HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-03-1984 NAH
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
3RD.
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Maria Harris of the Sun Tribune.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed.
Also present were City Planner Jim Corcoran, City Engineer Norm Rubel and Associate
Planner Howard Fields.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of December 20, 1983, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 83-7 - Elsinore School District - Staff presented proposal
for installation of a mobile office complex to be used for educational purposes
at 420 East Lakeshore Drive. Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 7:37
p.m., asking for those wishing to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 83-7.
There being no one wishing to speak in favor, the Chairman then asked for those
opposed. There being no opposition, the public hearing was closed at 7:38 p.m.
Chairman Steed questioned the land use designation of commercial to the south,
~ stating this should be Tourist Commercial. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez
to approve Conditional Use Permit 83-7 with staff recommendations, second by
Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1. A finding of conformance to the existing General Plan.
2. Issuance of a Categorical Exemption.
3. Meet requirements of County Fire Department.
4. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
-----
2. Conditional Use Permit 83-13 - Jess Rodriguez (Bulen) - Staff presented proposal
for storage of disposal bins, ro11-offs and parking for Disposal trucks, at the
northwest corner of Pottery Street and Spring Street. Chairman Steed opened the
public hearing at 7:40 p.m., asking for those wishing to speak in favor of Condi-
tional Use Permit 83-13. Mr. David Bulen, property owner, spoke in favor of the
project and stated that they were not in agreement with the conditions placed on
this project. Mr. Bulen stated that there were probably some things that they
could do to clean the place up. Chairman Steed stated that after the public
hearing they could go through the conditions item by item. There being no one
else wishing to speak in favor, the Chairman then asked for those opposed. There
being no opposition, the public hearing was closed at 7:44 p.m. The Planning Com-
mission then discussed the conditions of approval item by item. Motion by Com-
missioner Saathoff to approve Conditional Use Permit 83-13 with staff recommenda-
tions as amended, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. All parking, storage and driveway areas shall be paved with 4 inch
thick asphalt concrete and 3 inch concrete with 6 inch base.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Janua ry 3, 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83-13 - JESS RODRIGUEZ (BULEN) CONTINUED
4. Provide parking area striping on site for employee parking as
required by Planning Department.
5. Applicant to provide adequate screening (predominately vegetation)
with a plan (to include landscaping and screening) to be submitted
to the Design Review Board for approval.
6. Landscaping will be provided adjacent outside walls, as approved by
Planning Department.
-'
7. Provide sprinkler irrigation systems for landscaping.
8. Provide sanitary sewer system or provide hook-up to present sewer
system.
9. Conditional Use Permit shall be in effect for five (5)' years and
subject to a six month review.
10. Provide written assurance that County Health Department requirements
have been complied with.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
11. On Spring Street a 30 foot one-half right-of-way exists. No additional
right-of-way is required, except clarification of, and pre-emption of,
railroad rights in the existing 60 foot street right-of-way. Applicant
must obtain these rights if any, from the Railroad for the City.
12. Pottery Street is classified as a Modified Secondary (80-64). An
additional 10 foot right-of-way is required. This may be done through _
irrevocable offer of dedication because an existing building would be
within the required additional right-of-way. Some right-of-way or slope
easement may be needed in addition to the 10 feet for construction of a
lake outflow channel overcrossing. DEFER UNTIL MODIFICATIONS AND STREET
IMPROVEMENTS ON POTTERY STREET ARE IMPLEMENTED WITH LETTER OF AGREEMENT
ATTACHED TO DEED OF RESTRICTION.
13. Install curb and gutter 20 feet from centerl i ne for Spri ng Street. Exi st-
ing curb must be removed because it is on the wrong alignment and is badly
damaged. Prior to installation of new curb and gutter, status of railroad
rights must be determined by applicant. DEFER UNTIL MODIFICATIONS AND
STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON SPRING STREET ARE IMPLEMENTED WITH A LETTER OF
AGREEMENT ATTACHED TO DEED OF RESTRICTION.
14. Install new curb and gutter along a new alignment on Pottery Street as
approved by the City Engineer. Existing curb to be removed, prior to
installation of new curb and gutter, developer must present plan to the
City Engineer and Riverside Flood Control District for the channel over-
crossing which must define new curb alignment and new street grade to
standards of a modified secondary street corridor. Curb and gutter to be
installed 32 feet from street centerline at Spring Street and alignment
adjusted to be compatible with alignment on overcrossing. DEFER UNTIL
MODIFICATIONS AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON POTTERY STREET ARE IMPLEMENTED
WITH A LETTER OF AGREEMENT ATTACHED TO DEED OF RESTRICTION.
-
15. Construct standard 5 foot sidewalk adjacent to property line along Spring
Street and Pottery Street. Location and width may need adjustment from
standard location on Pottery Street and subject to an approved channel
overcrossing plan. A Class II bike lane will be required on the over-
crossing of Pottery Street. DEFER UNTIL MODIFICATIONS AND STREET IMPROVE-
MENTS ON POTTERY STREET ARE IMPLEMENTED WITH A LETTER OF AGREEMENT
ATTACHED TO DEED OF RESTRICTION.
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 3, 1984
Page 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83-13 - JESS RODRIGUEZ (BULEN) CONTINUED
--
16. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curbline
on Pottery Street (T.I. = 7.S) and Spring Street (T.I. = 6.0). Paving
exists on both streets. Paving is defective, and must be removed and
replaced unless tests show that existing paving is to City Standards
and will support the traffic index subject to City Engineer's approval.
Street and curb and gutter along Spring Street shall not be constructed
until rails are removed. Deferral of this construction may be necessary
with City Council approval until after rails (railroad tracks) are
removed. DEFER UNTIL MODIFICATIONS AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON POTTERY
STREET ARE IMPLEMENTED WITH A LETTER OF AGREEMENT ATTACHED TO DEED OF
RESTRICTION.
17. Provide ONE STREET LIGHT ON THE CORNER to City Standards. This can be
mounted on existing power pole adjacent to property.
18. Record "Noti ce of Hazardous Conditions" and "Hold Harml ess" agreements
from lOO-year flood plain of the outflow channel. lOO-year flood
elevation at Pottery Street is approximately 1269.4 based on Federal
Insurance Rate Maps.
19. Cooperate with City in establishing Lighting and Landscaping District.
20. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City Engineer. There
is an existing sewer main in Pottery Street in the existing parkway.
Provide cl eanout at property 1 i ne. ~~f~t~/t~(JUU~Mt~M(Ja.n~~fjM~(Jfj~~
$tf~~t/j~tta.ll/a.~/~/j~t~/t~~~t/~a.j~/a.tt~tt/t~~/t~ta.l/ft~~ta.~~t
,- 21. A) Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
There is an existing water main in Pottery Street.
B) Ptj~t/~~/f~p7~tjn~/t~~/pa.*jn~/~n/~ptjn~/$tt~~t~/jntt~77/a.n/~/jnt~
wa.t~t/~~ln/~tf~~~/t~~/t~ta.l/ft~nt_g~/. DELETED.
C) If the existing water main in Pottery Street is less than 6 inches
in size, install a new 10 inch main, ADHERE TO AT TIME OF REPLACE-
MENT WHEN A BUILDING PERMIT IS REQUESTED.
22. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements have
been complied with for fire protection and fire hydrant locations. There
is an existing fire hydrant on Pottery Street.
23. Provide traffic signs and markings. DEFER UNTIL MODIFICATIONS AND STREET
IMPROVEMENTS ARE IMPLEMENTED WITH A LETTER OF AGREEMENT ATTACHED TO DEED OF
RESTRICTION.
24. P7a.nt/a.n~/i(J~tjfjta.tj~ni/f~t/p~~ljt/j~pt~*~~~nti/t~/jnt7~~~/1a.~~/~~tf7~w
t~a.nn~l/~*~ttt~tijng/t~/~~/pt~p~f~~/~j/~/f~gl~t~t~~/tj*'7/~n~jn~~t/. DELETED.
2S. Provide street trees as required by LANDSCAPING PLAN.
26. Pay Public Safety fees per Resolution No. 83-4:
Police - $ .15 per square foot of gross floor area of
new and existing buil dings.
Fire - $ .05 per square foot of gross floor area of
new and existing buil dings.
27. Pay Capital Improvement fees:
Street
Park
Storm Drain
S ewe r
Water
- $ 810.00 (180 x lSO x .03)
- $ 270.00 (180 x lSO x .01)
- $ 540.00 (180 x lSO x .02)
- $ 520.00 for twenty plumbing fixture units.
- $ 500.00 for twenty plumbing fixture units.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Janua ry 3 t 1984
Pa ge 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83-13 - JESS RODRIGUEZ (BULEN) CONTINUED
28. Pay Traffic Safety Impact Mitigation fee of $ 4tOOO.00. PRORATED SHARE
TO BE DEFERRED UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF THE TRAFFIC SAFETY SIGNALIZATION
WITH A MAXIMUM OF $4,000.00 REFERRING TO SIGNALIZATION ON POTTERY-MAIN,
SPRING-GRAHAM OR GRAHAM-MAIN.
29. 'f~*'~~/f~t~f~~~/fjft~~nff~~t/6tt~tt/~6t~~~nt/61~ns/n~ft~/pf~p~ttj/ljn~
f~f/jnsf;tt/~sf~tt/f~f/6~A6t/~nt/p~p~ftj/~wn~f/t~/t~~/w~tt/An~/~61ntAjn
6tt~tt/w~~n/'~tt~fj/~tt~~t/t~6nn~1/~p~ttt~ttjns/j~/t~nttt~tt~~/. DELETED.
30. ~ppljt6nt't/~nnjn~~t/~~~t/pt~pj~~/t~nt~tlp~/~~~jsn/f~t/t~~nn~l/~p~ttt~~~jnn
jn/t~nn~ttj~n/wjt~/p16n~/f~t/ttt~~t/~~tjsn/67~ns/'~tt~ty/~tt~~t/jn/~t~~t/t~
~~t~t~jn~/A~~jtj~n6l/tjs~tf~ffwAY/n~~~~~/.//AppljtAnt/~~tt/pt~pj~~/A~~jtj~n~l
tjn~tf~ffw~y/~t/~At~~~ntt/~l~ns/P~tt~ti/~tt~~t/6~/t~~pjt~~/~y/tjtY/'n8jn~~t/.
l~~/~jp~ttj~~/t~~nti/Fl~~~/t~ntt~1/~j~tfjtt/~Ai/~6p~/typjtAl/~p~ttt~~~jnn
pl6n~/A*~jl_~l~/. DELETED.
-
31. Adjust sewer manholes and storm drain junction boxes in parkway to new
grades as required by the City Engineer. DEFER UNTIL MODIFICATIONS AND
STREET IMPROVEMENTS ARE IMPLEMENTED WITH A LETTER OF AGREEMENT ATTACHED
TO DEED OF RESTRICTION.
32. Provide title report with information on railroad property ownership in
the street right-of-way and along applicant's Spring Street property
frontage. Applicant must acquire the necessary rights from the railroad
for constructing the public street and for private property access from
Spring Street. (REFERS BACK TO CONDITION NUMBER 11).
33.
Agree to give up access along Pottery Street when future bridge crossing
of outflow channel is constructed. This is required because of the pro-
posed grade differential that will result when Pottery Street grade is
rai sed to meet the new overcrossi ng el eva tion. DEFER UNTI L MODI FI CATIONS
AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON POTTERY STREET ARE IMPLEMENTED WITH A LETTER OF
AGREEMENT ATTACHED TO DEED OF RESTRICTION.
-
34. Build catch basin at corner of Pottery Street and Spring Street with
lateral into junction box as approved by the City Engineer. DEFER UNTIL
MODIFICATIONS AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON POTTERY STREET ARE IMPLEMENTED
WITH A LETTER OF AGREEMENT ATTACHED TO DEED OF RESTRICTION.
3. Conditional Use Permit 83-14 - Hall/Davenport - Staff presented proposal to
allow the use of a temporary office trailer as a retail facility, located at
16921 Lakeshore Drive. Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 9:28 p.m.,
asking for those wishing to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 83-14.
Mr. Rick Davenport spoke in favor of the project and questioned the conditions
of approval. Chairman Steed stated that after the public hearing they could go
through the conditions item by item. There being no one else wishing to speak
in favor, the Chairman then asked for those opposed. There being no opposition,
the public hearing was closed at 9:30 p.m. Discussion was held on time frame
for construction of permanent building; and then the Planning Commission
discussed the conditions item by item. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to
approve Conditional Use Permit 83-14 with staff recommendations as amended,
second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 3-2 (Commissioner Saathoff and Chai rman Steed opposed)
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
1. Applicant shall present design elevations and a landscape plan to the
Design Review Board for approval.
2. Approval shall be for a period of twelve (12) months after which time
the applicant may petition the City Council for an extension not to
exceed six (6) months.
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 3, 1984
Page 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83-14 - HALL/DAVENPORT CONTINUED
--
3. Provide separate subsurface sewage disposal for trailer.
4. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Health Department for sub-
surface sewage disposal.
5. Staff recordation of CC & R's as required by City Council.
6. A finding of conformance to the existing General Plan.
7. Issuance of a Categorical Exemption.
8. Provide parking layout, to be approved by Planning Department.
9. Meet requirements of County Fire Department.
10. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
11. Provide will serve letter for water service from E.V.M.W.D.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
12. On Lakeshore Drive, a 30 foot one-hal f street right-of-way exists.
Dedicate 10 feet of additional right-of-way to conform to the City's
General Plan for a Modified Secondary which requires a 40 foot wide
one-hal f street.
13. On Illinois Street, a 20 foot one-half street right-of-way exists.
--. Dedicate 8 feet additional right-of-way for a 28 foot wide one-half
street.
14. Install curb and gutter 32 feet from centerline on Lakeshore Drive.
15. Install curb and gutter 20 feet from centerline on Illinois Street.
16. Construct 8 foot full concrete sidewalk on Lakeshore Drive and a 6
FOOT SIDEWALK on Illinois Street. On Illinois Street the planter as
shown on plot plan must be located out of the street right-of-way.
17. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curbline
on both Lakeshore Drive (Traffic Index = 7.5) and Illinois Street (T.I.
= 6.5). DEFER
18. Provide street lighting. A luminaire can be placed on a power pole at
the intersection 0 f La kes hore Dri ve and III i nois Street.
19. Cooperate with City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping District.
DEFER UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE CITY ESTABLISHES DISTRICT.
20. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City Engineer. There
is an existing sewer main in Lakeshore Drive. Construct cleanout at
property 1 i ne .
--
21. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore. Provide
City with letter of water availability from Elsinore Water District.
22. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements have
been complied with for fire protection and fire hydrant locations.
23. Provide traffic signs and markings. DEFER
24. Plans and specifications for public improvements to be prepared by a
registered civil engineer.
25. Provide street trees as required by City.
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 3,1984
Pa ge 6
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 83-14 - HALL/DAVENPORT CONTINUED
26. Pay Public Safety fees per Resolution No. 83-4:
$ .15 per square foot of gross floor area
of new and existing buildings.
$ .10 per square foot of gross floor area
of new and existing buildings.
27. Pay Capital Improvement fees:
Police
Fire
-
Sewer
Streets
Parks
Storm Drains
$420.00 for twenty fixture units.
$ .03 x ( *) s q ua re foo t
$ .01 x (*) square foot
$ .02 x (*) square foot
* REFIGURE AFTER DEDICATION ON NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE
28. Pay Traffic Safety Impact Mitigation fee of $ 3,000.00. DEFER, BUT
TRAFFIC SAFETY MITIGATION FEE NOT TO EXCEED $ 3,000.00.
29. Process merger to acreage through City.
30. Pay Storm Drainage Impact Mitigation fee of $ 3,000.00. DEFER, BUT
STORM DRAINAGE MITIGATION FEE NOT TO EXCEED $ 3,000.00.
4. Conditional Exception Permit 83-7 - W. Heath and Company - Staff presented pro-
posal to install a 65 foot high, 300 square foot freeway oriented shopping center
identification siqn, located on Mission Trail. Chairman Steed opened the public
hearing at 10:29 p.m., asking for those wishing to speak in favor of Condi-
tional Exception Permit 83-7. Mr. Butler of W. Heath and Company, spoke in ....
favor of the project. There being no one else wishing to speak in favor,
the Chairman then asked for those opposed. There being no opposition, the
public hearing was closed at 10:31 p.m. Discussion was held on terrain and
elevation of the shopping center. Motion by Commissioner Washburn to deny Condi-
tional Exception Permi t 83-7, second by Commi ss ioner Saatho ff.
Approved 5-0
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 83-12 - Hall/Davenport - Staff presented proposal for applicant
to construct a commercial buil di ng consi sting of 3,000 squa re feet on approximately
.30~ acres, located at 16921 Lakeshore Drive. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to
approve Commercial Project 83-12 with staff recommendations as amended, second by
Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 3-2 (Commissioner Saathoff and Chairman Steed opposed)
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall screen all trash and storage area.
2. All facilities shall be constructed as approved on site plan.
3. All signs shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance and shall be
issued prior to being erected.
-
4. All utilities shall be placed underground.
5. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets, and subject to approval from the
Planning Division.
6. A findi ng of no si gni fi cant impact upon the envi ronment.
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 3, 1984
Page 7
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 83-12 - HALL/DAVENPORT CONTINUED
-
7. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
8. Frontage landscaping planter on Lakeshore Drive and Illinois Street
shall be provided with automatic sprinkler systems.
9. Meet requirements of Ordinance 572.
10. Meet requirements of the Design Review Board.
11. Recordation of Redevelopment Agency CC & R's prior to plan check.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
12. On Lakeshore Drive, a 30 foot one-half street right-of-way exists.
Dedicate 10 feet of additional right-of-way to conform to the City's
General Plan for a Modified Secondary which requires a 40 foot wide
one-ha1 f street.
13. On Illinois Street, a 20 foot one-half street right-of-way exists.
Dedicate 8 feet additional right-of-way for a 28 foot wide one-half
street.
14. Install curb and gutter 32 feet from centerline on Lakeshore Drive.
15. Install curb and gutter 20 feet from centerline on Illinois Street.
16. Construct 8 foot full concrete sidewalk on Lakeshore Drive and a 6
,-- FOOT SIDEWALK on Illinois Street. On Illinois Street the planter as
shown on plot plan must be located out of the street right-of-way.
17. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curbline
on both Lakeshore Drive (Traffic Index = 7.5) and Illinois Street (T.I.
= 6.5). DEFER
18. Provide street lighting. A luminaire can be placed on a power pole at
the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Illinois Street.
19. Cooperate with City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping District.
DEFER UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE CITY ESTABLISHES DISTRICT.
20. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City Engineer. There
is an existing sewer main in Lakeshore Drive. Construct c1eanout at
property 1 i ne.
21. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore. Provide
City with letter of water availability from Elsinore Water District.
22. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements have
been complied with for fire protection and fire hydrant locations.
23. Provide traffic signs and markings. DEFER
24. Plans and specifications for public improvements to be prepared by a
registered civil engineer.
25. Provide street trees as required by City.
26. Pay Public Safety fees per Resolution No. 83-4:
Police
$ .15 per square foot of gross floor area
of new and exi sting buil di ngs.
Fi re
$ .10 per square foot of gross floor area
of new and existing buildings.
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 3, 1984
Page 8
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 83-12 - HALL/DAVENPORT CONTINUED
27. Pay Capital Improvement fees:
Sewer
Streets
Pa rks
Storm Drains -
$420.00 for twenty fi xture uni ts .
- $ .03 x (*) squa re foot
$ .01 x (*) square foot
$ .02 x (*) square foot
-
* REFIGURE AFTER DEDICATION ON NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE
28. Pay Traffic Safety Impact Mitigation fee of $ 3,000.00. DEFER, BUT
TRAFFIC SAFETY MITI GATION FEE NOT TO EXCEED $ 3,000.00
29. Process merger to acreage through City.
'30. Pay Storm Drainage Impact Mitigation fee of $ 3,000.00. DEFER, BUT
STORM DRAINAGE MITIGATION FEE NOT TO EXCEED $ 3,000.00.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Planner Corcoran informed the Planning Commission of the League of California
Cities 1984 Planning Commissioners Institute to be held February 20 - March 2, 1984
at tne Town and Country Hotel in San Diego. Mr. Corcoran asked that for those wish-
ing to attend, to please complete the reservation and registration forms and return
by Janua ry 27, 1984.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Saathoff - Attended a meeting on the Lakeshore Reclamation Project and
at the last meeting the Park and Recreation put forward a document giving some pros
and cons on various suggestions regarding the Lake Reclamation Project in preparation
-
to a public hearing they are going to have January 10, 1984 at 7:00 p.m., at Machado
School, concerning the following -- General Plan for their property; effects on
adjoining properties; City and County consideration to lakeshore property; the Planning
Commission individually or with City Council should have a study session to consider
specific uses on lakeshore perimeter i.e., such as wildlife and airport. It has been
recommended that the E.D.A.W. Plan be utilized, apparently it has some recommended
specific uses for the property around the lake and it was felt that whether or not we
agreed with this it would be a good starting point.
Commissioner Washburn - Agrees with Commissioner Saathoff.
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Commissioner Dominguez - At the last meeting asked for Jim Corcoran to look into the
Overlay Ordinance, wanting to know if anything has been received? Mr. Corcoran stated
that he spoke with Bud Attridge, the Chairman of that Committee, and was told that
Sharon Frank took the finished ordinance home to type and hasn't heard from her since.
Also, I talked to Howie Torn who directed Arta Valenzuela to contact Sharon Frank
regarding this matter.
Has a date been scheduled for the joint study session, which was requested at the
last meeting? Mr. Corcoran stated he was going to set-up a date after he knew more
about the schedules of both the Planning Commission and City Council. Commissioner
Dominguez requested this study session be scheduled as soon as possible.
Chairman Steed - None
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
3RD.
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1984
-
MI NUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of December 20, 1983, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 83-12 - Hall/Davenport - Staff presented proposal for site
approval for a 3,000 square foot commercial retail structure to be located at
16921 Lakeshore Drive. Discussion was held on architectural design; trees to
be placed along Illinois Street (to be picked from the list of indigenous trees
on file in the Planning Department), and applicant installing a 6 foot block
wall separating residential from commercial. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez
to approve Commercial Project 83-12 with staff recommendations, second by Com-
missioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
1. All items depicted on plot plan and elevations shall be provided as
indicated, unless otherwise modified by the Design Review Board's
conditions.. Any proposed changes must be resubmitted to the Design
Review Board for approval.
2. All trash areas and storage areas shall be screened and approved by
the Planning Division.
-
3. Signing plan for the commercial project shall be submitted to the
Design Review Board for approval.
4. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets, and subject to approval
from the Planning Division.
5. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
6. Applicant shall submit to the Design Review Board a Lighting and Land-
scaping plan (landscaping plan detailing trees, shrubs, ground cover and
other 1 andscapi ng features).
7. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six (6)
inch high concrete curb.
8. Staff recordation of CC & R's as required by City Council .
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
11 :03 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
Approved,
Whit Steed
Chai rman
Linda Gri nds ta ff
Planning Commission
Secretary
Respectfully
~
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 17TH.
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1984
-,
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Saathoff.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez and Commissioner
Washburn. Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed were absent.
Also present were City Planner Jim Corcoran, City Engineer Norm Rubel and
Associate Planner Howard Fields.
Being as Chairman Steed was absent Commissioner Dominguez conducted the meeting.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of January 3, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 3-0
PUBLI C HEARINGS
1. Tentative Tract Map 19402 - Art Nelson - Staff presented request from the
applicant asking that this item be continued to the meeting of February 7,1984.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Tentative Tract Map 19402 to the
meeting of February 7, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 3-0
-
Commissioner Barnhart arrived at 7:34 P.M.
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Lot Line Adjustment 83-16 - George Alongi - Staff presented proposal for re-
alignment of property line for the purpose of providing two (2) buildable lots,
located southwesterly of the intersection of Mill Street and Avenue 5. Staff
recommended that condition number 4, requiring a street light, be deleted since
a street light already exists. Mr. Alongi questioned engineering conditions
2 and 3. Discussion was held on engineering conditions 2 and 3. Motion by
Commissioner Washburn to approve Lot Line Adjustment 83-16 with staff recom-
mendations deleting condition number 4 and the last two sentences in condition
number 3, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. City Engineer certification of legal description as accurate.
2. Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
_.
1. On Mill Street a twenty-five foot one-hal f street ri ght-of-way exists.
No additional street right-of-way is proposed. The curb and gutter
which exists at other locations along this street is at 18 feet from
centerl i ne. Ins ta 11 concrete curb and gutter across the frontage 0 f
applicant's property 18 feet from street centerline and construct five
foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the property line.
2. On Avenue 5 a twenty-five foot one-hal f street ri ght-of-way exists.
No additional right-of-way is proposed. Curb and gutter exists across
the frontage of applicant's property at 18 feet from street centerline.
Construct a six-foot sidewalk adjacent to curb.
Minutes of Planning Commission
.January 17, 1984
Page 2
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 83-16 - GEORGE ALONGI CONTINUED
3.
Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curb
line on Mill Street (Traffic Index = 6.0). ~~~~/~~1jng/~tj~t~/~n
Mjl1/$tf~~t/.//l~ttt/m~~t/i~~w/t~~t/~tfttfng/p~*fng/fi/t~/~jti
Ztan~af~~/~n~/wjrl/t~p~~ft/t~~/tfaffjt/l~~~~/llf~ffjt/Jn~~t)t//~~t~
~n~/G~tt~t/~n~/~a1fng/~tjiti/~n/~1~n~~/~/.
lntt~ll/~tf~~t/ljG~t/t~/~jti/~~~tjfft~tf~n~/. DELETED.
-
4.
5. Cooperate with City in establishing a Landscaping and Lighting
District. A letter of consent must be signed by applicant.
6. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, the County
Hea1t~ Department and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
7. A six-inch domestic water line exists in both Mill Street and
Avenue 5.
8. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department require-
ments have been complied with for fire protection and fire hydrant
1 ocati ons .
9. Provide traffic signs and markings.
10. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared
by applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by City.
11. Provide street trees as required by City.
12. Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572:
-"
Sewer
Water
Street
Storm Drain
Parks
- $
- $
- $
- $
- $
420.00 per dwelling unit.
500.00 per dwelling unit.
.03 per square foot of gross
.02 per square foot of gross
.10 per square foot of gross
lot area.
lot area.
building area.
13. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
14. Provide City Engineer with soils report to include street pavement
design.
15. Pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee in the amount of $100.00 per lot.
16. Pay Drainage Off-site Impact Mitigation fee in the amount of $200.00
per lot.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Barnhart - At Flint and Spring the Right-Way trucks are dumping into
the manhole, received a couple of panic calls where they thought they were dumping
into the outflow channel. City Engineer stated that they have permission from the
City Council to collect septic tank dumping and dump it into the manhole, they pay
the City for that.
Commissioner Washburn - Asked if staff has any feed back on a proposed date for the
joint study session with City Council? City Planner Corcoran stated that he spoke
to the City ~1anager, who had a better feel for City Council schedule, and he suggested
that it be put off for a while, as Council has a couple of special study sessions
scheduled at this time, I think he was looking more toward the end of the month.
-"
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 17, 1984
Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
-
Commissioner Washburn continued - Received a call from Ron Barnes of Thermal
Electronics and he was wondering if they were going to finish cleaning up
Bernie Shane's property (adjacent to the channel, right across from Thermal
Electronics). Also, the gentlemen's house that is adjacent the channel
should be cleaned up, ordered to be cleaned up, or cleaned up and sent the
bi 11 .
Commissioner Barnhart - On Peck Street there is another burnt down house,
how long will that be there? The Commission discussed the Housing Abatement
Ordinance (Number 587), stating that maybe John Porter should be contacted
about amending the ordinance, making it mandatory in 30 days, or whatever, that
the structure be taken down for publ ic safety reasons.
Commissioner Saathoff - Would like to reiterate on what was mentioned earlier,
that we really should receive any new information or anything the City Council
adopts that may well effect what the Planning Commission does. Also, brought
this up previously and for a period of time we were receiving minutes of City
Council meetings that did give us an opportunity to get an insight as to what
they did on various projects, so we could relate to what we were doing and what
they finalized. In absence of having a joint session at least it gives us an
idea of what they are thinking. I would appreciate it if we could have copies
of the mi nutes .
Commissioner Dominguez - None
Chairman Steed - Absent
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
MI NUTES OF
HELD ON THE 17TH.
MI NUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1984
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of January 3, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
-
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 1100 Mill Street - George Alongi - Staff presented
proposal for a single-family residence to be located at 1100 Mill Street.
Proposal meets all Planning Department requirements. Staff recommended that
condition number 5, requiring a street light, be deleted since a street light
already exists. Mr. Alongi was present and questioned conditions number 1,4,
10, 12 and 15. Discussion was held on these conditions. Motion by Commissioner
Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence at 1100 Mill Street with staff
recommendations deleting the last two sentences in condition number 4; deleting
condition number 5; amending condition number 10 to read: City to provide
traffic signs and marking, and charge or assess the developer; deleting condi-
tions 12 and 15, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Replace two (2) trees that were removed from subject site.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
2.
On Mill Street a twenty-five foot (25') one-half street right-of-way
exists. No additional street right-of-way is proposed. The curb
and gutter which exists at other locations along this street is at
18 feet from centerline. Install concrete curb and gutter across
the fronta ge 0 f appl i cant's property 18 feet from street centerl i ne
and construct five-foot (5') wide sidewalk adjacent to the property
line.
-
3. On Avenue 5 a twenty-five foot (25') one-half street right-of-way
exists. No additional right-of-way is proposed. Curb and gutter
exi.sts across the frontage of applicant's property at 18 feet from
street centerline. Construct a six-foot (6') sidewalk adjacent to
curb.
4. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curb
line on Mill Street (Traffic Index = 6.0). Some paving exists on
Mill Street. l~iti/~~it/i~~w/t~~t/~tfttfnn/~~~jn~/jt/t~/~jtj
tt~n~~f~t/~n~/wj71/t~~~~ft/t~~/tf~ffjt/r~~~t/t7f~ffjt/Jn~~t)/.//~~t~
n~tt~f/~n~/~~~fng/~tjttt/~n/~*~n~~/~/.
5. Jntt~ll/ttf~~t/ljg~tt/t~/~jtj/tp~tjfjt~tj~nt/. DELETED.
6. Cooperate with City in establishing a Landscaping and Lighting
District. A letter of consent must be signed by applicant.
Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, the County
Health Department and the Regional Water Qual ity Control Board.
8. A six-inch (6") domestic water 1 ine exists in both Mill Street and
Avenue 5.
7.
-
9. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department require-
ments have been complied with for fire protection and fire hydrant
locations.
Minutes of Design Review Board
.January 17, 1984
Page 2
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 1100 MILL STREET - GEORGE ALONGI CONTINUED
10. City to provide traffic signs and marking, and charge or assess
the developer.
-
11. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be
prepared by applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by City.
12. Pt~*j~~/$tt~~t/tt~~$/~$/f~~~jf~~/~i/~jtit/ DELETED.
13. Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572:
Sewer
Water
Street
Storm Drain
Parks
- $ 420.00 per dwelling unit.
- $ 500.00 per dwelling unit.
- $ .03 per square foot of gross lot area.
- $ .02 per square foot of gross lot area.
-$ .10 per square foot of gross building area.
14. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
15. Pt~*j~~/~jti/~n~jn~~f/wjt~/$~jl~/f~p~tt/t~/jntl~~~/~tf~~t/p~*~~~nt/
~~$j~nt DELETED.
2. Single-Family Residence - 1150 Mill Street - George Alongi - Staff presented
proposal for a single-family residence to be located at 1150 Mill Street.
Proposal meets all Planning Department requirements. Staff recommended that
condition number 5, requiring a street light, be deleted since a street light
already exists. Mr. Alongi was present and questioned condition number 1.
- Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Single-Family Residence at 1150
Mill Street with staff recommendations amending condition number 1 to read:
Applicant to replace two (2) trees previously removed; deleting the last two
(2) sentences in condition number 4; amending condition number 10 to read:
City to provide traffic signs and markings and charge or assess the developer;
deleting conditions 5, 12 and 15, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant to replace two (2) trees previously removed.
2. Applicant provide (landscaping) ground cover for slope adjacent to
easterly property line of lot 19. Selected ground cover to be
reviewed by Planning Department.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
3. On Mill Street a twenty-five foot (25') one-half street right-of-way
exists. No additional street ri ght-of-way is proposed. The curb
and gutter which exists at other locations along this street is at
18 feet from centerl i ne. I nstall concrete curb and gutter across the
frontage of applicant's property 18 feet (18') from street centerline
and construct five-foot (51) wide sidewalk adjacent to the property
1 i ne.
-
4. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curb
line on Mill Street (Traffic Index = 6.0). Some paving exists on
Mill Street. 1~iti/~~it/i~0w/t~~t/~tjitjng/p~*jn4/ji/t0/~jtt/$t~n~~t~i
~~~/Wfl1/i~pp~ft/t~~/tf~ffjt/l~~~i/flf~ffjt/J~~~~J/.//~pf~i/n~tt~f/~n~
p~*jnB/~tjiti/~n/A*~~~~/~/./
5. JMt~n /itn~'t/n ~~U/t~/'tHilipUj fj t~U~M/. DELETED.
6. Cooperate with City in establishing a Landscaping and Lighting
District. A letter of consent must be signed by applicant.
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 17, 1984
Page 3
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 1150 MILL STREET - GEORGE ALONGI CONTINUED
7. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, the County
Health Department and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
8. A six-inch (6') domestic water line exists in both Mill Street and
Avenue 5.
9. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department require-
ments have been complied with for fire protection and fire hydrant
locations.
-
10. City to provi de tra ffi c si gns and ma rki ng and charge or assess
the developer.
11. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared
by applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by City.
12. Pt~*j~~/ttf~~t/tf~~t/~t/t~~pjt~~/~#/~jti/. DELETED.
13. Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572:
S ewe r
Water
Street
Storm Drain -
Pa rks
$ 420.00 per dwelling unit.
$ 500.00 per dwelling unit.
$ .03 per square foot of gross lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of gross lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of gross building area.
14. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
15.
Pt~*/~~/~jti/~nnjn~~f/w't~/t~jlt/t~p~ft/t~/jntlp~~/ttt~~t/p~*~~~nt
~~tjnn/. DELETED.
-
3. Single-Family Residence 1506 West Heald Avenue - Herb McCullah - Staff presented
proposal for a single-family residence to be located at 1506 West Heald Avenue.
Staff stated that proposal meets all Planning Department requirements. Discussion
was held on condition number 2, 11 and 12. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to
approve S ingl e- Famil y Res i dence at 1506 West Heald Avenue with sta ff recommenda-
tions. deleting the last two (2) sentences in condition number 2; deleting condi-
tion number 11; and amending condition number 12 to read: Applicant's engineer
shall determine adequate means of drainage for approval by City Engineer or if
possible provide drainage release(s) from downstream property owners, second by
Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
None
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
1. On Heald Avenue the existing right-of-way is 80 feet. Install curb
and gutter along the frontage of applicant's property 18 feet from
street centerline. Construct sidewalk 6 feet wide adjacent to the
curb and match existing improvements on adjacent lot.
2. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curb
line on Heald Avenue (Traffic Index = 6.0) .~~~~/p~*j~~/~~jttt/~~/
Vi~~r M IV/~M~/./ /l~tU/~Mt/~~~w/t.~~t/~M~U~~/p'A*" ~~/ f, ~/t.~/'Ut#
ip~tjfjt'At.j~~t/'A~~/wIJJ/~ppp~tt/t.~~/tt'Afflt/j~~~~/'
-
3. Cooperate with City in establishing a Landscaping and Lighting
District. A letter of consent must be obtained in the City
Engineer's office.
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 17,1984
Pa ge 4
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 1506 WEST HEALD AVENUE - HERB MCCULLAH CONTINUED
4.
Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City and the
Health Department. Existing 6 inch sewer lines are located in
Townsend Street, Matich Street, and Heald Avenue, but are
shallow and may require pumping.
-
5. Domestic 6 inch waterline exists in Heald Avenue.
6. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department
requirements have been complied with for fire protection and
fire hydrant locations.
7. Plans and specifications for public works improvement shall be
prepared by applicant1s Civil Engineer for approval by the City.
8. Provide street trees as required by City.
9. Pay Capi ta 1 Improvement fees per Ordi nance 572:
Sewer
Water
Street
Storm Drain -
Pa rks
$ 420.00 per dwelling unit.
S 500.00 per dwelling unit.
$ .03 per square foot of gross lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of gross lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of gross building area.
10. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
11.
Pt~*j~~/~j~i/~~gj~~~f/~j~~/$~jJ$/f~p~f~/t~/j~t7~~~/$~t~~t/p~p~~~~t
~~$jg~/. DELETED.
-
12. Applicant's engineer shall determine adequate means of drainage for
approval by City Engineer or if possible provide drainage release(s)
from downstream property owners.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
8:26 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
Approved,
Fred Domi nguez
Acting Chairman
-
Respectfully submitted,
~~./'~ ~,~
Li nda Gri nds ta ff
Planning Commission
See reta ry
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
7TH
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1984
-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by City Planner Corcoran.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner
Wa shburn, and Cha irman Steed. Commissi oner Barnhart was absent.
Also present was City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Rubel and Associate
Planner Fields.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of January 17, 1984, as
submitted, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 4-0
Chairman Steed announced that the Commission was going to take one item
out of the order as has been published and that item pertains to Item 1 under
BUSINESS ITEMS, IIRequest to Annex - Art Ne1son.1I Since Mr. Nelson has an item
under PUBLIC HEARINGS and, should the IIRequest to Annexll be denied, it would
avail nothing to have gone ahead with the public hearing prior to that. Chair-
man Steed then stated that at this point in time they would start with Business
Item 1.
BUSINESS ITEMS
-
1. Request to Annex - Art Nelson - Staff presented request from Butterfield
Surveys, representing Art Nelson, to annex 38r atres, southwesterly of the
intersection of Lincoln and Machado Streets, to the City of Lake Elsinore.
Applicant has also filed Tentative Tract Map 19402 (which comprises the area
to be annexed) in conjunction with the request to annex. This request is
the first step the applicant must take in their application to LAFCO for
annexation of this territory to the City. The Land Use Map of the current
General Plan indicates this area should develop residentially, specifically
single-family residential, and the City's capacity to provide necessary
public services and facilities are adequate at this time.
Chairman Steed called for discussion from members at the table. Commissioner
Washburn stated that he would 'like to make the point that on projects such
as this one, when they propose to come into the City we should indicate we
are looking for a fiscally sound dev-e1opment in the sense of revenue pay-
off or break-even, although residential usually is a negative. Motion by
Commiss ioner Saa thoff to approve the reques t to annex, second by Commi ssi oner
Dominguez. y
Approved 4-0
PUBLI C HEARl NGS
1. Zone Change 84-1 - Art Nelson - Staff presented proposal for a zone change
pre-zoning 38t acres presently in the County (southwesterly of-the inter~
~ection of Lincoln Street and Machado Street) to R-1 (Single-Family Resi-
dential). Subject parcel lies within the City's Sphere of Influence and
the City's R-1 zoning designation conforms with the intent of the General
Plan Land Use Map, which designates subject parcel as Low Density Residen-
tial. This pre-zoning will enable the applicant to meet the City's and
LAFCO's pre-zoning requirements prior to QPp1icant's application to LAFCO
for annexation of this area into the City of Lake Elsinore.
Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 7 :40 p.m. and asked if anyone
in the audience wished to speak in favor of Zone Change 84-1. Fred Crowe,
Butterfield Surveys, representing the applicant, stated they were the pre-
parers of the Map and app1 ication and that the developer, Mr. Art Nel son,
and the property owner, Mr. Ed Stewart, were present. They feel the R-1
zoning is consistent with the zoning on the property in the County. There
are some major flood concerns with this property and adjoining properties
and feel this type of density is necessary to justify the costs of resolv-
ing some of those flood problems. The R-1 zone in the County would allow
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 7, 1984
Page 2
ZONE CHANGE 84-1 CONTINUED
~200 minimum square foot lots; the R-l zone in the City would allow 6000
square foot lots. The Map is proposed with 7500 minimum square foot lots.
Mr. Crowe sa i"d they would be happy to answer any questi ons that may come up.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor and the follow-
ing persons responded in favor:
-
Allen Baldwin, 16496 Lash
Art Nelson, 23911 Innesbrook, Laguna Niguel
Robert Ponce, 32205 Machado Street
Lee Tompkins, 15020 Larson Road
Sam Surdonovich, 914 Diane Way
Bob Williams, .31401 Riverside Drive
With no one else wishing to speak in favor, the Chairman asked for those
wishing to speak in opposition. The following persons spoke in opposition
due to concerns on flooding and density:
Albert Wilsey, 15015 Lincoln
Pam Risser, 15170 St. Clair St.
Leonard Driver, 30524 Adelo Street.
De bra Ostl er, 15161 Alvarado
Cindy Corcoran, 30557
Joseph Heath, 30521 Tiny Street
Richard Ramickeal, 15450 Alvarado
Stephen Shineberger, 15401 Alvarado
Debqie Nance, 30523 Adelo Street
Hearing no further request to speak in opposition to Zone Change 84-1, the
Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. Discussion ensued covering
City's R-l zoning, project area having,,7500 square foot lots instead of
6000 square foot, flood control and City having control in area, Riverside
County Flood Control and two options which they offer.
-
Fred Crowe, spoke to the flood control concerns. He said one of the 1 argest
portions of the cost of this proposed subdivision is the box culvert crossing
that will accommodate both wat.ers from Leach Canyon Channel and from McVickers
Canyon Channel under Machado Street. The crossing that Mr. Nelson is build-
ing at Machado and the Canyon will accommodate waters that are a direct r+l1n":
off from the Woodhaven project. In .addition to that, they are proposing to
construct a flood control channel up the southwesterly side of the project and
on the full length of the project a line channel that is in a direct line up
to McVicker Canyon, in whi.~h Canyon is,"Larry Cartier's batch plant and pit.
This is the most direct line to that Canyon. This will not solve the total
flood problems of the area but it will work toward that end result. This
project will be protected and will takeoff more water into a line channel
than it will develop. ;
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Zone Change 84-1 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Appr ov ed 4-0
1. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
...",;
2. No significant impact on the environment.
3. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
2. Tentative Parcel Map 19767 - Centennial Engineering - Staff presented
request from the applicant asking that public hearing on Tentative Parcel
Map 19767 be continued for thirty (30) days to the meeti ng of March 6, 1984.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Tentative Parcel Map 19767 to
the meeting of March 6,1984, second by Corrmissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 7, 1984
Page 3
~ 3. Conditional Use Permit 84-1 - James B. Wight - Staff presented proposal
for a Conditional Use Permit to locate a Veterinary Clinic in 2,000 square
feet of a 7,000 square foot office complex. Proposed office complex is
currently under construction at 16776 Lakeshore Drive.
-
Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 8:13 p.m., and asked if anyone
in the audience wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-1.
Dr. James B. Wight, 29254 Via Frontera, Murrieta, applicant, stated he has
a business at the present time at 16289 Lakeshore Drive and he proposes to
move this business to the requested location. He questioned the Engineer-
ing Department's Conditions # 6 through #11. He feels they have nothing
to do with a renter but to developer and requested those cond itions be
deleted.
Fran Yankowski, 21621 Darby Street, spoke in favor.
-
With no one else to speak in favor, the Chairman inquired if anyone wished
to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chairman Steed closed the
public hearing at 8:17 p.m. Discussion was held on the Engineering Depart-
ment's conditions; sound proofing of business; animals staying overnight,
especially after surgery; boarding of animals for short and/or long periods
of time; outside runs; and need for joint study session with City Council
on this type of business. Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Con-
ditional Use Permit 84-1 with Planning Division conditions #1, #2, #3, and
#4, amended Condition #5 to read: IIAnima1s in attendance allowed to remain
on premises. No outside kennel boarding facilities;1I deletion of Engineer-
ing Department conditions #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, and #11, and an added new
Condition #6 to read: IIAnima1 Emergency Parking Zone - 1 Hour,1I second by
Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS
1. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
2. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
3. The facility will be adequately sound proofed.
4. Comply wi th all Cou nty Hea lth Department requirements.
5. Animals in attendance allowed to remain on premises. No outside
kennel boarding facilities.
6. Animal Emergency Parking Zone - 1 Hour.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
6. Cooperate with the City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping
District. DELETED.
7. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements have
been complied with for fire protection to include fire hydrant locations.
DELETED .
8. Pay Public Safety fees, for the entire shopping center, as follows:
Pol ice - $
Fire - $
TOTAL $
DELETED
.15 per square foot of gross floor area.
.15 per square foot of gross floor area.
.30 per square foot of gross floor area
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 7, 1984
Page 4
- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84~ CONTINUED
9. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
DELETED.
10. Pay equitable traffic safety mitigation fees for traffic signalization
at Four Corners in the amount of $20,000 prior to issuance of the Condi-
tional Use Pennit. DELETED.
11. Extend storm drain across total 247.50 foot frontage of applicant's
property, together with necessary appurtenances. An agreement for
this drain extension shall be signed between applicant and City Council
prior to issuance of the Conditional Use Permit. Agreement to be
similar to the agreement with the owner of the adjacent Stater Brothers
shoppingcenter for the storm drain exten~ion across that frontage.
DELETED .
-
4. Tentative Tract Map 19561 - Darwin B. Maxson c/o Kevin Jefferies - Staff
presented proposal for a residential/commercial subdivision of 7.72 acres
into 28 residential and 2 commercial lots located on the north side of
Grand Avenue, approximately 650 feet northwest of the Grand Avenue-Ortega
Highway intersection, and the Final Specific Plan for said project.
Chairman Steed opened the public hearing on Tentative Tract Map 19561 and
Final Specific Plan at 8:30 p.m., asking for those who wished to speak in
favor of Tentative Tract Map 19651 and Final Specific Plan.
Merrill Schultz, Neste, Brudin & Stone, Inc., 535 E. Florida, Hemet, stated
his firm designed the original Tract and the Tract was nearly finished
some years ago but principally because of flooding, etc., was not completed
nor recorded. They have sane concerns with Condition #27 because they wish
to bring those lots up to standard elevation and don't feel a variance is
necessary; on Condition #23 they wish this condition to also include the
fee for the interior streets and that the streets be maintained on a private
basis also. This would eliminate the need for forming the Lighting and
Landsca pi ng D is tr ic t if a 11 the streets were ma i nta i ned by the Ass oc i at i on.
The streets to be to City standards but they be private streets within the
interior of the subdivision, controlled by CC & R's, with a requirement for
fees to be assessed for maintenance of same.
-
The City Engineer said Mr. Schultz was not talking about a subdivision map
now but a private community. He has submitted a tentative tract map pro-
posing to divide that up into separate lots and the Code does not allow
separate lots sold unless they abut on a public street;: so we are back to
a condominium type project. Mr. Schultz said they would like to work it
out as he suggested, if it is at all possible. The City Engineer said it
sounds like a good idea except the City would still need an easement for
ingress and egress to some properties (Mosbacher and Frazier). The appli-
cants had no objection to that. Mr. Schultz also questioned Condition#9.
He would like to get with Engineering staff to better understand it.
Commissioner Washburn proposed they continue the public hearing to the meet-
ing of February 21, 1984, in order for applicant to work with staff on his
suggested changes and come to a conclusion.
-
With no one else wishing to speak in favor, Chairman Steed inquired if any-
one wished to speak in opposition.
Jim Rhodes, 3860 Ulla Lane, owner of property directly adjacent to the pro-
ject (O'Hara's Cocktail Lounge) on the west side, stated he is very con-
cerned about the houses going in so close to the type of business that he
has. He feels some kind of buffer zone is needed. Some type of low-level
commercial or something to buffer the two. His business has people and
cars leaving at 2:00 a.m in the morning from the street and his parking
lot which is across the street from where the houses will go. Commission
suggested consideration be given to some kind of buffer wall or screen
between houses and O'Hara's.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 7,1984
Page 5
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19561 - CONTINUED
5.
With no one else wishing to speak in opposition, motion by Commissioner
Saathoff to continue the public hearing on Tentative Tract Map 19561 and
Final Specific Plan to the meeting of February 21,1984, second by Com-
mi ssi oner Dominguez.
Approved 4-0
Tentative Tract Map 19402 - Art Nelson - Staff presented proposal for a
residential subdivision of 38! acres into 132 single-family residential
lots. Subject project is currently in the County but has been filed in
conjunction with Annexation No. 33 and Zone Change 84-1. Project site is
southwesterly of the i ntersecti on of Lincol n Street and Machado Street.
Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 8:53 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 19402. Fred Crowe,
Butterfield Surveys, representing the applicant, spoke on the appearance
of the Tract. The Tract wi 11 be fenced campl etely on two sides - on the
northwesterly side which will be the fencing for the flood control channel,
and proposed block wall fence on the uphill side - the side furthest
away from Machado, and will have block wall as back-up treatment adjacent
to Lincoln Street and some back-up treatment on Machado Street to be com-
patible with the adjoining lots that are out of this Tract. Basically,
the project will have fencing except for the streets and he feels it will
yield some of the privacy that the adjacent owners have indicated a desire
to have.
-
-
Also, Mr. Crowe questioned conditions of approval #28, #34 and #36. On
Condition #36, regarding the well site, the owner of the property, Mr.
Stewart, has had his well there and sold water to E.V.M.W.D. for years and
it has actually been an income for him. Mr. Crowe said he knew Mr. Stewart
would not be willing to give up those water rights in order to sell this
property. His concern on Condition #28 is that E.V.M.W.D. has said they
will not provide a will serve letter if they do not have the water rights
themselves. He would like Condition #28 to remain, but he would like
Condition #36 to be deleted. On Condition #34, questioned what would be
done with the fee. Will the neighborhood benefit from it. Was answered
in the affirmative.
With no one else wishing to speak in favor, Chairman Steed asked if anyone
wished to speak in opposition to Tentative Tract Map 19402.
Albert Wilsey, 15015 Lincoln, said he would like to see some provisions
made so future home owners could not change grading which could block
openings and change flow of water and flood his property.
.;:-
Pam Risser, 15170 Machado Street, stated her concerns on flood probl ems.
Wi th no one el se wi shing to speak in opposition to Tentative Tract Map
19402, Chairman Steed closed the public hearing at 9:17 p.m.
Discussion was held on adding condition about no change in grading that would
affect the water flow; Condition #36 which concerns on-going business and
expropriating his business; adding verbiage to or deleting Condition #36;
CC & R's; and Condition #16 and City's intention to propose a General Plan
Amendment to reduce roadway width of Machado Street.
Art Nelson requested that on Condition #2~ consideration be given to allow
sidewalks to, be adjacent to the curb rather than property line. He feels
it gives a more attractive development as well as being less expensive.
The City Engineer stated the City Council recently indicated that they
prefer the sidewalks adjacent to the property line with landscaping between
the sidewalk and curb.
Motion Commissioner Saathoff to approve Tentative Tract Map 19402 with staff
recorrmendations, changing Items 22 to read: "Sidewalks shall be 5 feet wide
and adjacent to curb along Lincoln Street and Machado Street;" adding sub-
paragraph to Condition #36 to read: "(a) To refer to City Council for
mitigation;" and add Condition #37 to read: "That there be no change of
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 7, 1984
Pa g e 6
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19402 CONTINUED
grading that would change any water flow on site. CC & R's to indicate
maintenance and adherence to approved grading plan," second by Commissioner
Domi nguez .
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Decl arati on.
3. A finding of conformity to the existing General Plan.
4. Bonding for drip or sprinkler irrigation system.
5. Meet requirements of Ordinance 572.
6. Street Maintenance District.
7. Recordation of CC & Rls.
8. Agreement with the Elementary and High School District to off-set
overcrowding.
9. Provide transit facilities, if applicable.
10. Pay all applicable Public Safety Fees.
11. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and City Codes.
12. Trailers utilized during the construction phase of this project shall
be a pproved by the Pl anni ng Di vis ion.
-
13.
14.
All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
Applicant shall provide landscaping plans for reverse frontage along
Lincoln Street and Machado Street. Landscaping materials to be approved
by Planning Division.
15.
Condition upon approval of Annexation by LAFCO and City of Lake Elsinore.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
16. Dedicate additional right-of~way a1~ng the Machado Street frontage of
the proposed devel opmeht. Ex isti ng half street ri ght-of-way is 30 feet.
The General Plan identifies Machado Street as a major street corridor
requiring 100 feet right-of-way and 76 feet roadway. Approximately
40% of the frontage along Machado Street-between Lakeshore Drive and
Grand Avenue has already been developed with 88 foot right-of-way and
a 64 foot wide roadway.
Staff is proposing that only an 88 foot total right-of-way along Machado
Street be required to provide for a 64 foot roadway. This width would
be compatible with existing conditions, including the existing dedica-
tion and improvements on the opposite side of the centerline across
the frontage of this development. Staff will propose in the first
General Plan Jlrnendment in 1984 that Machado Street corridor be reduced
from a 100 foot to an 88 foot right-of-way with a 64 foot roadway.
Developer shall dedicate 14 feet of additional right-of-way along the
Machado Street frontage. This will provide for an 88 foot right-of-way
and a 64 foot_roadway.
17. Dedicate additional right-of-way along Lincoln Street frontage of the
development. The existing half-street right-of-way measured from
existing centerline is 30 feet on the southerly side adjacent to this
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 7, 1984
Page 7
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19402 CONTINUED
proposed development. The subdivider on the northerly side of the
centerline was required by the County to dedicate a 50 foot one-half
street right-of-way. The General Plan does not include Lincoln Street
as a major corridor with a required right-of-way and roadway width.
The present Lincoln Street right-of-way width between Machado Street
and Riverside Drive varies from 88 to 64 feet, but the roadway is con-
sistently 44 feet. From Machado Street northwesterly on Lincoln Street,
the County required a 50 foot wide half-street width with a 64 foot
roadway be provided for Lincoln Street between Machado Street and the
future extension of Grand Avenue. Developer shall dedicate 8 feet of
additional right-of-way along the Lincoln Street frontage of this pro-
posed development which will provide for an 88 foot right-of-way width
with a 64 foot roadway for Lincoln Street between Machado Street and
the fu tu re ex tens i on of Gra nd Avenu e.
18. Dedicate 60 foot right-of-way with standard corner cutbacks at inter-
sections for all interior streets.
19. Construct curb and gutter 32 feet from street centerl ine on Machado
Street. Provide temporary paving from existing edge of pavement to
gutter. This temporary paving is in anticipation of storm drain
installation by others along the northwest side of Machado Street from
Lincoln Street to the Leach Canyon Flood Control Channel. Bond for the
future pavement requirements to be installed along the total property
frontage on Machado Street (Traffic Index = 7.5). Existing paving to
centerline on Machado Street must be reconstructed, unless tests show
it is adequate for the traffic index.
20. Construct curb and gutter 32 feet from street centerline on Lincoln
Street, and pave to City Standards from centerline to gutter (measure
of traffic load Traffic Index = 7.5).
21. For all interior streets, construct curb and gutter 40' curb to curb.
Pave to City Standards (measure of traffic load Traffic Index 6.5).
22. Sidewalks shall be 5 feet wide and adjacent to curb along all interior
streets and along Lincoln Street and Machado Street.
23. Provide soil and geology report including street design. Provide final
soil report showing compliance with preliminary report and certifica-
tion of compliance with detailed grading plan.
24. Provide street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
25. Comply with requirements of flood control report dated January 6, 1984.
The City Engineer shall judge as to interpretation and application of
flood control recommendations. Construct McVickers Canyon drainage
channel along the southwesterly tract boundary to intersect with Leach
Canyon Channel near the southeast corner of this development. Provide
transition structure at this confluence just northwesterly of Machado
Street along with required drainage facility under Machado Street,
as recommended ,by Ri verside County F1 ood Control and Water Conserva-
tion District and approved by the City Engineer. Provide drainage
inlet and underground storm drain from the southerly street knuckle
into the McVickers Canyon (or Leach Canyon) Channel rather than the
open surface drain.
26. Provide detailed hydrology and hydraul ic studies to show compliance with
requirements of the flood control report entitled, "Master Flood Control
and Drainage Plan for Lake Elsinore, Northwest Area, Zone Three,"
dated December 1966.
Additiona 1 drai n i nl ets may be requi red to adapt to future master
drainage plan.
27. Construct sanitary se\\er system as approved by the City Engineer.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Fe bruary 7, 1984
Page 8
- TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19402 CONTINUED
Participate equitably in the cost of providing added capacity in the
pumping stations, sewage collection system and the sewage treatment
plant. This equitable sewer connection fee is in addition to the Sewer
Capital fee of $420.00 required by Ordinance No. 572. The connection
fee charge cou ld be as muc h as $2,000.00 per dwell i ng unit to be pa id
as condition of recording the final map. Build sewer cleanouts at
property 1 i ne .
-
28. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water service from serving
district.
29. Comply with the County Fire Department requirements for fire protection
to include fire hydrant locations.
30. Pay a Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for traffic. signalization in the
amount of $225.00 per lot.
31. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
32. Plans and specifications to be prepared by a Civin Engineer and include
signing and striping.
33. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Sewer
Street
Park
Storm Drain
$
$
- $
- $
420.00 per
.03 per
. 1 0 per
.02 per
residential unit.
square foot of lot area.
square foot of building area.
square foot of lot area.
-
34. Pay Public Safety fees as follows:
Po 1 ice
Fire
$ 250.00
$ 150.00
$ 400.00 per residential unit
TOTAL
35. In the event this development is to be phased, all off-site improvements
must be bonded with Phase I.
36. Enter into an agreement with the City which would allow the City to I
a~quire ownership of the well on the site. Provide the City access to
well. Agreement must be consummated before recording the final map.
Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
(a) To refer to City Coincil for mitigation.
37. That there be no change of grading that would change any water flow on
site. CC & R's to indicate maintenance and adherence to approved
gradi ng pl an.
The Acting Secretary was directed to take name and address of gentleman interested
in horse stables and to notify him of the next public hearing for General Phn
Jlmendments.
-
BUSINESS ITEMS
2. Business License - James M. Strech - Commissioner Washburn excused himself
from sitting on this matter due to a possible conflict of interest. Staff
presented appl icant IS busi ness 1 icense appl icati on to uti 1 i ze "Uni t B" of
an existing manufacturing building located at 18301 Collier Avenue, in an
M-l Zone, for the purpose of conducting a plexiglass business.
James Strech, appl icant, stated there would be no odor or dust from their
operation; They will not be manufacturing the plexiglass and their work
makes chips and not dust. Motion by Commission Dominguez to approve
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 7, 1984
Pa ge 9
BUSINESS LICENSE - JAMES M. STRECH CONTINUED
Business License application of James M. Strech to conduct plexiglass busi-
ness at 18301 Collier Avenue, subject to a-pplicant abiding by all City Codes
and Ordinances, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
3. Business License - Floyd Bridges - Staff presented applicant's business
license application to engage in an auto wrecking and salvage yard business
located at 18247 Collier Street, in the M-l (Manufacturing) Zoning District,
and in the General Plan Land Use Desfgnation of Limited Industrial. This
type of enterprise is a permitted use in the M-l Zoning District if
approved by the City Council.
Discussion was held on suitability in the area; need of office; need or
desire for another salvage yard in that area; necessity for block wall;
issuance of business license to applicant prior to approval from the
City Council; and commitments made by applicant. Motion by Commissioner
Saathoff to deny business license application of Floyd W. Bridges to con-
duct an auto wrecking and salvage yard business at 18247 Collier Avenue
and return of business license fee to applicant, second by Commissioner
Was hburn.
Fa i 1 ed to Pa ss : Ayes:
(2-2) Noes:
Commissi oner' s Saa thoff and Washburn
Commissioner Dominguez and Chairman Steed
4. Lot Line Adjustment 84-1 - Buster-Alles - Staff presented proposal to realign
four (4) parcels into two (2) parcels, located southeasterly of Robb Road
- and Mountain Avenue (Tentative Tract Map 19750). Of the 108 lots approved
under Tentative Tract Map 19750,91 lots will be incorporated into Parcel A,
and 17 lots will be incorporated into Parcel B. Parcel B will be retained
by current property owner. If approved, Lot Line Adjustment 84-1 will
create two (2) separate property descriptions and two (2) separate owners.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Lot Line Adjustment 84-1 with
staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITION
1. Issuance of a Certificate 6~ Compliance.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
2. Comply with conditions as set forth on approved Tentative Tract Map 19750.
/
5. Lot Line Adjustment 84-2 -- Buster-Alles - Staff presented proposal to
realign existing parallel lot line separating Parcel 34 and 35 to proposed
perpendicular lot 1 ine for Parcel 34 and 35, .located westerly of Terra Cotta
Road, adjacent to existing Tract. Of the 127 lots approved on Tentative
Tract Map 15020 Revised, 120 lots will be incorporated into Parcel A and 7
lots will be incorporated into Parcel B. Parcel B will be retained by
current property owner and Parcel A will be utilized by the developer. If
approved, Lot Line Adjustment 84-2 will create two (2) separate property
descriptions and two (2) separate owners. Motion by Commissioner Washburn
to approve Lot Line Adjustment 84-2 with staff recommendations, second by
Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITION
1. Issuance of a Certificate of Compli ance
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITION
2. Comply with conditions as set forth on approved Tentative Tract Map
15020 Revised.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 7, 1984
Page 10
- 6. Policy Recommendation on Interpretation of Ordinance No. 572. - City of
Lake Elsinore Engineering Department - Chairman Steed asked the City Engineer
if he had any addi ti ona 1 i nforma t i on to add to thi s report a nd was a ns wered
in the negative. Discussion was held on how much it would cost -- would it
be a serious burden. The City Engineer stated it would not be a serious
burden because in every development they require a soil report and the soil
report a lways has to include a test on the soi 1 between the edge of pave- -
ment and gutter so he can design a street section. Developers are being
made aware of this requirement so they don't need to make two separate tests.
A further concern was expressed on making developers and property owners
bring existing streets up to Code from centerline to curb. They feel an
existing street is the City's responsibility.
Commissioner Washburn stated that in the General Plan they felt infill was
necessary. Why couldn't it be feasible that we could structure an ordinance
or policy that in set~cted areas, to aid infrastructure infill in existing
lots, that this condition, if required by the City Engineer to go paving
from curb to centerl i ne be the res pons ibil ityof the City. Commis si oners
felt they needed a joint study session with the City Council to properly
resolve this matter.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve a soils test including a core
sample of existing pavement and a test to show resistance value of subgrade
material with City being responsible for bringing existing City-owned
streets up to Code from centerline to curb with the added recommendation
that it be deleted on a case-by-case basis to promote infill in the City,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
-
None
PLANNI NG COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - None.
Commissioner Dominguez - None.
Commi ss i oner Wa shburn - 1. As ked staff to try and structure a Joi nt Study Sessi on
with the City Council. If sessionC'can't be arranged, would like to know reason.
2. Requested the City Planner and City Engineer present list, at next Planning
Commission meeting (February 21, 1984) oJ all suggested matters for General Plan
Amendments (not just in-house) since the last Gen.eral Plan Amendment in December,
1983. That they be given an opportunity to bring forward additional matters,
which they have been discussin,g for along/time, to add to the list.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez' to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
-
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
~ HELD ON THE 7 TH
MINUTE ACTION
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1984
Motion bv Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of January 17,1984, as sub-
rrlitted, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 4-0
BUSI NESS ITEMS
1. Krouse Builders - Ron Christian (Parkside Estates) - Staff presented pro-
posal for plot plan approval for twelve (12) apartment units on three (3)
contiguous lots consisting of three (3) four-unit structures. Each of the
three (3) lots have an area of 9,000 square feet. Project site consists
of 2.2 acres situated north of Pottery Street, between Lindsay Street and
Kellogg Street. Ron Christian, representing Krouse Builders, questioned
Condition #4 and requested it be deleted since they have converted carports
to garages and no longer need the wall for screening purposes; Condition
#10 on Capital Improvement fees, but was informed by the Commission that
they were not empowered to waive these fees, only the City Council could
do so; and Condition #12 he wished to put on IIhold.1I After discussion
between the Commission and City Engineer, it was decided Condition #12
could be deleted as it didn't apply to this portion of the project. Dis-
cussion was held on Condition #4 with Mr. Christian explaining the original
conditions which required screening by a wall. Motion by Commissioner
Dominguez to approve plot plan for 12 apartment units (Parkside Estates)
with staff recommendations and deletion of Conditions #4 and #12, second by
- Conmissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
1. Chinese Pistache trees be provided on the northerly and southerly
exposures between the structures. Minimum of four (4) on each lot.
2. Holly Oak trees be provided in the parkway area. Minimum one tree
per lot.
3. Applicant's choice of ground cover be provided around structures.
4. DELETED.
5. Screen trash areas from view.
6. Provide landscaping as identified on the plan compatible with the
conditions imposed by the Design Review Board.
7. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler
systems.
8. Dedicate 2.5 feet of right-of-way along southerly property line of
Lot 8.
---
9. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
10. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Street
Storm Drain
Park
Sewer
- $
$
$
$
.03 . per square foot of lot area.
.02 per square foot of lot area.
.10 per square foot of building area.
420.00 for each residential unit.
11. Provide City Engineer with hydrology study to identify any potential
drainage problem that may occur. The City Engineer reserves the right
to request street improvement plan and grading plan revisions as
needed to mitigate any potential downstream drainage impacts and other
impacts to adjacent properti es .
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 7, 1984
Page 2
12. DELETED.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 10:21 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner" Dominguez.
Approved 4-0
-
Approved
Whi t Steed
Respectfully submitted,
~7fJ~
Ru t h Ed wa rd s
Acti ng Planning
Commission Secretary
-
-
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON THE 21ST.
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:35 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by City Planner Corcoran.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner
Washburn, Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed.
Also present was City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Rubel and Associate Planner
Fields.
MINUTE ACTION
Commissioner Dominguez stated that on page two second paragraph, Mr. Bob Williams
should have been listed as speaking in favor of Zone Change 84-1.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of February 7, 1984, with
correction on page two second paragraph, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Tentative Tract Map 1956l/Specific Plan - Darwin B. Maxson % Kevin Jefferies -
Staff requested this item be continued to the meeting of March 20, 1984.
Chairman opened and closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m.
Discussion was held on reasons for continuance. Staff stated the continuance
was requested so that concerns on private community concept; lot abutting
O'Hara's Coctail Lounge; drainage; maintaining streets as private streets;
lighting and landscaping and fees could be resolved.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to continue Tentative Tract Map 1956l/Specific
Plan to the meeting of March 20, 1984, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 84-1 - Wayne & Dorothy Morisette - Staff presented proposal
for a Day Care Center (A Small World for Little People), to be located 90 feet
southwesterly of the intersection of Machado Street and Lakeshore Drive.
Chairman commented on the two play areas and the craft area wanting to know
how the children would be confined in these areas, would this be open, fenced
or what? Mr. David Jones, General Contractor for the project stated that the
play areas as shown on the plan-- the size of the play area is determined by
the state (you have to have so many feet for outside play area per child),.e!nd
the play areas themselves are chain link fenced in. Also, at the back of the
project is a concrete block wall along the back and then the play area is set
a considerable distance from the street.
--
Commissioner Dominguez asked if condition number 19 (provide will serve letter
from serving agency) had been cleared? Mrs. Dorothy Morisette stated that
she has talked with Elsinore Water District as well as Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water ~istrict and it was agreed that one of the Districts would serve the
project since it was in a gray area.
Mr. Wayne Morisette commented on condition number 20 (dedication of subsurface
water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore), stating that one of the water
districts expressed an opinion that they own the water rights, and if the water
district owned them, how could they dedicate the water rights to the city?
Commissioner Dominguez stated that is why he asked about the will serve letter
from the water district being cleared, as required in condition number 19.
Minutes of Planntng Commission
February 21, 1984
Page 2
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-1 - WAYNE & DOROTHY MORISETTE CONTINUED
Commissioner Dominguez stated that there is a brick wall at the end of the
property, and asked applicant if a buffer in between that wall and the
project would be provided? Mr. David Jones stated that there were two (2)
buffers ( a buffer which is landscape, 16 feet wide), the structure itself and
then the play areas. Commissioner Dominguez stated that he would like this
added as a condition.
-"
Mrs. Dorothy Morisette spoke in behalf of the Day Care Center, stating
that the Day Care Center was necessary and that the facility would house
one hundred children. Mrs. Morisette also requested that some of the condi-
tions be deferred to a later date requiring them when other properties in
the area are developed.
Mr. Wayne Morisette requested condition 13 a through g be deferred, stating
they would be happy to work with Engineering Department and provide temporary
paving from the present street to the driveway, and at such time the street
is widened then they would put in the necessary improvements; requesting
condition number 15 be deferred until such time the City deems that necessary.
Discussion was held on deferring conditions 13 and 15; and project being on
sewer instead of septic.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 84-1 with staff
recommendations deferring conditions 13 a through g and condition number 15;
amending condition number 17 by adding the following verbiage: "Applicant may
be able to place a dual septic/hook-ups for future sewer line extension, if
necessary, when required by City; and adding condition number 23 which will
read: Southwest portion of property to be buffered with landscaping from
Machado Pines Park (the rear portion), second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
--
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall screen all trash and storage areas.
2. All facilities shall be constructed as approved on site plan.
3. All signs shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance and shall be
issued prior to being erected.
4. All utilities shall be placed underground.
5. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
6. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
7. Meet requirements of Ordinance 572.
8. Meet requirements of Design Review Board.
9. Landscaping planters shall be provided with automatic sprinkler systems.
10. Staff recordation of CC & R's as required by City Council.
11. Meet requirements of County Fire Department.
-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
12. The General Plan requires a 100 foot wide street corridor on Lakeshore
Drive with a 76 foot roadway. A 50 foot wide one-half street dedication
exists across the frontage of this property proposed for development.
No additional street dedication is needed.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 21. 1984
Page 3
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-1 - WAYNE & DOROTHY MORISETTE CONTINUED
--
13. In compliance with Ordinance 572 provide street improvements:
a) Install curb and gutter 38 feet from centerline across
the 60 foot frontage on Lakeshore Drive.
b) Install 8 foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the curb
along Lakeshore Drive.
c) Construct paving from curb line to street centerline.
One lane of pavement exists adjacent to street center-
line. Existing paving must be removed and replaced
unless tests of existing pavement and subgrade show
that it can be brought up to City Standards for the
expected traffic load (Traffic Index = 8.0).
d) To install off-site (public) improvements in the
County jurisdiction. a County permit must be obtained.
e) Comply with City Council interpretation of Ordinance
572 requi rements for extent 0 f street improvements
because this is a flag lot. The City Council may
require that this development be responsible for a
greater width than 60 feet width of frontage. The
City Council has not established a policy for ap-
plication of Ordinance 572 requirements to flag lots.
f) Provide street lighting as approved by the City
Engineer.
g. Plans and specifications for off-site improvements
shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
DEFERRED UNTIL REQUESTED BY CITY.
14. Record a drainage easement in favor of Machado Pines to accomrrodate an
existing drainage discharge through this site to Lakeshore Drive.
Record a hold harmless agreement protecting City against drainage
liabilities. Construct a drainage facility as required by the City
Engineer to convey the drainage from Machado Pines to Lakeshore Drive.
including a properly designed discharge into Lakeshore Drive with the
necessary grading and improvements to the roadside ditch.
15. Contribute $2.000.00 as an additional drainage fee for future construction
of the Lakeshore Drive storm drain. DEFERRED UNTIL REQUESTED BY CITY.
-
16. Cooperate with City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping District.
17. Provide sewage disposal as approved by the City. the County Health
Department and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Applicant will
be required to participate equitably in financing the sewer line extension
in Lakeshore Drive and participating equitably in the cost of a regional
sewage collection. treatment and disposal system. Applicant may be able
to place a dual septic/hook-ups for future sewer line extension. if
necessary. when required by City. This cost may be in addition to the
existing sewer capital fee required by Ordinance 572.
18. Provide soils report which includes street design. Provide grading plan
and grade certification.
19. Provide will serve letter from serving agency.
20. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
21 . Pay Capita 1 Impro vement fees as fo 11 ows :
S ewe r
Street
Park
Storm Drain
$ 420.00 for 20 fixture units.
$ .03 per square foot of lot area
$ .01 per square foot of lot area
$ .02 per square foot of lot area
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 21, 1984
Pa ge 4
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-1 - WAYNE & DOROTHY MORISETTE CONTINUED
22. Provide fire protection as required by the County Fire Department.
23. Southwest portion of property to be buffered with landscaping from
Machado Pines Park (the rear portion).
2. Residential Project 83-2 - William S. Buck - Staff presented proposal for
112 Unit Apartment Complex, to be located southwesterly of the intersection
of. Lincal nand Fl annery Street.
Mr. Buck questioned the second paragraph of condition number 14 (provide an
easement and/or drainage acceptance for the properties to the northwest).
-
It was recommended that condition number 14 be re-numbered to 14 A and 14 B.
A lengthy discussion was held on condition 14 B and alternatives to the
easement and/or drainage situation.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Residential Project 83-2 with
staff recommendations and condition number 14 B to be deferred and addressed
by staff and applicant and resubmitted for approval by the Planning Commission,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Commissioner Washburn asked for discussion - stating there are two items he
would like to see brought forward on Design Review Board when talking about
this project: (1) Pertaining to condition number 4, applicant submitting a
landscape plan to the Design Review Board, would like him to include recre-
ational facilities and provide some type of bicycle stands for high density
project; and (2) the question of trees that are on that site.
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
2. Applicant shall meet with all City Codes.
3. Applicant to build per plot plan submitted.
4. Applicant shall submit to the Design Review Board a landscape plan
detailing trees, shrubs, ground cover and other landscape features.
5. All conditions of both the Planning Commission and Design Review Board
to be met prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. Any changes
from the plans, other than those required by the Commission and Design
Review Board necessitate resubmittal .
6. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
7. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
8. Lincoln Street:
a)
Dedicate three feet of right-of-way along Lincoln Street
frontage for a total one-half street width of 33 feet.
Existing right-of-way is 60 feet.
Existing 44 foot curb-to-curb width warrants a total of
66 foot future ri ght-of-way to conform to General Pl an
requirements 66-44 for collector street classification
on figure CIR-2 in the General Plan.
-
b)
c)
Minutes of Planning Commission
F ebrua ry 21, 1 984
Pa ge 5
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 83-2 - WILLIAM S. BUCK CONTINUED
9.
Dedicate right-of-way on Flannery Street to provide for a 60 foot
total right-of-way with standard cul-de-sac to match existing
improvements. Provide title report to show that dedication exists.
-
10. Install curb and gutter 18 feet from street right-of-way centerline
along Flannery Street and connect to existing curb and gutter at the
cul-de-sac. Curb and gutter exists on Lincoln Street 22 feet from
the centerline. Remove and replace existing curb and gutter that
is damaged.
11. Construct 6 foot wide sidewalk adjacent to curb line along Lincoln
Street and construct 5 foot sidewalk adjacent to property line along
Flannery Street. Construct one 30 foot driveway on Flannery Street
and one 35 foot driveway on Lincoln Street. Present plan reflects
one 25 foot driveway access on Flannery Street and one 35 foot drive-
way on Lincoln Street.
12. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curb
line on all surrounding streets. Paving exists on all surrounding
streets. Tests must show that existing paving is to City Standards
and will support the traffic loads as reflected in the traffic
indexes which are 7.0 on Lincoln Street and 6.0 on Flannery Street.
13. Provide City Engineer with soils report to include street design.
Provide final soils report and grading certification. Provide City
Engineer with grading pl an for this project for approval.
-
14A. Drainage for subject property must be directed to Flannery Street
and Lincoln Street, and conveyed under the sidewalk in an acceptable
manner as approved by the City Engineer. Pay equitable drainage
impact mitigation fee in the amount of $ 350.00 per dwelling unit.
14B. Applicant shall provide for accepting drainage from the adjacent
properties to the northwest and conveying such storm water in a
manner approved by the City Engineer to Flannery Street. Provide
an easement and/or dra i nage acceptance for the properti es to the
northwest as approved by the City Engineer. TO BE DEFERRED AND
ADDRESSED BY STAFF AND APPLICANT AND RESUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL BY
THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
15. Provide street lighting as approved by City Engineer. Existing
power poles may De utilized on which street lights can be mounted.
Otherwise install decorative standards.
16. Plans for off-site work shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer,
including signing and striping. Existing street improvement plans
for Flannery Street are on file in the City Engineer's office.
The City Engineer reserves the right to modify existing street
improvement plans.
17. Existing sewer facilities are located in Lincoln Street and Flannery
Street. Applicant to conform to City Standards and specifications
for connection to City sewer system and to pay sewer connection fees
as listed below. Install sewer cleanout at property line. Participate
equitably in the cost of providing added capacity in a regional sewage
collection, treatment and disposal system. This equitable sewer
connection fee is in addition to the sewer capital fee required by
Ordi nance 572.
18. Provide to City a water availability letter from servicing agency.
Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 21, 1984
Page 6
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 83-2 - WILLIAM S. BUCK CONTINUED
19. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements
(to include fire protection and fire hydrant locations) have been
complied with.
20. Provide letter of agreement to assist City in forming Lighting
and Landscaping District.
21. Applicant to agree that on-street parking on Lincoln Street shall
be prohibited.
-
22. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Street
Storm Drain
Park
Sewer
$ .03 per square foot of lot area
$ .02 per square foot 0 f lot a rea
$ .10 per square foot of building area
$ 420.00 for each residential unit
3. Sign Proposal - Gearhart's Garage - Staff presented proposal for a illuminated
20 foot free-standing pole sign for Gearhart's Garage, located at 184 South
Main Street. This proposal is being submitted because of the following con-
cerns:
The current scope of the City's Sign Ordinance does not
reflect the sensitive nature of commercial signs in
Lake Elsinore's downtown area;
Downtown commercial signage is a paramount concern
which directly affects revitalization of a decaying core;
An inadequate signage program could adversely affect
commercial development and constrain growth.
-
Staff stated with the sensitive area of downtown that it may behoove the
Commission to look a little closer at the type of signage or the type of
signage program and architectural theme they woul d 1 He to see downtown.
Discussion was held on exact location of sign arid whether or not conditions
could be placed on this proposal.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Sign Proposal for Gearhart's
Garage as submitted, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Appro ved 5-0
4. Conceptual Plan, Back Bay Marina - Al Hertz - Staff presented proposal for
conceptual approval of Back Bay Marina, to be located on the northeast shore
of Lakeshore Drive (between St. John Way and Bushman Avenue).
Chairman stated that the State mandates what will and will not take place on
the lake. Marinas are one of the things they have spoken to.
Staff stated the State prohibits certain activities on the lake in terms of
piers, jetties and marinas, but it does not speak to marinas, piers and jetties
on private land already under water on their own property.
Commissioner Washburn stated that what the State has said, if he can interpret,
is that if the lake went real low they could not dredge a channel deeper than
the State Park contour to allow water to come in to it.
-
Mr. Larry Buxton, representing Back Bay Marina, stated they had contacted the
Department of Parks and Recreation and provided then with a copy of the con-
ceptual plan, and all of the facilities are on private property; and,received
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 21, 1984
Page 7
CONCEPTUAL PLAN, BACK BAY MARINA - Al HERTZ CONTINUED
-
a letter back from the Department of Parks and Recreation stating "that
they have reviewed the proposed project and it appears to be above the
lake Elsinore State Recreation boundaries, thereby it would be permitted
as long as the owners are aware of California Administrative Code, Title
14 4605.1 and 4605.2, which establishes the requirements that "No person
shall wharf out or erect quays, jetties, piers, breakwaters, groins,
moles, wharves, docks, boathouses or any structures whatsoever floating
or otherwise upon or in lake Elsinore SRA except by permission in writing
by the Director. Further, if the facilities are constructed as per the
blueprints with proper allowances for boat traffic safety, they see no
probl ems."
Mr. Buxton stated further, that they did go to the Parks and Recreation
Board before coming to the City. Also, they obtained a dredging permit
from Water Quality Control Board and obtained a letter from the Army
Corps of Engineers stating "that proposed project does not require an
individual permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and that any
individual discharge of dredge of fill material associated with your pro-
posed work would be covered by a nationwide permit (33 CFR 330.4(a)(1) or
330 .4(a H 2) ." A copy 0 f the 1 etters from the Park and Recreati on Board
and Army Corp of Engineers has been submitted to staff.
-
Discussion was held on how water would be brought up; and elevation of
parking lot. Mr. Buxton stated they would be providing landscaping (low
enough so that there would be sight distance, so as not to interfere with
circulation); providing 185 parking spaces also 38 spaces for cars and
trailers who might be there to launch boats; handicapped parking spaces;
walkways; a restaurant (which would include outside restrooms for the
marina patrons as well as the restaurant); also a certain number of guest
docks.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Conceptual Plan for Back Bay
Marina, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Planner Corcoran stated that the Community Development Director had nothing
to report, but he would like to inform the Commission of the upcoming four (4)
General Plan Amendments:
1. Down grading Of Machado Street;
2. To include circulation element for lincoln Street
corridor from Machado Street northwesterly;
3. Downgrading of Pottery Street corridor as a
result of City Council action on January 10, 1984,
on Conditional Use Permit 83-13.
4. Apartments on lindsay and Kellogg adjacent to
YarBorough Park.
Commissioner Washburn asked that a fifth General Plan Amendment be added: whatever
the Planning Commission/City Council come up with at the joint study session be
included, as there are other items that need to be addressed. Commissioner Washburn
stated that he would put this request in letter form and submit to the City Manager.
PLANNING COMfnSS lONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Dominguez - None
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 21, 1984
Page 8
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONTINUED
Commissioner Washburn - Will talk to the City Engineer about providing reflectors
that are mounted on stands for cars that are turning off of Lincoln Street on
to Machado, so that they do not run into the one tree that is there.
Commissioner Barnhart - There is a new newspaper in the area, which is Canyon
Lake/Elsinore News, and there was an article with pictures on the burned down
structures. The burned down structure on Chestnut has finally been cleaned up,
I don't know who had anything to do with it, but thanks.
Chairman Steed - None
....
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
....
....
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
21ST.
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1984
~
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of February 7, 1984, as
submitted, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 84-1 - Wayne & Dorothy Morisette - Staff presented pro-
posal for a Day Care Center (A Small World for Little People), to be located
90 feet southwesterly of the intersection of Machado Street and Lakeshore
Drive.
Discussion was held on applicant providing a Class II Bicycle lane, and
providing one or two zones for handicapped parking.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Commercial Project 84-1 with
staff recommendations and adding condition number 6, which will read:
On East Lakeshore Drive, applicant to provide Class II Bicycle lane
striping; adding condition number 7, which will read: Applicant to
establish 1 or 2 zones for handicapped parking, second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1.
Project shall be constructed according to approved site plan and
elevations. Any changes will require resubmittal to the Design
Review Board.
~
2. All trash areas and storage shall be screened and approved by
the Planning Division.
3. All signs shall be approved by the Planning Division.
4. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler
systems.
5. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six
(6) inch high concrete curb.
6. On East Lakeshore Drive, applicant to provide Class II Bicycle
Lane striping.
7. Applicant to establish or 2 zones for handicapped parking.
2. Residential Project 83-2 - William S. Buck - Staff presented proposal for
112 Unit Apartment Complex, to be located southwesterly of the intersection
of Lincoln and Flannery Street.
A brief discussion was held on existing Walnut trees on project site.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Residential Project 83-2 with
staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
1. All items depicted on the site plan and landscape plan shall be
provided as indicated, unless otherwise modified by the Design Review
Board's conditions. Any proposed changes must be resubmitted to the
Design Review Board for approval.
2. All planting and landscaping areas shall have permanent and automatic
sprinkler systems.
3. All trash areas and storage shall be screened.
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 21, 1984
Page 2
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 83-2 - WIllIAM S. BUCK CONTINUED
4. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six
(6) inch high concrete curb.
3. Residential Project 84-2 - William S. Buck - Staff presented proposal for
two (2), two (2) unit duplexes, to be located 50 feet easterly of the ...
intersection of Cowell Street and lakeshore Drive.
The Design Review Board had concerns about reviewing this proposal, stating
this should be reviewed by the Planning Commission as a business item, due
to the Engineering conditions placed on this proposal. It was the consensus
of the Deisgn Review Board to review the proposal as conditon number 22
recommends applicant request from City Council deferral of all Engineering
conditions.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Residential Project 84-2 with
staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Grading plan to be approved by Engineering Department.
2. Provide landscaping as depicted on submitted plan.
3. Applicant to comply with drainage mitigation measures.
4. All items depicted on site and landscape plan shall be provided as
indicated.
...
5. All planting areas shall have automatic sprinkler systems.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
6. lakeshore Drive:
a) Dedicate 10 feet of right-of-way along lakeshore Drive
frontage.
b) Existing right-of-way is 60 feet and the City's General
Plan requires an 80 foot wide corridor.
7. Ryan Avenue:
a) No dedication required.
b} Existing right-of-way is 40 feet.
8. Install curb and gutter 32 feet from street centerline on lakeshore
Drive. Install curb and gutter 16 feet from street centerline on
Ryan Avenue.
9. Construct 5 foot sidewalk adjacent to property line along total
property frontage on lakeshore Drive. Construct 4 foot sidewalk
adjacent to curb along total property frontage on Ryan Avenue.
Construct sta'ndard driveway as approved by the City Engineer.
10. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curb
line on lakeshore Drive and Ryan Avenue. Paving exists on lakeshore
Drive only. Tests must show that existing paving is to City Standards
and will support the traffic loads with Traffic Index of 7.5 on lake-
shore Drive and 6.0 on Ryan Avenue.
...
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 21, 1984
Pa ge 3
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-2 - WILLIAM S. BUCK CONTINUED
--
11. Provide City Engineer with soils report on this project to include
street design. Provide final soils report and grading certification.
Provide City Engineer with a grading plan for this project for approval.
12. Pay an off-site drainage impact mitigation fee of $350.00 per unit for
grading of existing drainage facilities on Lakeshore Drive. Provide
adequate drainage facilities, due to topographic constraints, to convey
storm water to Lakeshore Drive as approved by City Engineer.
13. Provide street lighting as approved by City Engineer. Existing power
poles may be utilized on which street lights can be mounted. Otherwise,
install decorative standards.
14. Plans for off-site work shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer
including signing and striping plans.
15. Comply with the requirements of the City, County Health Department and
Water Quality Control Board for sewer service. Applicant may be re-
quired to participate equitably in the cost of providing a regional
sewage collection, treatment, and disposal system. This equitable
sewer connection fee would be in addition to the sewer capital fee
required by Ordinance 572.
16. Provide water will serve letter guaranteeing water service from serving
District. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
17. Comply with the County Fire Department requirements for fire protection
to include fire hydrant locations. Provide written acceptance to City
Engineer.
18. Provide letter of agreement to assist the City in forming a Lighting
and Landscaping District.
19. Plans and specifications to be prepared by a Civil Engineer and include
striping and signing.
20. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Sewer
Street
Park
Storm Drain
$ 420.00 for each residential unit
$ .03 per square foot of lot area
$ .10 per square foot of building area
$ .02 per square foot of lot area
21. Access shall be from Ryan Street.
22. Construction of off-site improvements on Lakeshore Drive and Ryan Street
do not appear practical at this time. It is proposed that applicant
request deferral from the Ci ty Council .
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
-- 9:35 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
Approved
Whit Steed
Chairman
ResP~8...tfUllY SUbmi~, ~
~.;~ ~(/~
Linda Grindstaff ~.
Planning Commission
Secretary
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 6TH.
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
MARCH
1984
-
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:34 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Associate Planner Fields.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner
Washburn, Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed.
Also present was City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Rubel and Associate
Planner Fields.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve minutes of February 21, 1984, as
submitted, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Tentative Parcel Map 19767 - Centennial Engineering - Staff presented request
from the applicant for a 30 day continuation of Tentative Parcel ~~ap 19767.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. and closed the public hearing
at 7:36 p.m.
-
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to continue Tentative Parcel Map 19767 to the
meeting of April 17, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
2.
Conditional IUse Permit 84-2 - Gene Kl imowicz - Staff presented proposal for
a towing operation and vehicle impound area, to be located at the southeast
corner of Lakeshore Drive and Fraser Drive.
,
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-2. Mr. Gene Klimowicz, applicant,
stated that he had no plans of making a junk yard out of this, all I want to
do is have three trucks and possibly cars, maybe up to five, until I know
where they have to be towed to. Mr. Klimowicz also stated that this will not
be a wrecking yard of any sort and they will not be working on cars.
There being no one else wishing to speak in favor, the Chairman then asked for
those opposed. There being no opposition the public hearing was closed at
7:41 p.m.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that he had two things that he would like the
Commission to give consideration to, which are:
1) that all storage of vehicles he confined to the area within
the wall, so if there is overage it would not be outside
tha t a rea;
2) putting language into the conditions where there would be
no dismantling of vehicles.
Commissioner Dominguez asked Mr. Klimowicz if he was aware of the conditions
and if he had received a copy of the conditions? Mr. Klimowicz stated he had
-received a copy of the conditions. Commissioner Dominguez asked if he agreed
with all of the conditions? Mr. Klimowicz stated that he did not own the
property only leasing the property. Commissioner Dominguez asked if he had
any questions on the conditions. Mr. Klimowicz stated that he did not agree
with any of the conditions.
Commissioner Barnhart stated that she would be abstaining from this, but asked
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 6, 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-2 - GENE KLIMOWICZ CONTINUED
if she could help the applicant in clarifying the conditions placed on this
proposal. Chairman so granted.
Chairman stated that rather than going through conditions 7-21 it might be
advantageous to postpone this to another time and let the applicant, property
owner and staff get together and discuss the conditions.
Commissioner Washburn asked if the property owner has seen the conditions?
Mr. Klimowicz stated that he had just received the conditions yesterday, and
he thought the property owner would be here tonight. Commissioner Washburn
stated that it would probably be to the applicant's benefit to continue this
until he can review these items with the owner and then get further clarifica-
tion from staff, if necessary, and then bring it back before the Commission.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Conditional Use Permit 84-2 to
March 20, 1984, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Barnhart abstaining
.....,
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Sign Proposal for 01de Tyme Antiques - Staff presented proposal for 01de Tyme
Antiques, located at 107 East Graham, to erect a sign on the northeasterly
corner of Main Street and Graham Avenue, projecting at a 45 degree angle
bolted to IIStuff N Hairll store. Staff stated that the current City Sign
Ordinance prohibits signs or sign structures to be erected within public
property or public right-of-way. Staff is recommending that this proposal
be held over until the new zoning ordinance is written, which would incorporate
a specific sign ordinance.
Discussion was held on sign projecting into right-of-way; time involved for
consultant ~o write zoning ordinance; location of business; existing signs
downtown; type of material sign is made of; erecting sign adhearing to safety
standards; forwarding to City Council for their interpretation; using Ca1
Poly Study for guidance.
I
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to accept staff's interpretation of the sign
that it does in fact interfer with public right-of-way. Motion died due to
lack of a second.
--
Chairman stated that rather than putting it in the form of a motion - the
recommendation is that it be held over until the Zoning Ordinance is written,
without speaking specifically to free space or public right-of-way.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to accept the interpretation of staff that the
sign does infringe into public right-of-way and should be denied on those
grounds, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Commissioner Dominguez asked for further discussion, stating the word deny
should not be used. CommissiOner Washburn suggested that sign proposal be
denied without prejudice. Commissioner Dominguez agreed.
Commissioner Saathoff amended his motion to accept the interpretation of staff
that the sign does infringe into public right-of-way and to deny without pre-
judice.
Approved 3-2 Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed voting no.
-
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Barnhart - Finally got the building down up on the corner of Chestnut
and Graham, and now we have two (2) beat up vehicles parked in there. I under-
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 6, 1984
Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMEN~ATION CONTINUED
,....
stand that we have an ordinance against abandoned vehicles being parked on lots,
especially on a corner.
Commissioner Washburn - Would like to report that Mr. Corcoran and myself attended
the League of California Cities Conference held in San Diego, and it was very
informative. A number of the meetings brought the attention to the importance of
the General Plan, traditional items as well as new items dealing with conversion
of old schools into public use or actually utilizing lands, mobile homes, Granny
Flats problem, also finding that as of the first of the year will be able to
amend the General Plan four (4) times rather than three (3) times.
Also would like to have this body this evening give a recommendation to City Council
dealing with the problem with signs within the City. Recommending that we defer all
signs that are coming forward to Planning Commission or across the counter, to be
deferred and held until which time we have an acting new sign ordinance.
Chairman stated that Commissioner Washburn is referring to all signs, and he thinks
that signs that conform at this point of time should not be a problem.
Commissioner Dominguez asked if the signs are in conformance, why would we want to
hold it up? Commissioner Washburn stated because of the integrating, architectural
design review characters, we are trying to accomplish with the Cal Poly Study.
,....
Commissioner Saathoff stated that you could request a moratorium on signs that do
not meet the conceptual design of the Cal Poly Study.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he did not think that would work either, because
they could turn around and cite the ordinances 'as set forth in the books. I think
that we should pass to staff the Cal Poly design, maybe in the joint study session
we could talk about that and give it to the consultant so that it can be incorporated
into what we are trying to accomplish.
Commissioner Dominguez - None
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Chairman then stated City Planner Corcoran could address Commissioners comments.
City Planner Corcoran stated that the consultant at this time, has a copy of the
Urban Design Study and he will be incorporating that into the sign program.
Commissioner Washburn stated that any signs that do not conform with the current
sign ordinance be held at bay until which time we have adopted a new sign ordinance.
Commissioner Dominguez stated that he agrees with Commissioner Washburn, but should
be handled on a case-by-case with applicant having the option to go before City
Council. If staff has a problem with a sign then it should be brought before the
Planning Commission.
Commissioner Washburn recommended that all non-conforming signs be held at bay
until we have an approved sign ordinance.
Chairman Steed - At Spring Street above the Alamo Market it looks like they've cut
a lateral or something like that and did not get it filled properly, if you hit it
you just about loose control of your car. Maybe when they are around that way with
a little patch material they might drop some in it and rollover it once or twice.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 6TH.
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DAY
OF
MARCH
1984
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of February 21, 1984, as
submitted, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
-
BUS I NESS ITEr~S
1. Landscape Plan for Conditional Use Permit 83-3 - Robert Steele - Staff pre-
sented Landscape Plan for Conditional Use Permit 83-3, which was required
as condition number 3 of the Conditional Use Permit.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that these landscape plans should have some
time element established on when they are to be brought back to Design Review
Board, also time element on when they are to be implemented.
Chairman stated that it may be prudent to bring this up at this time. When
this came to us originally, this was to be an intern storage yard, no long
term storage or dismantling. The yard is so crowded that they have now opened
up another yard on Langstaff Street. It is in the downtown area and we
have spoke in the past about visibility of wrecking and storage yards. This
was going to be an in and out type storage, now it is completely filled and
evidently they have long time storage problems. If it is impounded by the
Sheriff's Department or whatever it can be there for 2-3 years or until such
time the disposition of the case is settled. I wonder if this is going to be
an on-going situation, and is so will landscaping solve that problem?
Discussion was held on Conditional Use Permit being violated, and landscaping _
plan design should add more detail. Commissioner I~ashburn stated he felt
it inappropriate to screen only Main Street visibility and not the rear yard
or side yard, should fully screen the property and make sure that the light
is in place, include on plan parking stalls for towed vehicles; circles
representing Oleanders on the other two perimeter sides which would be the
rear alley side and the south side.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Landscaping Plan for Conditional
Use Permit 83-3 with staff recommendations also to include additional two (2)
sides (east and south) have Oleanders planted sufficient enough to fully
screen the property and to be implemented within 30 days, second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
2. Landscaping Plan for Conditional Use Permit 83-13 - Jess Rodriguez - Staff
presented Landscaping Plan for Conditional Use Permit which was required as
conditions 5, 6, 7 and 23.
Discussion was held on the wall that was required to be included in the
landscaping plan.
Commissioner Washburn stated that a landscaping plan such as the one submitted
is not detailed enough, no defination of tree types, whether they are existing
trees to remain or new vegetation. Commissioner Washburn felt a vertical plot
pl an i ndi cati ngdtstance; scales; north arrO\'l; types of pl ants and shrubs;
tirrigation and wall.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez that the Landscaping Plan for Conditional Use
Permit 83-13 be returned to staff, and that the applicant and staff get together
and a new Landscaping Plan includin~ t~e wall or fencing be brought back to the
Design Review Board, second by CommlSSloner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
Minutes of Design Review Board
March 6, 1984
Page 2
3.
Elevations and Landscaping Plan for Residential Project 84-1 - Barclays Inland
Empire -
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused due to possible conflict of interest.
Commissioner Washburn was excused.
~
Staff presented design elevations and landscaping plan for a 150 unit apartment
complex on 4.76 acres, which would be located 1,000 feet northwesterly of the
intersection of Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive.
Staff stated that the project appears feasible and sound with provisions for
generous amounts of landscaping and recreational amenities (playgrounds,
swimming pool, and open space) however, staff has the following concerns:
1) Since trash bins will be within view, staff recommends the
relocation of several proposed trash enclosures within the
rear parking island;
2) The provisions of only one (1) swimming pool for a minimum
of 300 residents (excluding children), staff recommends an
additional swimming pool be provided;
3) Proposed waterways in open space areas between buildings:
This aspect of the project could potentially create
problems of health and nuisance, if not properly maintained.
(Staff recommends that applicant furnish specific details
as to the circulation/filtration of water within proposed
waterway, provisions for maintenance, and specific details
of construction techniques to insure useful life.)
Mr. Mark LaPort was present and stated that at this time the plans before the
Design Review Board are conceptual plans. Mr. LaPort then addressed staff's
concerns regarding relocation of trash enclosures; swimming pool (stating
size and sha~e to be determined later); proposed waterways in open space
areas between buildings.
Mr. LaPort then requested that condition number 1 be changed to "all items
depicted on ~andscaping plan and design elevations be provided as indicated.
Applicant will submit formal landscape plans for staff approval prior to
notice of completion". Mr. LaPort then gave specific details on the proposed
project covering landscaping, elevations; and architectural layout.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Conceptual Elevations for Residential
Project 84-1 with staff recommendations and amend condition number 1 to add the
following verbiage "formal plan to be submitted to the Planning Department and
Design Review Board for approval II , second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Washburn excused
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on Landscaping Plan and Design Elevations be
provided as indicated. Formal plan to be submitted to the Planning
Department and Design Review Board for approval.
.....
2.
Relocation of trash enclosures in rear property island to alternate
acceptable locations.
3. Details for maintenance, construction techniques, and circulation/filtra-
tion of proposed waterway.
4. Any major changes necessitates resubmittal to Design Review Board for
approval.
5. All landscaped areas be provided with permanent and automatic irrigation
system.
Minutes of Design Review Board
March 6, 1984
Page 3
ELEVATIONS AND LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR RESIOENTIAL PROJECT 84-1 - BARCLAYS INLAND
EMPIRE CONTINUED
6. Provide ten (10) street trees along 300 foot frontage of subject
site.
7.
Applicant shall submit a Lighting Plan to Planning Division for
review and Design Review Board for approval.
-
4. Single-Family Residence - 29236 Gunder - Walter & Geraldine Parker % Allison
Construction - Staff presented proposal for a single-family residence to be
located at 29236 Gunder. Proposal meets all Planning Division requirements.
The Design Review Board had concerns about reviewing this proposal, due to
the Engineering conditions placed on this proposal, stating the Engineering
conditions should be reviewed by the Planning Commission as a business item.
It was the consensus of the Design Review Board to review the proposal with
applicant having the right to ask City Council for deferral on Engineering
conditions.
Mr. Allison was present and stated he had no problems with the conditions,
but they will be changing the roof material from shake to tile for fire
reasons.
A brief discussion was held on condition number 7. The City Engineer stated
that a letter of agreement from adjacent property owners would suffice.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Single-Family Residence at
29236 Gunder with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DI~ISION CONDITIONS:
,
1. Landscape all area with slope, surrounding building pad with erosion
control vegetation (ivy, ice plant, or grass).
!
2. Finding of conformance to General Plan.
-
3. All items depicted on site plan and design elevations shall be as
indicated.
4. Due to evidence of erosion, driveway shall have a good driveab1e
surface and structural base (i .e. compacted D.G.).
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
5. This flag lot has an access width to Gunder Avenue of only 15 to 20
feet. Existing Gunder Avenue right-of-way is 40 feet wide. Across
the 15 to 20 foot Gunder Avenue frontage of the access road to this
proposed dwelling an additional 10 feet of right-of-way has been
dedicated. No additional dedication is required.
6. Street Improvement Ordinance 572 requires that off-site (public)
improvements be constructed in Gunder Avenue to the street centerline
along this 15 to 20 foot access road frontage. Staff is of the
opinion that it is impractical to construct the (off-site) public
street improvements at this time and that the applicant should request,
in writing, that the City Council defer the improvements, by standard
lien agreement. The public improvements when constructed would
include:
-
a) curb and gutter, sidewalk, driveway, and paving from
new concrete gutter to street centerline for a traffic
load represented by a traffic index of 6.0;
b) plans and specifications prepared by a Civil Engineer;
Minutes of Design Review Board
March 6, 1984
Page 4
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE 29236 GUNDER AVENUE - WALTER & GERALDINE PARKER % ALLISON
CONSTRUCTION
-
7. Obtain slope easements for slope grading from adjacent owners, along
access driveway.
8. Provide Soils Report, Grading Certification, and Certificate of
Survey with Grading plan.
9. Provide sewer service as approved by the City, the County Health
Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
10. Provide domestic water will-serve letter.
11. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
12. Provide fire protection facilities to the approval of the County
Fire Department.
13. Cooperate with the City in the establishment of a Lighting and
Landscaping District.
14. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Sewer
Street
Park
Storm Drains
$ 420.00
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of building area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
-
Commissioner Washburn recommended that staff look into setting a time limit for
the Design Review Board for landscaping plans that come back from the applicants,
30 days possibly. Applicant is to be informed of this at the counter. Also, at
that time let them know we will probably put a 30 day time frame for them to
complete or implement that project.
Commissioner Saathoff asked to address the concern on single-family process,
stating the Procedure Manual-states: "The Planning Department will schedule review
date at the earliest possible meeting of the Design Review Board. The Design Re-
view Board will check the proposal for conformance to various city ordinances
including Ordinance 621." Commissioner Saathoff asked for the consensus of the
Commission, on whether or not proposals continue to be processed as presently done,
or do you want proposals with engineering conditions on the Planning Commission
agenda as a business item? It was the consensus of the Commissioners to have future
proposals with engineering conditions be placed on the Planning Commission agenda as
a business item, and the elevations be on the Design Review Board agenda.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:40 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
Approved
Whit Steed
Chairman
/'
. ~es~t~UllY SUbm~d~ ..
eYfudcu /~?1~
Linda Gri nds ta ff /f;/
Planning Commission
Secretary
MI NUTES OF
HELD ON THE 20TH
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
r.1ARCH
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:31 P.M.
-.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Barnhart.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissio.ner Dominguez, Commissioner
Washburn, Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Rubel and Associate
Planner Fields.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of March 6, 1984, as submitted,
second by; Commiss ioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
Tentative Tract Map 19561jSpecific Plan - Darwin B. Maxson, c/o Kevin
Jefferies - Staff presented proposal for a residential/commercial subdivi-
sion of 7.72 acres into 28 residential and 2 commercial lots located on the
north side of Grand Avenue, approximately 650 feet northwest of the Grand
Avenue-Oretega Highway intersection, and the Final Specific Plan for said
project.
-
Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m., asking for those
who wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 19561 and the Final
Specific Plan. Receiving no response, the Chairman asked if anyone wished
to speak in opposition.
Jim Rhodes, 3860 Ulla Lane, owner of O'Hara's Cocktail Lounge, which property
is directly adjacent to the project on the west side. asked if this approval
was with the change on Lots 9 and 10 to be commercial. The City Planner
replied in the negative. Mr. Rhodes then passed out to each Commissioner
a copy of the state law, sent to him by the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board,
regarding cocktail lounge and parking lot distance from residential dwelling.
He feels his business will be in jeopardy after this project goes in and
would like some buffer zoning or safeguard -- that maybe his and the City's
attorney should look into this.
-
With no one else wishing to speak in opposition, Chairman Steed Closed the
public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Discussion was held on making Lots 9 and 10
commercial; City Attorney making determination on law concerning distance
between cocktail lounge parking lot and residential dwelling(s); applicant,
Kevin Jefferies, stating he agreed to putting up 6-foot wall as buffer zone
but that if Lots 9 and 10 were made commercial, they would just about have
to scrap the whole project; hold harmless agreements with CC & R's dealing
with Lots 9 and 10 and future owners not holding the cocktail lounge
responsible for problems that might arise; questioned meaning of Condition
#23; and location of buffer wall and said wall being 135 feet long.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Tentative Tract Map 19561 and'
Final Specific Plan with staff recommendations and amending Condition #3
to read, "Recordation of CC & R's. CC & R's to include prohibiting vehicle
storage, except for Lot "All (boats, trailers, recreational vehicles and
trucks more than one ton of load capacity). CC & R's to also have a hold
harmless agreement for the buyers of lots within this tract to protect
their interest and the interest of the owner of the Cocktail Lounge, with
the legal definitions to be drawn by the City Attorney, subject to the
approval of the City Attorney;" amending Condition #23 to read, "The
recorded CC & R's shall include a requirement that lot owners in this sub-
division pay a fixed increase above normal sewer service charge to provide
for operation and maintenance of the sewage pump station and, any new
hook-ups that shall occur, the charges shall be pro-rated;" and add Condi-
tion #28 to read, "Applicant shall install a wall to buffer the commercial
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Pa g e 2
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 1956l/SPECIFIC PLAN - DARWIN B. MAXSON, C/O KEVIN JEFFERIES _
CONTI NU ED.
from said Tentative Tract Map 19561 along the 135 foot section of Maxson
Avenue, II second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. Recordation of CC & R's. CC & R's to include prohibiting vehicle
storage, except for Lot IIAII (boats, trailers, recreational vehicles
and trucks more than one ton of load capacity). CC & R's to also 'I.'
have a hold harmless agreement for the buyers of lots within this
tract to protect their interest and the interest of the owner of the
Cocktail Lounge, with the legal definitions to be drawn by the City
Attorney, subject to the approval of the City Attorney.
4. A finding of conformity to the existing General Plan.
5. Street trees as required by Planning Department.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS.
6.
Presently there is an existing 40 foot one-half street right-of-way
along Grand Avenue (State Highway 74). Dedicate an additional 10 feet
of right-of-way along Grand Avenue to provide for 50-foot one-half
street right-of-way to conform to the City's General Plan and to Ca1-
Trans requirements of 100 feet right-of-way for a major street corridor.
7. Dedicate the widths of street rights-of-way for interior streets as
shown on the tentative map.
...,
8. Substantially all off-site public improvements exist. Developer must
repair all existing street improvements as required by the City Engi-
neer upon his detailed field inspection. Developer must provide
evidence required by the City Engineer that the public improvements
are constructed to City Standards.
9. Sewer pump station design and construction (to include power source and
locations) must meet approval of the City Engineer.
10. Ex ist i ng sewer system withi n the proj ect must be ins pected and tested
for compliance to City Standards and approved by the City Engineer.
Television camera inspection will be required. If damage or defici-
encies exist, they must be repaired as required by the City Engineer.
The sewage pump station discharge line must be pressure tested and
repaired if necessary as required by the City Engineer.
11. Provide City Engineer with letter of water availability from serving
di strict.
12. Provide written assurance from County Fire Department that standards
to include fire hydrant locations have been complied with. There are
existing fire hydrants within this project, but County Fire Department
requirements may have changed since their installation.
13. Provide access to existing properties adjacent to and northeasterly of
Lot 19.
..."
14. All existing streets must be repaired and also sealed with liquid asphalt
as required by the City Engineer.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Ma rc h 20, 1 984
Page 3
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19561/SPECIFIC PLAN - DARWIN B. MAXSON, C/O KEVIN JEFFERIES -
CONTI NUED .
-
15.
Provide signing and striping as approved by the City Engineer.
16. Pay equitable traffic safety mitigation fee for traffic signalization
in the amount of $ 225.00 per lot.
17. Pay an off-site drainage mitigation fee of $ 100.00 per lot.
18. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
1 9. Pay Ca p ita 1 1m provem ent fees as fo 11 ows :
Sewer - $ 420.00 for each residential lot.
- $ 420.00 for the first twenty plumbing fixtures
for commercial.
Street - $ .03 per square foot of 1 ot a rea.
Park - $ .01 per square foot of lot area for commercial
- i nd u s t ria 1 .
Storm Dra i n $ .10 per squa re foot of bu i 1 ding area for
residential.
- $ .02 per square foot of lot area for both
residential and commerci a 1.
20. Pay Pu b 1 i c Safety fees as follows:
Police $ 250.00 pe r res ide n t i a 1 un it.
$ .15 per square foot of floor area for commerc i a 1.
Fire $ 150.00 per residential unit .
$ .15 per s quare foot of floor area for commercial.
21. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
22. The Lake access and boat storage Lot "N! shall be a lot separate from
the public street and owned and maintained by a Homeowners Association
legally established by recorded CC & R.s.
23. The recorded CC & R's shall include a requirement that lot owners in
this subdivision pay a fixed increase above normal sewer service charge
to provide for operation and maintenance of the sewage pump station and,
any new hook-ups that shall occur, the charges shall be pro-rated.
24. Provide ties on all survey points and certification on elevations of
existing improvements.
25. Pay additional fees for participation in a regional sewage treatment,
collection and pumping system as required by the City Council.
26. Sign and record a flood hazard deed notification form.
-
27. The five lower lots are below elevation 1270 (more specifically, Lot 1:
69.3, Lot 17: 69.3, Lot 18: 69.5, Lot 20: 68.7, and Lot 19: 68.3.
Ordinance No. 711 states:
"No person, firm or corporation shall construct any new
resident i al s'tructure wit hi n the City of La ke Elsi nore-
with the foundation or basement lower than the elevation
1270. mean sea level within the perimeter streets of
Lake Elsinore consisting of Grand Avenue, Riverside
Drive, Lakeshore Drive, Mission Trail and Corydon Road."
Staff recommends that construction not be permitted on these five (5)
lots unless a variance from the requirements of Ordinance 711 is
obtained from the City Council.
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Page 4
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19561/SPECIFIC PLAN - DARWIN B. MAXSON, C/O KEVIN JEFFERIES _
CONTI NUED.
28. Applicant shall install a wall to buffer the commercial from said
Tentative Tract Map 19561 along the 135 foot section of Maxson Avenue.
2. Conditional Use Permit 84-2 - Gene Klimowicz - Chairman Steed stated staff -
has recommended this matter be continued to the meeting of April 3,1984.
At this time, Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 8:00 p.m. and
asked for a motion to continue the hearing to April 3, 1984. Motion by
Commissioner Barnhart to continue this public hearing on Conditional Use
Permit 84-2 to the meeting on April 3, 1984, second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 5-0
3. Zone Change 84-2 - Karoly and El izabeth Hangyassy - Staff presented proposal
for a zone change from R-3 (Multiple-family Residence) to C-l (limited Com-
mercial) for a 50.91 x 150.91 parcel, located on the northwest corner of
the intersection of lakeshore Drive and Adams Avenue.
Chairman Steed opened the public hearing at 8:03 p.m. Receiving no response
to his inquiries if anyone wished to speak in favor or opposition to Zone
Change 84-2, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:04 p.m.
Discussion was held on access to commercial use (off lakeshore Drive; use to
be for engineering office; and General Plan Amendment application to be made
for Mixed Use designation to be extended. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez
to approve Zone Change 84-2, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
-
1. Commercial Project 84-2 - Chevron U. S. A., Inc. - Staff presented proposal
to construct a three (3) bay self-service gas station/minimarket on approxi-
mately .73 acres located 150 feet northwesterly of the intersection of Mission
Trail and Railroad Canyon Road.
Mr. Vincent Tock of Tait & Associate's, Anaheim, representing the applicant,
requested and received clarification on Conditions #14, #16, #19, #20, and
#24. Chairman Steed asked Mr. Tock if they plan on installing a dump station
and received a negative reply.
Discussion was held on type of gas tanks to be installed -- would they be the
double seal tanks. Mr. Tock replied that Chevron is still working out their
response to the secondary containment legislation requirements and will
respond in full compliance. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Com-
mercial Project 84-2 with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Wash-
burn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
2. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
-
3. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
4. Provide necessary striping for Class II Bicycle lane along Mission Trail.
5. Provide written clearance and approval from County Health Department.
6. Provide written clearance from California Regional Water Quality Control
Board.
7. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Page 5
COMMERC1Al PROJECT 84-2 - CHEVRON U.S.A., INC. - CONTINUED.
8. Design on-site sewage disposal so that a future connection can be made
to the Regional Sewage System.
9. Applicant to provide six (6) parking spaces adjacent to the proposed
septic tank leach field area.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
10. An existing 100-foot right-of-way exists on Mission Trail which is in con-
formance to the City of lake Elsinore General Plan. No additional right-of-
way dedication will be required along this property frontage.
11. An existing 80-foot right-of-way exists on Casino Drive which is in con-
formance to the recent General Plan f.mendment 83-4. No additional right-
of-way dedication will be required along the proposed 3D-foot wide ingress,
egress easement frontage.
12. Install curb and gutter 38 feet from street centerl ine on Mission Trail.
Install an 8-foot commercial sidewalk adjacent to curb to match existing
8-foot commercial sidewalk at McDonald's. Install two (2) 36-foot com-
mercial driveway approaches along Mission Trail. Install Class II bike
trail to tie into existing system adjacent to McDonald's.
-
13. Install curb and gutter 32 feet from street centerline on Casino Drive.
Install an 8-foot commercial sidewalk adjacent to curbline to match
existing 8-foot commercial sidewalk at McDonald's. Install a commercial
driveway approach on Casino Drive as approved by the City Engineer.
14. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from centerline to curb line on
Mission Trail (Traffic Index = 8.0) and Casino Drive (TraffiC Index = 7.5).
There is existing paving on both Mission Trail and Casino Drive. Tests
must show that the existing paving is to City standards and will support
the traffi c load represented by the traffic index.
15. Provide grading plan, Certificate of Survey, and Soils Report which includes
soil test for pavement design.
16. Applicant shall provide plans and specifications and construct the
extension of the storm dra in system as approved by the City Engineer.
This system shall connect to the existing system and extend westerly
along the northside of Mission Trail.
Provide the City Engineer with the Hydrology Study and Hydraulic Calcula-
tions to verify the proposed line sizes for approval.
Deposit with the City $8,000.00 as an equitable contribution toward con-
veying storm water runoff to a safe point of disposal. This contribution
is in addition to construction of needed drainage facilities included in
approved development plans.
17. Install street lights as approved by the City Engineer.
18. Plans and specifications for Public Improvements to be prepared by a Civil
Engineer to include striping and signing as approved by the City Engineer.
19. Cooperate with the City of lake Elsinore in forming a Lighting and land-
scaping District.
20. Comply with the requirements of the City, County Health Department and
Water Quality Control Board for sewer service. Agree to participate
equitably in the financing of a regional sewage collection, treatment and
disposal system.
21. Provide a will-serve letter guaranteeing water service.
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Page 6
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-2 - CHEVRON U.S.A., INC. - CONTINUED.
22. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department requirements for
fire protection (to include hydrant locations) have been met.
23. Pay traffic signal mitigation fee per Resolution No. 83-19 in the amount -
of $4,983.00 at the time o~ building permit issuance.
24. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
S tr eet
Park
Stonn Dra in
Sewer
$ .03
$ .01
$ .02
$ 420.00
per square foot of lot area.
per square foot of lot area.
per square foot of lot area.
for twenty fixture units.
2. Industrial Project 84-1 - John Rainsford/E-Z Products - Staff presented pro-
posal for a 35,975 square foot manufacturing facility, on 15~ acres, located
on the south side of Collier Avenue, west of Riverside Drive.
John Rainsford, owner of E-Z Products Company, went through each condition,
asking for and receiving clarification on Conditions #4, #5, #7, on #12
requested being allowed to defer doing that portion beyond the area where
they are constructing their present building until they develop the rest of
the property, #14, #15, #18, #19, #20 but on this item the Commission told
him he must get waiver of fees from City Council to cover only building area
and not area to be developed at later date.
Guy Taylor, 17815 Collier, spoke in favor of th~s project.
-
Discussion was held on amending certain conditions. Motion by Commissioner
Saathoff to approve Industrial Project 84-1 with staff recommendations,
adding Condition #12.a to read, IIDefer construction of curb and gutter and
street improvements on the undeveloped area of the land owned by the applicant
until that area is deve10ped,1I and adding to Condition #13 the following
verbiage, IIIf the existing street meets City Standards, the applicant will
only be required to asphalt from the edge of existing street to h:is curb line;1I
and with the recommendation on Condition #20 to read, liThe Planning Commission
recommends that the Capital Improvement fees be prorated on the developed
area and not the undeveloped area,1I second by Commissioner Dominquez.
Ap proved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. ~leet all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
2. All lighting shall be directed on-site.
3. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
4. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
5. Applicant shall comply with all City Codes.
6. All items depicted on Plot Plan/Landscape Plan and Elevations shall
be provided as indicated on the Plot Plan, unless otherwise modified
by the Planning Commission/Design Review Board's conditions.
7. Recordation of City Council/Redevelopment Agency CC & R's prior to
transfer of plans to the City's Building Division.
-
8. All signs shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, and shall be
issued through the Planning Division before being erected.
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Page 7
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-1 - JOHN RAINSFORD/E-Z PRODUCTS - CONTI NUED.
9. Design on-site sewage di sposal so that a future connecti on can be
made to the Regional Sewage System.
10. Meet all County Health Department requirements.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
11. A 60 foot right-of-way exists on Collier Avenue. Dedicate three (3)
feet additional right-of-way to provide for 66 foot ultimate right-
of-way to conform to the City's General Plan.
12. Construct curb and gutter 31 feet from street centerline of Collier
Avenue. The General Plan requires no sidewal k along this property
frontage.
a. Defer construction of curb and gutter and street improvements
on the undeveloped area of the land owned by the applicant
until t ha t a rea is developed.
13. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from street centerl ine to
curb line (Traffic Index = 7.0) for Collier Avenue. If the existing
street meets City Standards, the applicant will only be required to
asphalt from the edge of existing street to his curb line.
14.
Provide grading plan, grade certification, certificate of survey and
soils report to include soil data for street pavement design.
-
15. Install street lights as approved by the City Engineer.
16. Plans and specifications for off-site public improvements shall be
prepared by a Civil Engineer.
17. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, County Health
Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
18. Provide to the City a water availability letter from serving agency.
19. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department requirements
(to include fire hydrant locations) have been complied with.
20. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Street - $ .03 per s qu a re foot of lot area
Storm Drain - $ .02 per square foot of lot area
Park - $ .01 per square foot of lot a rea
Sewer - $ 420.00 for twenty fi xture un its
(THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FEES
BE PRORATED ON THE DEVELOPED AREA AND NOT THE UNDEVELOPED AREA.)
21. Comply with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District letter dated March 8,1984. Record a IIhold harmlessll agree-
ment to indemnify and hold the City harmless from possible flood
damage to subject property and a 1I100-year flood plain notificationll
subject to the City Attorney's review and recommendations. The
lOa-year flood plain elevation, which affects a majority of this
property, is 1258 feet per the City' s Federal I nsurance Rate Maps,
dated March, 1980.
22. Cooperate with the City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping
District.
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Page 8
3. Residential Project 84-3 - Williams' Development Company - Staff presented
proposal for a 6-unit apartment complex on a .2 acre parcel (50' x 175'),
located 165 feet southeasterly of the intersection of Main Street and
Prospect Street.
Commissioner Washburn excused himself from sitting on this matter due to
a possible conflict of interest. _
Bill Fink, applicant, questioned Items #7, his set back requirements and
#13 wi th regard to requ irement for soil s report.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Residential Project 84-3 with
staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0 - Commissioner Washburn abstaining due to possible conflict
of interest.
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on Plot Plan and Elevations shall be provided as
indicated unless otherwise modified by the Design Review Board's
conditions.
2-. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
3. Meet County Health Department requirements.
4. Parking of trucks over one (1) ton capacity, boats, recreational
vehicles and trailers shall be prohibited and specified in recorded
CC & R' s .
5.
Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
-
6. Finding of no adverse env ironmenta 1 impacts.
ENGINEERI NG DEPARlMENT COND IT! ONS:
7. Existing right-of-way on Prospect Street is 45 feet. No additional
right-of-way is required.
8. Curb, gutter and sidewalk exist across the total property frontage.
9. An encroachment permit will be required to construct the proposed
15-foot driveway approach.
10. There is an existing sewer main and water main in Prospect Street.
Connection to these facilities shall be done in accordance to City
standards and specifications as approved by the City Engineer and
under the issuance of an encroachment permit.
11. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
12. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Street
Storm Dra in
Park
Sewer
Wa t er
- $
- $
- $
$
$
.03
.02
.10
420.00
500.00
per square foot of lot area
per square foot of lot area
per square foot of building
per each residential unit
per each residential unit
area
-
13. Provide grading plan, certificate of survey and soils report to the
City Engineer for approval.
14. Provide for reciprocal use of eight (8) foot wide existing driveway
with adjacent owner.
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Pa ge 9
4. Single-Family Residence - Neil Peake - 620 Lake Street - Staff presented
proposal to construct a one-story single-family residence (modular home)
on a 60' x 100' parcel at 620 Lake Street. Proposal meets all ordinance
requirements and will be compatible with surrounding residential homes.
Neil Peake, applicant, stated he had read the conditions and had no questions.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Single-Family Residence at 620
Lake Street with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
5.
-
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
1. A 50-foot right~of-way exists on Lake Street. No additional right-of-
way is required.
2. Install curb and gutter 18 feet from street centerline on Lake Street.
3. Construct 6-foot sidewalk to City Standards adjacent to curb on Lake
Street to conform to existing sidewalk conditions along Lake Street.
4. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curbline
for anticipated traffic loads represented by Traffic Index of 6.0.
There is existing paving on Lake Street adjacent to. centerline. Test
must be provided to show that existing paving is to City Standards.
Provide grading plan, Certificate of Survey, and Soils Report. Soils
Report to include data for street design.
Provide street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared by
applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by City Engineer.
Provide sewage disposal facilities as approved by the City, County
Health Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
There is an existing 4-inch domestic waterline in Lake Street and
service is from the City of Lake Elsinore.
Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department requirements
for fire protection have been complied with to include fire hydrant
locations.
12. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Street - $ .03 per s qu are foot of lot area
Storm Ora in - $ .02 per square foot of lot area.
Park - $ .10 per square foot of building area
~la ter - $ 500.00 per residential unit
Sewer - $ 420.00 per residential unit
13. Provision shall be made for drainage as approved by the City Engineer
and City Attorney for accepting street drainage through or adjacent
to this property to conform to existing drainage patterns. A require-
ment to improve the alley is not proposed because this requirement
was waived for a development.
14. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None
Minutes of Planning Commission
March 20, 1984
Page 10
PLANNING CO~1ISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Commissioner Washburn - He said he had a Xerox copy of a report put out by
Hermosa Beach on how the Institute felt on cooperation and conmunication between
, the City Council, Planning Conmission and staff members and a copy of same had -
been distributed to each of the Commissioners by the Planning Secretary. He
recommended the Commissioners read it for information on their responsibilities.
He also feels the City Council should also receive copies but he would like to
wait until after the election.
Commissioner Barnhart asked if the Joint Study Session with the City Council
had been rescheduled and was infonned by the City Planner that a new date had
not as yet been set.
Commissioner Dominquez - Questioned stay of burned structures on Heald,
Scrivener, Sumner and other places. City Planner explained the Code Enforce-
ment notified the owners, and the owners, in turn, have a certain period of time
to reply -- that it is a long drawn out process. Commissioner Saathoff said
if this is a Planning Commission matter, the Commission requests staff to give
them a copy of the ordinance and if they feel the ordinance should be re-written,
they can make a recommendation to the City Council. Chairman Steed directed
staff to look into the matter and report back to the Commission and make it
an agenda item for the next Study Session with the City Council. Commissioner
Washburn requested staff make up a complete lake Elsinore City Code for each
of the Commissioners and keep them updated.
Commissioner Saathoff - Stated the only recommendations he would like to make
is that iJfl the Planning Commission feels there is any problem that is of
interest to the community that falls within the realm of the Planning Commission,
the Planning Commission should'make the effort to look into it and make ,.
recommendations to the City Council for changes to ordinances they don't feel
. are proper and adequate.
Chairman Steed - None.
-
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commission Washburn.
Approved 5-0
,
--
MINUTES OF
HELD ON TH E
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
20TH
DAY
OF
MARCH
1984
MI NUTE ACT! ON
-
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve minutes of March 6, 1984, as sub-
mitted, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
BUSI NESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 84-2 - Chevron U.S.A., Inc. - Staff presented proposal
for elevations, design and landscape approval for a gasoline self-service
station, mini-market and accompanying facilities on approximately .73 acres
located 150 feet northwesterly of the intersection of Mission Trail and
Ra i 1 road Canyon Road.
Chairman Steed asked Mr. Vincent Tock, representative for applicant, if he
had any questions on the six Planning Division conditions of approval and
received a negative reply.
Discussion was held on architectural theme and the completion time for
landscaping. Condition #3 was changed to read, "Landscaping plan to be
implemented prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or Performance
Bond of sufficient magnitude to assure performance.1I Motion by Commissioner
Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 84-2 with staff recommendations and
amend Condition #3 to read as stated above, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant to re-design overhead steel canopy and incorporate materials
which constitute the area I s existing Spani sh Design theme.
2. All roof mounted equipment, trash area, and ground support equipment
shall be effectively screened from public view and subject to approval
from the Planning Division.
3. Landscaping plan to be implemented prior to issuance of Certificate
of Occupancy or Performance Bond of sufficient magnitude to assure
performance.
4. Applicant to provide safety and security lighting and shall be shielded
so as not to shine onto adjacent streets (both high and low level
1 i g ht i ng) .
5. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
6. All signs shall conform to City Codes and Ordinances.
2. Industrial Project 84-1 - John Rainsford/E-Z Products Company - Staff
presented proposal for e1evations/designand landscape approval for 35,975
-- square foot manufacturing faci1 ity on 15:1: acres located on the south side
of Collier Avenue, west of Riverside Drive. Chairman Steed asked Mr.
Rainsford if he had any questions on the seven Planning Division condi-
tions of approval and was answered in the negative, with comment that he
agreed with the thirty-day completion time for landscaping as stated in
Condition #1.
Discussion ensued and the verbiage for Condition #1 was changed to conform
to Condition #3, as amended, for Commercial Project 84-2. Motion by
Commissioner Dominguez to approve Industrial Project 84-1 with staff
recorrmendations and amend Condition #1 to read, "Landscaping plan to be
implemented prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or Performance
Bond of sufficient magnitude to assure perf.ormance,1I second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Design Review Board
March 20, 1984
Page 2
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-1 - JOHN RAINSFORD/E-Z PRODUCTS COMPANY - CONTINUED
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Landscaping plan to be implemented prior to issuance of Certificate
of Occupancy or Performance Bond of sufficient magnitude to assure
performance. . _
2. All items depicted on Plot Plan/Landscape Plan and Elevations shall
be provided as indicated on the plot plan, unless otherwise modified
by the Planning Commission/Design Review Board's conditions.
3. All roof mounted equipment, trash area, and ground support equipment
shall be effectively screened from public view and subject to
approval from the Planning Division.
4. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
5. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six (6)
inch high concrete curb.
6. Applicant to provide security lighting on-site, and shielded so as
not to create a hazard or nuisance.
7. All signs shall be approved by the Planning Division.
3. Residential Project 84-3 - Williams Development Company - Commissioner
Washburn excused himself from sitting on this matter due to a possible
conflict of interest~ Staff presented proposal for elevations and deSign
approval for a two-story, 6-unit apartment complex on a .2 acre parc~
(50' x 175') located 165 feet southwesterly of the intersection of Main -
Street and Prospect Street.
Chairman Steed inquired if Mr. Bill Fink, representing the appl icant, if
he had any questions regarding the conditions. Mr. Fink replied that he
had none and that he had intended to submit a landscape plan before the
meeting but they were dealing with some very, very old survey records on
this project and had just received a copy of the Tract Map from San Diego
County which is dated 1891. As soon as they know the exact site boundaries,
how it will drain, etc., they will submit their landscape plan. He also
requested Condition #6 be changed to allow the on-site manager of units
to do necessary watering in lieu of automatic sprinkler system.
Discussion ensued regarding automatic sprinkler systems and landscape plan.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Residential Project 84-3 with
staff recommendations. Commissioner Saathoff recommended Condition #3 be
amended to read, "All areas not designated for buildings, parking, patios,
and walkways shall be landscaped. Implementation of landscaping plan
shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division if it meets
all requirements, otherwise, it must be presented to the Design Review
Board for approval. Landscaping plan to be implemented prior to issuance
of Certificate of Occupancy or Performance Bond of sufficient magnitude to
assure performance." The Commissioners present concurred with this recom-
mendation. Motion by Commissioner Dominquez to amend his previous motion
and approve Residenttal Project 84-3 with staff recommendations and amend
Condition #3 to read as recommended by Commissioner Saathoff, second by
Commi s si oner Saa thoff .
Approved 4-0; Commissioner Washburn abstained due to possible conflict of
interest.
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on Plot Plan and elevations shall be provided as
indicated, unless otherwise modified by the Design Review Board's
conditions.
Minutes of Design Review Board
March 20, 1984
Page 3
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-3 - WIlLIAf'~S DEVElOpr~ENT COMPANY - CONTINUED.
-
2. Applicant to provide an enclosed trash area and receptacle.
3. All areas not designated for buildings, parking, patios, and walkways
sha 11 be landscaped. Impl ementat ion of 1 andscapi ng plan shall be
subnitted to and approved by the Planning Division if it meets all
requirements, otherwise, -it must be presented to the Design Review
Board for approval. landscaping plan to be implemented prior to
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy or Performance Bond of suffi-
cient magnitude to assure performance.
4. All roof mounted equipment and ground support equipment shall be
effectively screened from public view and subject to approval from
the Planning Division.
5. Applicant to provide security lighting and shall be shielded so as
not to shine onto adjacent streets or residences.
6. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler
systems.
7. Arch projection shall not encroach within 30 inches of side yard
property line. (reference Uniform Building Code, Section 504(A),
1979) .
-
4. Single-Family Residence - 620 lake Street - Neil Peake/c/o Manufactured
Housing Corporation - Staff presented proposal for design/elevations
approva 1 of si ngl e -famil y res idence to be located at 620 lake Street.
After discussion Chairman Steed recommended applicant subnit a landscape
plan and installation of sprinkler system to which he received concurrence
from the Commission members. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve
as sutrnitted, second by Commissioner Barnhart. '
Approved 5-0
There being no further business, the lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 9:31 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
Approved
Whit Steed
Respectfully submitted,
) (.oj' I)
,1~J[ C-ftitrtt,!4-/
Ru t h Ed wa rd s
Acti ng Planni ng
Commission Secretary
--
-
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 3RD.
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
APRIL
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO O~DER AT 7:31 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by City Planner Corcoran.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner
Washburn, Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Rubel and Associate
Planner Fields.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve minutes of March 20, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
Conditional Use Permit 84-2 - Gene Klimowicz - Chairman stated staff has
recommended this matter be continued to the meeting of April 17, 1984.
At this time, Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:32 p.m., and asked
for a motion to continue the hearing to April 17, 1984. A brief discussion
was held on the number of continuances granted on this proposal.
Mr. Gene Klimowicz stated that the property owner was with him tonight, and
he would like to explain what the operation is going to be.
Staff stated that the Commission directed the applicant to meet with staff
regarding concerns on the conditions, as stated at the March 6th meeting. At
this point, we had not heard from the applicant, therefore we requested the
continuation. Discussion was held on whether or not to proceed with the
public hearing or continue to the next scheduled meeting. Mr. Longtin, pro-
perty owner, stated he had information he would like to contribute at this
meeting as he will be out of town should the hearing be continued to the next
scheduled meeting. It was the consensus of the Commission to continue this
matter and take it up at the end of the PUBLIC HEARINGS portion 6f this meeting,
thereby permitting staff to assemble and distribute the STAFF REPORT as sub-
mitted on the March 6th meeting.
2. Conditional Use Permit 84-3 - Robert Williams - Staff read a letter received
this morning from'Mr. Robert Wi11iams,requesting a continuation on his Condi-
tional Use Permit Application for two weeks, as he was called out of town on
an emergency and wants to be present when the Commission reviews his application.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m., and asked for a motion to
continue Conditional Use Permit 84-3 to the next scheduled meeting. Motion by
Commissioner Barnhart to continue Conditional Use Permit 84-3 to the meeting of
April 17, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
3. Conditional Use Permit 84-4 - Butterfield Savings & Loan - Staff presented pro-
posal for a Conditional Use Permit to allow existing Savings & Loan Institution,
located at 16856 Lakeshore Drive, to remain as a temporary'structure for a period
of five (5) years.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:41 p.m., asking for those wishing to speak
in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-4.
Mr. Doug Gustafson, representing Butterfield Savings & Loan, requested a con-
tinuance in order to review the conditions of approval with staff and his
superiors.
,.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Apri 1 1 3, 1 984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-4 - BUTTERFIELD SAVINGS & LOAN CONTINUED
Applicant submitted written request to extend continuance of Butterfield.
Savings & Loan's Conditional Use Permit 84-4.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use
Permit 84-4. Receiving no response, Chairman t~en asked f~r those ~PBosed.
Receiving no response, Chairman asked for a motlon to con~lnue Con~1~lona1
Use Permit 84-4. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to contlnue CO~dl~lona1
Use Permit 84-4 to the meeting of April 17, 1984, second by Commlssloner
Washburn.
Approved 5-0
BEING AS STAFF HAS NOT RETURNED WITH THE REPORTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-2,THE
CHAIR~1AN STATED THAT THEY WOULD PROCEED WITH THE BUSINESS ITEMS AND COME BACK TO
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-2 FOR GENE KLIMOWICZ.
...
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Lot Line Adjustment 84-3 - Amsler & Sons - Staff presented proposal for a
Lot Line Adjustment to realign Lots 8, 9, 14, 15 and 16 into four (4) parcels
(Parcell: 2.49 acres; Parcel 2: 2.43 acres; Parcel 3: 2.92 acres; and Parcel
4: 2.95 acres), located 1,570 feet northerly of the intersection of Mission
Trail and Corydon Road. Discussion was held on planning aspects affecting
adjacent property; establishing narrow frontages (112.8 foot) for lots in
Tourist Commercial designation; elevation of lots; and denying project due
to lots being irregular in shape, and having applicant resubmit plans-for
one or two large parcels.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Lot Line Adjustment 84-3 to the
next scheduled meeting, second by Commissioner Saathoff. MOTION FAILED TO
PASS DUE TO A 2-3 VOTE. (2 AYES - 3 NOES)
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Lot Line Adjustment 84-3 with staff ...
recommendations, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 3-2 (Commissioners Saathoff and Washburn voting no)
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. City Engineer verification of legal description as accurate.
2. Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
3. Dedicate 20 feet right-of-way for Mission Trail. There is an existing
30 foot one-half street right-of-way. General Plan designation is
major highway 100 foot right-of-way and 76 feet curb to curb.
4. Construct curb and gutter 38 feet from street centerline, and paving to
City Standards (Traffic Index = 8.0). There is existing paving along
Mission Trail. Paving must be to street centerline unless tests show
existing paving is to City Standards (as a condition of building permits).
5. Install 8 foot commercial sidewalk adjacent to curbline constructed to
City Standards (as a condition of buil ding 'permits).
6. Install street 1ight(s) to City Standards as approved by the City
Engineer (as condition of building permits).
7. Cooperate with the City in the formation of a Lighting and Landscaping
District.
...
8. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, the County
Health Department, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Pro-
vide letter of agreement to participate equitably in the regional sewage
collection, treatment and disposal system (as condition of building
permi ts) .
Minutes of Planning Commission
Apri 1 3, 1984
Page 3
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 84-3 - AMSLER & SONS CONTINUED
9. Provide letter of water availability from serving agency, as a
condition of building permit.
-
10. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or
its ass i gnees .
11. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements
have been complied with for fire protection to include fire hydrant
locations, as a condition of building permits.
12. Provide traffic signs and markings, and Class II bike lane along
Mission Trail as a condition of building permits.
13. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared
by applicant's civil engineer for approval by the City Engineer.
14. Applicant to record notice of 100-year flood hazard and waiver of
claims against the City.
15. Provide City Engineer with grading plan, Certificate of Survey, and
soils report to include street pavement design, as a condition of
building permits.
16. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows, as a condition of building
permi ts :
-
Street
Storm Ora in -
Park
Sewer
$ .03 per square foot of lot area
$ .02 per square foot of lot area
$ .01 per square foot of lot area
$420.00 for first twenty fixture units
17. Pay Public Safety fees as follows, as a condition of building permits:
Police
Fire
$
$
.15 per square foot of building area
.15 per square foot of building area
18. Pay equitable share of Traffic Mitigation fee for Mission Trail and
Corydon Road traffic signal in the amount of $5,000.00, as a condition
of building permits.
THE CHAI RM.L\N STATED THAT AT THIS TH1E, THEY WOULD GO BACK AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING
ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-2 GENE KLIMOWICZ.
Staff gave a brief presentation on Conditional Use Permit 84-2, which is to
locate a tow truck and temporary towed vehicle storage on an existing paved
vacant lot, located at the southeast corner of Lakeshore Drive and Fraser
Drive.
Chairman asked for those wishing to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit
84-2.
-
Mr. Joe Longtin, property owner, gave background on the lot and proposed opera-
tion. Mr. Longtin stated opposition to dedicating 25 feet of his property,
stating he had already dedicated all the property that should be dedicated; curb
and gutter; lights; and fees. Chairman Steed stated that they were not empowered
to waive dedication or fees levied.
Discussion was held on the 25 foot dedication; adding the following verbiage to
condition number 2 IIno automobile dismantling nor \'iholesale/retail used auto
parts or sales operation in the rear"; continue or deny without prejudice so
that the applicant and property owner could meet with staff, as Mr. Longtin had
stated earl ier they really were not prepared to address the item tonight. It was
recommended that the Commission act on this item and forward to City Council.
Chairman Steed asked for the consensus of the Commission. It was the consensus
Minutes of Planning Commission
Apri 1 3, 1984
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-2 - GENE KLIMOWICZ CONTINUED
of the Commission to act on Conditional Use Permit 84-2 and forward to City
Council. Discussion continued on baving curb and sidewalk on the property;
and adding condition number 6.a. which will read: "no vehicle storage out-
side wall area".
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use
Permit 84-2. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed.
Receiving no response, the public hearing was closed at 8:19 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-2 with
staff recommendations, amending condition number 2 to read: "No off-site
advertising. No automobile dismantling nor wholesale/retail used auto parts
or sales operation in the rear"; and adding condition number 6.a. which will
read: "No vehicles to be stored or parked outside of wall area", second by
Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All signs shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance, and shall be
issued prior to being erected.
2. No off-site advertising. No automobile dismantling nor wholesale/retail
used auto parts or sales operation in the rear.
3. Meet requirements of County Fire Department.
4. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
5. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
6. Conditional Use Permit shall be in effect for two (2) years and subject
to a six (6) month review.
a) No vehicle to be stored or parked outside of wall area.
-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Dedicate 25 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Fraser Drive to
provide for 50 foot total right-of-way.
8. No additional right-of-way dedication for Lakeshore Drive is required.
9. Construct curb and gutter 20 feet from street centerline on Fraser Drive
to match existing improvements at Lakeshore Drive. Construct 5 foot
sidewalk on Fraser Drive adjacent to the curb to match existing sidewalk
at Lakeshore Drive.
10. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curbline
on Fraser Drive for a traffic load represented by a Traffic Index of 6.5.
Some paving exists on Fraser Drive. Tests must show that existing paving
is to City Standards and will support the traffic load.
Provide standard pedestrian access ramp per City Standards at the inter-
section of Fraser Drive and Lakeshore Drive. Existing asphalt pedestrian
ramp does not meet State guidelines.
11.
-
12.
.
Construct standard driveway approach per City Standards to meet existing
on-site improvements.
13. Provide street lighting as approved by City Engineer. Street lights may
be mounted on existing utility poles.
14. Provide written compliance from the County Fire Department for fire pro-
tection to include adequate fire hydrant locations. There is an existing
fire hydrant located at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Fraser
Drive.
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 3, 1984
Page 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-2 - GENE KLIMOWICZ CONTINUED
15. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
-
16.
Plans and specifications for public improvements to be prepared ?y a
Civil Engineer to include signing and striping.
17. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Sewer
Street
Park
Storm Drain -
$420.00 for 20 fixture units, if not previously paid.
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .01 per square foot of lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
18. Pay Public Safety fees as follows:
Police
Fi re
$
$
.15 per square foot of gross floor area.
.10 per square foot of gross floor area.
19. Applicant shall pay equitable share of off-site storm drain mitigation fee
in the amount of $2,000.00 for the Lakeshore Drive storm drain system.
20. Applicant shall pay equitable share of traffic signal mitigation fee in
the amount of $3,000.00 for Riverside Drive/Lakeshore Drive intersection.
21. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
BUSINESS ITEMS CONTINUED
-
2. Request to Annex - Charles Pease - Staff presented request to annex approximately
123.6~ acres, located westerly of the intersection of Mountain Street and Robb
Road, to the City of Lake Elsinore. A brief discussion was held on the location
of proposed annexation. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Request to
Annex, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
3.
Site Plan Review "existing non-conforming use" - Wilheim Piche - Staff presented
plot plan for review of automobile and trailer sales area, located westerly of
the intersection of East Lakeshore Drive and Lucerne. Staff informed the Com-
mission that this business was started in 1966 and expanded into two (2) separate
but related uses-- auto repair and sales, but was never reviewed by the appro-
priate legislative body.
<
Chairman Steed asked why no off-site improvements and fees were required, and
shouldn't a Conditional Use Permit be required. Staff stated that this item
falls under the Grandfather Clause.
Discussion was held on existing use being under the Grandfather Clause; whether
or not the expansion of the use falls under the Grandfather Clause; business
license issued for the operation with a condition stating the operation could not
be expanded; and expansion occuring and then coming before the Commission for
review.
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff that they request an opinion from the City Attorney
whether this is discretionary or non-discretionary approval, and the rights of
the City to request conditions on the property. If the City Attorney says yes,
the City does have a right to put conditions on it, then have the conditions
drawn up by staff and presented at that time, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
COMMUNITY DEVLEOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Planner Corcoran stated that the Community Development Director had nothing to
report, but he would like to inform the Commission that the deadline for filing General
Plan Amendments is April 15, 1984, and will be heard by this body June 19, 1984. A
memorandum was circulated to each Commissioner requesting a list of changes he/she
feels necessary to update the General Plan, and submittal of said list to the Planning
Division as soon as possible.
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 3, 1984
Page 6
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Dominguez - Asked if staff had an answer for him on burnt structures.
City Planner Corcoran stated that a copy of the Housing Abatement Ordinance was
circulated to each of the Commissioners, but the real problem goes back to the
Insurance Companies. People cannot touch those structures until the Insurance
Company goes out and assesses them.
-
Chairman Steed stated perhaps a form letter could be sent to the Insurance Company
stating the property is a public nuisance and it might be fenced for public safety
at their expense.
City Planner Corcoran stated that another problem was that we do not have a specific
person to deal with housing abatement. Code Enforcement is not knowledgeable and
their expertise is not housing abatement, and the Building Department is overwhelmed
at the current time.
It was the consensus of the Commission to recommend to City Council that they put
on their priority list the revaluation of ordinance and the loop holes it is causing
with burnt out structures and act on it right away.
Commissioner Washburn - None
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Chairman Steed - None
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
...,
...
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
3RD.
DAY
OF
APRIL
1984
--
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of March 20, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
BlJS INESS ITEMS
1. Elevations/Landscaping Plans for Tract Map 14450 - Quail Construction - Staff
presented Elevations/Landscaping Plans for Tract Map 14450, located south of
Lincoln Street, between Machado Street and Riverside Drive.
Chairman asked if the color of the tile would be changed, as the four (4)
elevations looking at them head-on are almost all identical, there is no
break in the roof lines. Mr. Bowen stated that they would vary the color
of tile.
Mr. Bowen, president of Quail Construction, asked to address staff discussion
stating that each home will have 1,200 - 1,400 square feet. Plan 1 will have
1,226 square feet; Plan 2 will have 1,403 square feet, and they will have a
garage area of approximately 400 square feet. Also, Mr. Bowen stated that they
will install front yard sprinklers not automatic sprinklers.
Discussion was held on front yard set-backs; identical plans not being across
from one another; and type of sprinkler system.
-
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Elevations/Landscaping Plans for
Tract Map 14450 with staff recommendations, and amending condition number 3
by adding the words "not automatic", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on Design Elevations/Landscape Plan shall be pro-
vided as indicated unless otherwise modified by the Design Review
Board's conditions.
2. Trees to be pl anted at a 30 foot to 40 foot i nterva 1 .
3. $3,000.00 Performance Bond will be required to insure implementation
of landscaping plan and sprinkler system (not automatic).
4. All roof maintained or ground support structures and equipment incidental
to the development be architecturally screened so that they are not
visible from the neighboring property or the publit street, with such
screening subject to approval of the Design Review Board.
-
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
8:50 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
Approved
Whit Steed
Chairman
~l~~~ted.
Linda Grindstaff ~
Planning Commission Secretary
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
17TH.
DAY
OF
APRIL
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
~
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Washburn.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Washburn,
and Commissioner Barnhart. Chairman Steed was absent.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Culp, Assistant City Engineer
Rubel and Associate Planner Fields.
Being as Chairman Steed was absent Commissioner Domingue~ conducted the meeting.
MINUTE ACTION
Commissioner Washburn stated the records should state on Page 2 of the minutes, that
the applicant submitted written request to extend continuance of Butterfield Savings
and Loan's Conditional Use Permit 84-4.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to accept minutes of April 3, 1984, as corrected,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
-...
--
1. Tentative Parcel Map 19767 - Centennial Engineering - Staff presented proposal
to subdivide 5.21 acres into three (3) potential commercial lots, located on
Mission Trail, northeast intersection of Mission Trail and Campbell Street.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:33 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 19767.
Mr. Gil Beaird of Centennial Engineering, stated that in reading the conditions
all improvements are to be required at building stage, except for number 7,
wondering if that statement should be added. Mr. Beaird stated that he had no
other comments unless the Commission had some questions.
\
r .
Commissioner Dominguez asked the City Engineer to clarify condition number 7;
City Engine~r stated that the statement should be added, that it would be re-
quired at building permit stage.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map
19767. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m.
Discussion was held on condition 14.c. (fee for construction of a storm drain
pipe and drain inlet); condition number 24 (fees to be paid on each lot as it
is developed); condition number 10 adding the following verbiage "Provide Class
II Bicycle Lane on Mission Trail", and; Casino Drive and Mission Trail improve-
ments.
......
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Tentative Parcel Map 19767 with staff
recommendations, wi th the addi tion on condition number 10 to i ncl ude II Cl ass. II
Bicycle Lane", and the addition on condition number 7 to include "this be re-
quired at building permit stage", second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. t1eet all requi rements 0 f Co unty Fi re Department.
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 17, 1984
Page 2
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19767 - CENTENNIAL ENGINEERING CONTINUED
4. Comply with all County Health Department requirements.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
5. A 100 foot right-of-way and off-site improvements exists along Mission
Trail which is in conformance with the General Plan.
-
6. An 80 foot right-of-way exists along Casino Drive. The General Plan
requires 100 feet (major classification), but General Plan Amendment
83-4 reduced this right-of-way to 80 feet (modified secondary) with
64 feet curb to curb. No additional right-of-way is required.
7. Install curb and gutter 32 feet from centerline for Casino Drive.
REQUIRED AT BUILDING PERMIT STAGE.
8. Provide 8 foot commercial sidewalk along Casino Drive. Provide standard
driveways located as approved by the City Engineer. To be required at
building stage.
9. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curb line
on Casino Drive (Traffic Index = 7.5). Some paving exists on Casino
Drive. Tests must show that existing paving is to City Standards and
will support the traffic index. The paving is to be required at build-
ing stage.
10. The existing 14 foot 'center width of paving on Mission Trail is deteriorat-
ing. Completely reconstruct this 14 foot width if tests (Traffic Index =
8.0) indicate this is needed in the opinion of the City Engineer. Sand
seal the remainder of the existing paving from curb line to street center-
line. To be required at building stage. PROVIDE CLASS II BICYCLE LANE.
-
11. Provide grading plan and certificate of survey at building stage.
12. Provide street lighting and trees for both Mission Trail and Casino Drive
frontages at building stage.
13. Provide soils and geological reports with final report and grading certifica-
tion to include pavement design at building stage.
14. Provide a plan to be approved by the City Engineer for receiving, channel-
ing, and discharging into Mission Trail the storm water run-off onto
applicant's property from the drainage pipe under Casino Drive. Required
at building stage.
a} Applicant must sign a drainage acceptance letter to
the satisfaction of the City Attorney to eliminate
any City liability before the Final t1ap records.
b} Drainage into the street must be under the sidewalk
and directed downstream as approved by the City
Engineer at building stage.
c) Pay to the City $10,000 to construct a storm drain
pipe and drain inlet(s)iri Mission Trail to carry
storm water to a point of disposal. This fee to
be paid at building stage in proportion to area of
lot.
--
d) Provide flood hazard review letter from Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Control District.
15. Plans and specifications for public improvement work shall be prepared by
a Civil Engineer at building stage at time of first lot development.
16. Applicant shall meet all the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and
Ci ty Codes.
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 17, 1984
Page 3
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19767 - CENTENNIAL ENGINEERING CONTINUED
17. Applicant to assist the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping
District.
-
18. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, the County
Health Department, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Pro-
vide a letter of agreement to participate in the regional sewage
collection, treatment and disposal system.
19. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements
have been complied with for fire protection and hydrant locations at
building stage.
20. Provide to City a will serve letter for water from Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District.
21. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of lake Elsinore.
22. Pay traffic signalization assessment fee of $ 12, 716.96 as determined
by City Council Resolution Np. 83-19. Pay at building permit issuance:
Parcell = $ 3,440.75
Parcel 2 = $ 4,238.99
Parcel 3 = $ 5,037.23
$ 1 2,716.96
(1.25 acres)
(1.54 acres)
(1.83 acres)
-
23. Pay Public Safety fees as determined by City Council Resolution No. 83-4
at $ .30 per gross floor area, to be paid as condition of building permit.
24. Pay Capital Improvement fees as determined by City Council Resolution No.
77-39. To be paid as condition of building permit:
Sewer
Street
Park
Storm Drains
- $ 420.00 per 20 fixture units.
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
- $ .01 per square foot of lot area.
- $ .02 per square foot of lot area.
2. Conditional Use Permit 84-3 - Bob Williams - Staff presented proposal for a
Conditional Use Permit to continue the existing Mobile Home Sales Office/Real
Estate Sales Office, located ~ 400 feet west of the intersection of Railroad
Canyon Road and Mission Trail, and recommended that condition number 18 be
deferred and required at building permit stage.
City Engineer stated that on condition number 21 there is an error, the word
"sewer" should be deleted and insert the wordUstreetll, and sewer should be
$420.00 per 20 plumbing fixture units.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:48 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-3.
Mr. Bob Williams stated that he had a couple of minor changes. The mobile
office to be used is going to change from 241 x 561 to 30' X 601 mobile (the
mobile is a classroom that came from Cal Poly, of which we will put a new skin
on so it does not look like an old government classroom building). Mr. Williams
then asked for clarification on the last sentence in condition number 14.
Assistant City Engineer stated the property line goes down over the banks and
the 100 year water surface is short of the bank, there is an area over the bank
into the ri ver that caul d be developed and waul d not be in the 100 year water
surface (flood way), does not know whether you would want this developed or
leave it in its natural state. Commissioner Dominguez stated that this would be
up to the property owner. Mr. Williams stated that if this is what you are
referring to, he doesn1t have any immediate plans, but it is possible someday
that he will want to use it for storage or something, and has no objections to
that. Clarification on condition number 18, staff recommended deferment to
building permit stage, Mr. Williams stated the building permit he is assuming
is referenced to when he develops the property with regular commercial buidings,
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 17, 1984
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-3 - BOB WILLIAMS CONTINUED
because he will have to take out a building permit to move the electrical meter
and put in a new septic system. Staff stated that they were referring to the
actual construction of the building, not electrical. On condition number 11,
referring to Casino Drive improvements (curb, gutter and commercial sidewalk),
Mr. Williams asked that these improvements be deferred to building permit
stage, stating that they are going to go ahead and do all of the off-site
improvements and drainage fees to clean up Lakeshore Drive (Mission Trail). ---
Discussion was held on curb, gutter, sidewalk and street paving to City Standards
on Casino Drive. The Commission agreed that any items referring to Casino Drive
would be deferred until building permit stage.
City Engineer stated that it was brought to his attention that they neglected to
include the Class II Bicycle Lane. The Commission stated that this could be
added as condition number 11 .a.
Mr. Williams asked to have entered into the minutes, that he is here asking for
a Conditional Use Permit not because he believes he has to have one, but because
every time we change city staff, naturally, 11m operating a Mobile Home Sales
Yard in an area that requires a Conditional Use Permit under the present ordi-
nance. Mr. Williams stated that fifteen (15) years ago when he purchased the
property, it was about a year after, the city annexed that particular property
into the City of Lake Elsinore. When I purchased the property DePasquale did
his development above the freeway, he had all of that property annexed to the
City and the City decided that any property annexed to the City reverted auto-
matically to a R-l zone, and I had a real estate office on the property at that
time, so I came to the City and requested the property be changed to C-l, which
is just a little strip of the property, but where the Williams Realty was. At
that time, I also leased the property where Country Wide Mobile is now, and I
came to the City Council and asked for permission to have a real estate office
and mobile home sales yard, and they allowed me to have it and there was no
Conditional Use Permit required. I have been there for fifteen (15) years, so
I would like it to be put in the minutes, that even though I am asking for a
Conditional Use Permit now, because every time we change staff I get letters
asking when I'm going to get a Conditional Use Permit. I want it noted that I
do claim a right, whether it be legally right or not, I do claim a right under
the Grandfather Clause for my Mobile Home Sales yard. Because it is conceivable
that with a Conditional Use Permit, right now, that in three (3) years, I can
be kicked out of there and I don't want to loose that right to a Grandfather
Clause, just because I am asking for a Conditional Use Permit.
.....
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit
84-3. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:00 p.m.
Discussion was held on size of mobile (changing from 24' x 56' to 30' x 60')
for office purposes, submitting rendering or photographs to Design Review Board
on what the finished product is going to look like, so it conforms with the
design in that area; condition number 11, curb and gutter on Casino Drive to be
deferred until building stage; traffic circulation; and removal of existing
billboard being added as condition number 23.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve CondHional Use Permit 84-3 with
s ta ff recommendations and amendi ng condition number 3: II i ncl udi ng el evations of
the offi ce bui 1 di ng to be s ubmi tted to the Desi gn Revi ew Boardll; amendi ng condi - .....
tion number 11: II deferri ng construction to any item that refers to construction
along Casino Drive; adding condition number ll.a.: IIClass II 3icycle Lane"; oondi.-
tion number 18; II defer to buil ding permit stage of new construction, at time of
new constructionll; condition number 21, amended to read: "Sewer $420.00 per 20
unit plumbing fixtures, and scratch the word IIsewerll and make it IIstreetll; and
add condition number 23, which will read: IIRemove existing billboard", second by
Commissioner' Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Conditional Use Permit 84-3, shall be for a three-year period, subject
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 1 7, 1 984
Page 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-3 - BOB WILLIAMS CONTINUED
to annual review.
-
2. Office unit to be fully skirted, and models visible to Mission Trail
shall be skirted on the side fronting Mission Trail.
3. Applicant shall submit to the Design Review Board a detailed plot plan
at a reasonably large scale to show placement of office unit; parking;
and landscaping and all use of the subject property. ELEVATIONS OF THE
OFFICE BUILDING TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
4. All signs shall be approved by the Planning Department.
5. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
6. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
7. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
8. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
9. Meet County Health Department requirements.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
-
10. The General Plan requires a 100 foot wide traffic corridor along Mission
Trail and an 80 foot traffic corridor on Casino Drive. The 80 foot right-
of-way exists along Casino Drive and no additional dedication is required.
The 100 foot right-of-way exists for the greater distance along the ap-
plicant's frontage on Mission Trail. But along a portion of the Mission
Trail frontage the existing right-of-way is only 60 foot wide.
Dedicate an additional 20 feet of right-of-way as necessary along Mission
Trail to provide a 50 foot wide one-half street, across applicant's entire
frontage.
11. Construct curb and gutter along Mission Trail for a future 76 foot wide
roadway, and 38 feet from centerline. Construct 8 foot wide sidewalk.
Construct street paving to City Standards to carry a traffic load re-
presented by a traffic index of 8.0. Construct curb and gutter along
Casino Drive for a future 64 foot wide roadway, and 32 feet from center-
line. Construct 8 foot wide commercial sidewalk. Construct street paving
to City Standards to carry a traffic load represented by a traffic index
of 7.5. Pavement exists on Mission Trail and Casino Drive. Paving must
be to centerline unless tests show that existing paving is constructed to
City Standards. DEFER CONSTRUCTION TO ANY ITEM THAT REFERS TO CONSTRUCTION
ALONG CASINO DRIVE.
a) PROVIDE CLASS II BICYCLE LANE ALONG MISSION TRAIL.
12. Install street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
13. Record notice of laO-year flood hazard, and Waiver of Liability claims
against the City. Record release of drainage liability against City for
culvert discharge across Casino Drive onto applicant's property to protect
City until complete drainage system is installed and dedicated to the City.
14. Construct drainage facilities to convey storm water run-off, in coordination
with the development of the Chevron Station, along Mission Trail to the San
Jacinto River. Drainage facilities shall be as required by the City Engineer.
A drainage outlet into San Jacinto River shall be designed and constructed
by applicant as approved by the City Engineer. Some drainage fees collected
from upstream developers is expected to be available to defray some of the
storm drainage costs to applicant.
Record CC & R's against the applicant's property prohibiting all develop-
ment within the lOa-year flood plain and existing San Jacinto River, unless
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 17, 1984
Page 6
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-3 - BOB WILLIAMS CONTINUED
approved by the City Council. The CC & R's must provide for property
owner maintenance of creek and other conditions required by City
Council and Planning Commission to guarantee maintenance and the
environmental ecosystem.
15. Sewer service shall be provided as approved by the City, the County
Health Department and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Ap-
plicant shall sign a letter of agreement to participate in the regional
sewage collection, treatment and disposal system.
16. Dedicate water rights to the City or its assignees.
17. Provide fire protection facilities in compliance with written County
Fire Department requirements.
-
18. Pay to the City a traffic safety mitigation fee for traffic signals.
The amount is $15,520 in compliance with Resolution No. 83-19. DEFER
TO BUILDING PERMIT STAGE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION, AT TIME OF NEW CONSTRUCTION.
19. Cooperate with City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
20. Applicant shall provide plans and specifications for public improvements,
to be prepared by applicant's Civil Engineer for City approval.
21.
Pay Capi ta 1 Improvement fees as follows:
STREET $ .03 per square foot of lot area.
Park $ .01 per square foot of lot area.
Storm Dra i ns - $ .02 per square foot of lot area.
SEWER $ 420.00 per 20 unit plumbing fixtures.
-
Pay Publ ic Safety fees as follows:
22.
Po 1 ice
Fire
$
$
.15 per square foot of gross floor area.
.12 per square foot of gross floor area.
23. REMOVE EXISTING BILLBOARD.
3. Conditional Use Permit 84-4 - Butterfield Savings & Loan - Staff stated that he
was in receipt of a request for a continuance on Conditional Use Permit 84-4, in
order to have time for the applicants to discuss this matter with their Board of
Directors, so staff recommends continuance of this Conditional Use Permit.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:09 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-4. Receiving no response, Chairman
asked for those opposed. Receiving no response, Chairman closed the public
hearing at 8:10 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Conditional Use Permit 84-4 to the
next regularly scheduled meeting, second by Commissioner Washburn with input,
Usually, in the past we have two (2) extensions granted and then we go for deny
without prejudice. Assistant City Engineer asked to address the Commission re-
garding the continuance, stating that he was primarily responsible for this'J
being continued, I didn't get the information to them in time, so they could
review some of the conditions. Commissioner Saathoff amended his motion, that
per the request of staff this be continued to the next regularly scheduled meet-
ing, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
-
4. Tentative Parcel Map 19925 - Mission Bell%Butterfield Surveys, Inc. - Staff,.,.
stated that in light of recent correspondence received from Riverside County
Flood Control, staff respectfully requests this item be continued to the meeting
of May 1, 1984. This continuance will allow City staff to meet with the ap-
plicant and Riverside County Flood Control to mitigate all concerns.
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 17,1984
Page 7
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19925 MISSION BELL%BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC CONTINUED
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:11 p.m., asking for those wishing.to
speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 19925. Receiving no response, Cha~rman
asked for those opposed. Receiving no response, Chairman closed the pub11C
hearing at 8:12 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn per staff's request to continue Tentative
Parcel Map 19925 to the meeting of May 1, 1984, second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Site Plan Review lIexisting non-conforming usell - Wilhei!T1 Piche - Staff stated
that at this time, we are currently awaiting a reply from the City Attorney on
this matter and we again request a continuance to the meeting of May 1, 1984.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue site plan review to May 1,1984,
seoond by Commissioner Washburn.
Appro ved 4-0
2. Industrial Project 84-2 - Frank Ayres & Sons Construction -
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused, due to possible conflict of interest.
Staff presented proposal for a self storage facility and multi-tenant industrial
park, to be located north of the intersection of Chaney Street and Collier Avenue.
-
I
Mr. Bruce Ayres stated that they do concur with most everything in the staff
report, other than a few items that he would like to go over. On page 1 in the
second paragraph, basically clarifying the phasing. What we have in mind is to
build industrial at one time, and say two of the mini warehouse buildings (most
likely, the one being on the freeway and the one on Collier), then as the demand
gets greater, go ahead and build the two on the inside. But we would like to go
ahead and get the whole plot plan approved at this point. Also, on page 2 item
numoer 13, in regards to the loading zone on the easterly side on Second Street,
would like to see if we could have it read: "if we are able to get Second Street
abandoned, we could keep that loading zone". Commissioner Saathoff asked, if it
was their intent to request vacation of Second Street? Mr. Ayres stated yes.
Mr. Ayres also asked that on item number 15, curb and gutter, that they be allowed
to hold off on these until the area around them develops.
.--.
Discussion was held on property frontage; phasing of project; condition number
23, capital improvement fees being on the 4.5 acres; concerns on the impact of
drainage and grading, whether or not it is necessary to bring back to the Com-.
mission (staff stated it was not necessary to bring back to the Commission);
condition number 15, whether or not to recommend deferment. It was felt that
this condition should not be deferred, and applicant should install curb and
gutter at development stage. Mr. Ayres asked if it was possible to hold off
on these improvements for a year or so, until they get some income off the pro-
perty? Commissioner Barnhart asked if an addendum could be put on the deed, that
the improvements be done within the year, or put some time limit on it? Staff
stated that on industrial projects the improvements were done at development stage.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Industrial Project 84-2 with staff
recommendations with the following changes in paragraph 2 under STAFF DISCUSSION,
phase should be to include two (2) storage buildings that would have been a part
of Phase II, will be in Phase I now, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Commissioner Dominguez asked if anything should be added on the abandonment of
Second Street. Commissioner Saathoff stated no, that the applicant was going to
ask for it anyway. Mr. Ayres asked if they will be able to load off of Second
Street. Commissioner Saathoff asked for staff1s recommendation, stating if the
street were vacated, he would then, I assume, have to the center of street.
Staff stated he was not sure a 30 foot radius would do it, it is something that
would have to be looked at closer in terms of turn about radius for a loading
Minutes of Planning Commission
Apri 1 1 7, 1984
Page 8
INDUSTRAIL PROJECT 84-2 - FRANK AYRES & SONS CONSTRUCTION CONTINUED
dock. City Engineer stated that abandonment to the centerline., 30 foot, this
might not give adequate turning radius. Staff recommended condition number 13
be amended to read: II Del ete loading area on easterly boundary, unl ess turn
about radius meets Planning Department specifications".
Commissioner Saathoff amended his motion to include the amendment of condition
number 13, .. Del ete 1 oadi ng area on eas terly boundary, unl ess turn about radi us -
meets Planning Department specifications", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-0 Commissioner Washburn excused, due to possible conflict of interest.
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Complete removal of all tires prior to issuance of any permits.
2. All items depicted on Plot Plan/Landscaping Plan and Elevations shall
be provided as indicated on the plot plan, unless otherwise modified by
the Planning Commission/Design Review Board's conditions.
3. Reciprocal parking agreement for the Industrial Park phase of project
to be implemented with CC & R's.
4. Recordation of Redevelopment Agency CC & R's prior to plan check.
5. Finding of no significant impact.
6. Issuance of a Negati ve Decl aration.
7. Applicant shall meet all City Codes.
8. All operations shall be conducted within the fenced property boundaries.
--
9. Provide parking access ways and associated facilities/materials as
indicated on plot plan.
10. Provide one handicapped parking space as required by Title 24 (CAC, 1981)
of the State Code.
11. Provide for accessibility of handicapped person(s), i.e., incorporation of
curb ramps, if appl i cabl e.
12. Delete the four (4) parking spaces on the northeasterly boundary of pro-
ject site.
13. Delete loading area on easterly boundary, UNLESS TURN ABOUT RADIUS MEETS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT SPECIFICATIONS.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
14. Existing right-of-way on Collier Avenue is 60 feet. The General Plan
identifies Collier Avenue as a 66 foot wide modified collector. It is
proposed to obtain the total six-foot widening on the opposite or south-
west side of Collier Avenue because of the existence of an adjacent 30
foot wide railroad right-of-way on the southwest and another adjacent 60
foot ri ght-o f-way.
Construct curb and gutter 31 feet from the future centerline of Collier
Avenue. Construct paving from centerline to the new gutter to City
Standards to resist traffic loads represented by a traffic index of 7.0.
A 27 foot width of paving exists on Collier Avenue. Existing paving must
be replaced unless tests show that it is constructed to or can be up-
graded to City Standards. No sidewalk is required.
--
15.
16. Provide soils report, grading plan, certificate of survey, and certificate
of grading compliance.
17. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
Minutes of Planning Commission
April 17, 1984
Page 9
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-2 - FRANK AYRES & SONS CONSTRUCTION CONTINUED
18.
-
19.
20.
2l.
22.
23.
Provide hydrology study and plan for disposal of storm water run-off.
Provide report from the Riverside County Flood Control District.
Provide sewage disposal as approved by the City, County Health Depart-
ment, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by the
County Fire Department.
Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
Plan for public improvements shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer.
Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Sewer
Streets
Park
Storm Drai ns
$ 420.00 for 20 fixture units.
$ .03 per square foot 0 f lot area.
$ .01 per square foot of lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
24. Record agreement to indemnify and hold the City harmless against damages
from storm drainage discharges from pipes under freeway onto applicant's
property. Freeway drainage must be conveyed through applicant's property
and to a safe, adequate and approved point of disposal as approved by the
City Engineer.
25. Second Street is a dedicated 60 foot wide street terminating at the free-
way right-of-way. Staff feels that this road is not needed as a public
facility. Applicant should petition the City Council to abandon this
roadway to adjacent owners and pay all costs associated therewith. The
alternative is improvement to City Standards in compliance with Ordinance
572 or Council approved deferral of these improvements on Second Street.
-
26. Eliminate access driveway opposite Chaney Street.
3. Single-Family Residence - 17320 Sunnyslope Avenue - Roy Smith - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residence at 17320 Sunnyslope Avenue, that
had originally received approval from the Design Review Board on November 4~ 1980.
At that time, no agreement for off-site improvements were signed or documented.
Due to the expiration of Design Review Board approval, this project has been re-
submitted.
Commissioner Dominguez asked Mr. Smith if he had received a copy of the condi-
tions. Mr. Smith stated he received a copy of the conditions, but has questions
on conditions 4 through 8, and asked if they could go over them one-by-one. The
Commission went over the conditions ~n question one-by-one. Mr. Smith then asked
for deferment on conditions 4, 5, 7, 8, and 12. Discussion was held on conditions
4, 5, and 8 being tied together and deferring them until future development occurs
in surrounding area, or deleting them; new ordinance for Country Club Heights
which would address public improvements for that area.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 17320
Sunnyslope with staff recommendations, deferring items 4, 5, and 8 until at
which time, the City writes the ordinance for the Country Club Heights dealing
with public improvements also, if possible, if street lights be provided for
City approval with existing power poles, if possible if available, and placed in
the front part of the structure, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Provide written clearance and approval from the County Health Department.
2. Applicant to provide block wall as depicted on site plan.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Apri 1 17, 1984
Page 10
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 17320 SUNNYSLOPE AVENUE - ROY SMITH CONTINUED
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
3. An existing 40 foot right-of-way exists on Sunnys10pe Avenue. No
additional right-of-way dedication is required.
4. Install curb and gutter to City Standards and specifications 16 feet
from street centerline. A reduced pavement width may be allowed in
the future, once the total street sections for the Country Club Heights
area is completed. DEFERRED UNTIL AT WHICH TIME, THE CITY WRITES THE
ORDINANCE FOR THE COUNTRY CLUB HEIGHTS DEALING WITH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
'-"
5. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards and specifications from
street centerline to curb line (Traffic Index = 6.0). DEFERRED UNTIL
AT WHICH TIME, THE CITY WRITES THE ORDINANCE FOR COUNTRY CLUB HEIGHTS
DEALING WITH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS.
6. Provide City with grade certification that existing graded pad is in
conformance to the approved grading plan of April, 1981.
7. Provide street lights as approved by the City Engineer. IF POSSIBLE,
IF STREET LIGHTS BE PROVIDED FOR CITY APPROVAL WITH EXISTING POWER
POLES, IF POSSIBLE IF AVAILABLE, AND PLACED IN THE FRONT PART OF THE
STRUCTURE.
8. Plans and specifications for off-site public improvements are to be
prepared by a Civil Engineer. DEFERRED UNTIL AT WHICH TIME, THE CITY
WRITES THE ORDINANCE FOR COUNTRY CLUB HEIGHTS DEALING WITH PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS.
9. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, County Health
Department, and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
10. Provide the City with a water availability letter from serving agency.
-
11. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department requirements
tto include fire hydrant locations) have been complied with.
12. Pay Capital Improvement fees:
Street
Storm Drain
Park
S ewe r
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of lot area.
$ 420.00 per residential unit.
13. Pay Public Safety fees:
Police
Fire
$ 250.00
$ 50.00
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Planner Corcoran stated the Community Development Director had nothing to report,
but he would like to say that we have approximately 9 to 11 General Plan Amendments
for June 19, 1984, and they all have to be heard in one evening, so it is going to be '-"
a long ni ght.
Commissioner Dominguez asked if they could call a special meeting. Mr. Corcoran
stated this date is set by Ordinance.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Barnhart - Has a question on Specific Plan, mostly about Country Club
Heights. We have a couple of builders up there and they want to keep an aesthetic
quality, if a man had a two-hundred-thousand dollar house, are we going to allow a
fifty-thousand dollar single-family to be built there? I said you would have to go
Minutes of Planning Commission
Apri 1 17, 1984
Page 11
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
"property owner". I 1m looki ng for di rection on what to tell these peopl e. Com-
missioner Washburn said Community Design Element of the General Plan. Commissioner
Barnhart asked if this will be a General Plan Amendment? Commissioner Saathoff
stated with the General Plan, under the new ordinance believes the design will be
addressed, and there has already been a General Plan Amendmentaddressino that area.
Commiss ioner Washburn stated that he bel i eves the ordi nance addresses pub1 i c improve-
ments (street widths, curb, sidewalk, etc.). I think we have to to go the General
Plan and look for implementation of design and review criteria for community areas
that we have outlined in the Country Club Heights, Four Corners, San Jacinto area.
So really, we need to get with the new City Council and talk about putting together
design criteria. Commissioner Barnhart asked if that could be put on an agenda,
that we would like to request a study session before the Planning Commission hears
the General Plan Amendments, in case we have to do an amendment to cover this, or if
we can do it by ordinance. Commissioner Saathoff stated it was too late to bring
up in a General Plan Amendment, as the deadline was April 15, 1984. Commissioner
Barnhart asked if this could be done by ordinance. Commissioner Washburn stated
that it could be done by ordinance, you don't have to have a General Plan Amendment,
we have already spelled it out.
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Washburn - None
Commissioner Dominguez - None
Chairman Steed - Absent
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
-
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
17TH.
DAY
OF
APRIL
1984
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of April 3, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
-'
BUS INESS ITEMS
1 . Industrial Project 84-2 - Frank Ayres & Sons Construction -
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused, due to possible conflict of interest.
Staff presented proposal for a self storage facility and multi-tenant industrial
park, to be located north of the intersection of Chaney Street and Collier Avenue.
Mr. Bruce Ayres gave a brief background on the two-story concept stating the
two-story building enables you to have the large units downstairs and the smaller
units upstairs, and they have a non-rider hydraulic lift that will service the
ups ta i rs .
Discussion was held on condition number 2 (internal signage); external signage
conforming to existing Sign Ordinance being added as condition number 11, and;~
trees shown between walT and freeway on landscaping plan being provided.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Industrial Project 84-2 with staff
recommendations and the addition of condi tion number 11 whi ch wi 11 read: "Ex_
terna1 signage must conform to existing Sign Ordinance",seco"nd bycCommissioner
Saathoff.
Approved 3-0 Commissioner Washburn excused, due to possible conflict of interest....
1. All roof mounted equipment, ground support equipment shall be effectively
screened from public view and subject to approval from the Planning
Division.
2. ~11 i.nterna1 signage shall be of similar size and design and subject to
Planni ng Di vi s i on approval.
3. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
4. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted. Any proposed
changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
5. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch
(6") hi gh concrete curb.
6. All lighting shall be shielded so as not to shine onto adjacent streets
or residences.
7. Frontage sign shall be approved by the Planning Division.
8. All items depicted on the Landscaping Plan shall be provided as indicated.
9. Applicant to post a $3,000.00 Performance Bond to assure implementation
of Landscape Plan.
10. If applicable, all trash areas shall be effectively screened and subject
to Planning Division approval.
...
11. EXTERNAL SIGNAGE MUST CONFORM TO EXISTING SIGN ORDINANCE.
2.
Commercial Project 84-3 - L.P.L. Industries%Chevron - Staff presented proposal
for the re-location of existing overhead canopy (existing pump island only), and
incorporation of a pay booth (Kiosk), located at 16830 Lakeshore Drive.
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
1ST.
DAY
OF
MAY
1984
-
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:35 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by John Unsworth (Lake Elsinore's previous mayor)
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,: Assistant City Engineer
Rubel and Associate Planner Fields.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of April 17, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 84-4 - Butterfield Savings & Loan - Staff presented pro-
posal for a Conditional Use Permit to allow existing Savings and Loan Institution
to remain as a temporary structure for five-years, located at 16856 Lakeshore
Drive.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:39 p.m., asking for those wishing to speak
in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-4.
-
Mr. Doug Gustafson, representing Butterfield Savings and Loan, requested that
conditions 8 and 11 be deferred until such time as the city is ready to install
these improvements. Chairman stated that the Planning Commission is not empowered
to waive or defer fees imposed, but can make recommendation but this will be
handled by Council.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit
84-4. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
Discussion was held on length of time for Conditional Use Permit (applicant request-
ing 5 years) Commissi9~ suggested 18 months with 6 month extension (as stated in
the minutes of October 5, 1982, 9n Commercial Project 82-5 for Butterfield Savings
and Loan); continued use of property as a Savings and Loan but without investment
in the community with just temporary facility; reason why extension of Conditional
Use Permit requested. Mr. Gustafson stated they have different options for what
they see for the property in the future at this point (undecided on use or place-
ment of structure), looked at the possibility of the Savings and Loan on different
positions on the property; and they don't feel the site has the appearance of a
temporary nature. Discussion continued on how the trailers were set-up, are they
on a slab or on footings? Mr. Gustafson stated that the trailers are on a concrete
block foundation; condition number 9, on public safety fees, is this for existing
building area? Staff stated these fees are for the current structure; and defer-
ring conditions 8 and 11 with fees bonded with letter of attachment.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-4 with staff
recommendations with condition number 2 amended to read: Conditional Use Permit
shall be effective for a period of 18 months with a 6 month extension with semi-
annual reviews; conditions 8 and 11 to be bonded, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Discussion continued on the time limit for the Conditional Use Permit.
Commissioner Washburn withdrew his second and Commissioner Dominguez withdrew his
motion.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-4 with staff
recommendations with condition number 2 amended to read: Conditional Use Permit
shall be effective for 24 months with 6 month review; conditions 8 and 11 deferred
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-4 - BUTTERFIELD SAVINGS AND LOAN CONTINUED
and bonded, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Conditions placed on Commercial Project 82-5 will remain in effect with __
the exception of condition number 1.
2. Conditional Use Permit shall be effective for a period of 24 MONTHS WITH
6 MONTH REVIEW ~- ,i
3. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
4. Issuance of a Negative Decl aration.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
5. No additional dedication required.
6. Eight-foot (8') wide sidewalk shall be installed on Riverside Drive and
Lakeshore Drive. A six-foot (6') wide sidewalk shall be installed on
Wisconsin Street. The $9,500 cash bond will be released when the work
is completed and accepted.
7. Cooperate with the City of Lake Elsinore in forming a Lighting and Land-
scaping District.
8. Applicant to pay equitable share for traffic signal mitigation fee for
Riverside Drive/Lakeshore Drive signal in the amount of $20,000. DEFER
AND TO BE BONDED.
,
--
9. Pay Public Safety fees, as follows:
Police - $ .15 per square foot of buildi'ng area.
Fire $ .05 per square foot of building area.
10. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assi gnees.
11. Pay drainage mitigation fee of $8,000.00 DEFER AND TO BE BONDED.
12. Capital Improvement fees have been paid.
2. Tentative Parcel Map 19925 - Mission Bell Development c/o Butterfield Surveys, Inc.
- Staff presented proposal to subdivide 0.46 acres into three (3) lots, located at
southerly corner of Lincoln Street and Machado Street.
..
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m., asking for those wishing to speak
in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 19925.
Mr. Fred Crowe of Butterfield Surveys, representing the applicant, requested certain
cQnditions be amended or deleted as follows:
Condition 4 and 30: Verbiage practically identical on both. Delete
said conditions and add to condition 17 as
follows:
--
"17.f. - Proposed drainage facilities be reviewed by
the Riverside County Flood Control and Flood Control
concerns considered before final approval by City
Engi neer."
"17.g. - Provide a 3 foot maximum height deflection
wall at 45 degree angle to the rear-lot line of parcel
number 1, from the property corner to the sidewa1k."
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1984
Page 3
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19925 - MISSION BELL DEVELOPMENT clo BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC
CONTINUED
Condition 17.b.:
Addi ng the fo 11 owi ng verbiage: 1I0r near the
back property line on Lincoln Street.1I
-
Condition 17.d.
and 19:
Asking that if these fees are paid now that
when the agreement is drawn that the agreement
be for any amounts above the $1,000.00 per lot,
since they will have already paid more than the
other people that will be in the assessment
district.
Condition 23:
Asked to have the words IIProvide fire protection"
changed to "Provide fire hydrants".
Condition 12:
Request the traffic index of 7.5 be removed.
Condition 13:
Would like omitted.
Condi tion 14:
There are several lots on Lincoln Street, there is
one lot in between this project and the next and
the curb and gutter and sidewalk is already installed
with adjacent sidewalk rather than separated sidewalk.
This is also true on Machado Street adjacent to this
project, the sidewalk is adjacent to the curb and not.
separated. However, there are some large trees on
Lincoln Street, and what we would like to do is have
the condition changed to have adjacent sidewalk on
Machado Street and that on Lincoln Street that the
5 foot sidewalk be provided, but be allowed to meander
around the existing trees.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map
19925. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:18 p.m.
-
Discussion was held on requiring separated sidewalk from curb instead of sidewalk
adjacent to curb; condition number 17.a. changing height of block wall from 3 feet
to 42 inches; height of deflection wall; condition number 7 (right-of-way along
Machado Street); and condition number 11 (handicapped ramp), include in verbiage
that ramp shall be provided at discretion of the City Engineer. Commissioner
Washburn stated that we are looking at a lot of flood waters coming out of those
canyons, and we are going to have to address a master plan for hydrology out there.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Tentative Parcel Map 19925 with staff
recommendations deleting condition number 4, amending condition number 11, deleting
"Provide depression for handicappedll and insert IIRe10cate handicapped ramp per
City Engineer discretion"; condition number 12, delete '1traffic index of 7.5" and
insert lito accommodate wheel loads appropriate to City Standards"; deleting condi-
tion number 13; condition number 14, amended to read: "Construct a meandering five-
foot wide sidewalk separated from curb and standard driveway (Defer and require as
a condition of building permit). On Lincoln Street trees are to remain. On
Machado Street curb, sidewalk adjacent to the curb; condition number 17.a. amended
to read: "Construct a 42 inch block wall"; condition number l7.b. to include the
following verbiage "or near back property line on Lincoln Streetll; adding condition
number l7.f. which will read: "Proposed drainage facilities be reviewed by the
Riverside County Flood Control and Flood Control concerns considered before final
approval by City Engineer"; adding condition number 17.g. which will read: IIPro_
vide a 3 foot maximum height deflection wall at 45 degree angle to the rear lot line
of parcel number 1, from the property corner to the sidewalk"; condition number 19
amended to read: "Sign a document agreeing to participate in a future assessment
above $1,000.00 (as per condition number 17.d.); condition number 23, change the
word "protection" to "hydrant"; and del ete condition number 30, second by Com-
missioner Saathoff. .
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1 984
Page 4
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19925 - MISSION BELL DEVELOPMENT c/o BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC.
CONTINUED
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negati ve Decl aration.
3. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and City Codes.
-
4. ~~ttj;t/tJt~f~ntt/4f~~/~~~nti/FJ~~~/~~ntf~J/. DELETED.
5. Comply with all County Health Department requirements.
6. Meet all requirements of County Fire Department.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Staff is proposing that only an 88 foot right-of-way along Machado Street
be required to provide for a 64 foot roadway. This width would be com-
patible with existing conditions, including the existing dedication and
improvements proposed for Tentative Tract 19402 on the opposite side of~
Machado Street. Staff will propose in the first General Plan Amendment
in 1984 that Machado Street corridor be reduced from a 100 foot to an
88 foot right-of-way with a 64 foot roadway. No additional dedication is
needed along Machado Street.
The existing street right-of-way on the southeast side of the centerline
of Machado Street is 44 feet. The General Plan identifies Machado Street
as a major street corridor requiring 100 feet right-of-way and 76 feet
roadway. Approximately 40% of the frontage along Machado Street between
Lakeshore Drive and Grand Avenue has already been developed with 88 foot
right-of-way and a 64 foot wide roadway.
-
8. The existing street right-of-way on Lincoln Street is 88 feet, the General
Plan does not classify Lincoln Street, and it does not list a required
right-of-way width. No additional right-of-way is required along Lincoln
Street frontage of this Tentative Tract Map.
9. Dedicate street right-of-way for a corner cut-off in conformance with
Ci ty Standards.
10. Construct curb and gutter 32 feet from street centerline on Machado Street.
A proposed General Plan Amendment will reduce the roadway from 76 feet to
64 feet. (Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
11. Curb and gutter exists 12 feet from the centerline of the 88 foot wide
right-of-way along Lincoln Street, which provides an existing roadway width
of 44 feet. Replace curb if the radius is not to City Standards. RE-
LOCATE HANDICAPPED RAMP PER CITY ENGINE~R DISCRETION.
12.
Construct paving on Machado Street to City Standards from centerline to new
gutter to accommodate traffic wheel loads . appropriate to City Standards.
The existing paving to the centerline of the street must be replaced unless
tests show that the existing paving is, or can be up-graded, to City
Standards. (Defer_and_require as a condition of building permit).
-
13.
'~1j~~/~~j~t~/~~/~j~t~1~/~tf~et/ff~~/t~~/t~~t~fll~~/~f/t~~/~~/f~~t/wj~~
fls~tf9ff~~I/t9/t~~/~~j~tj~~/~~tt~ft//l~~t~/~~~t/~~~~/t~~t/t~~/~~I~tj~~
'~Yl~S/f9f/t~~/'~1/f99t/ff9~t~~~/j~~/9f/t~~/~~/~~f~f~~~~J/t9/~jtl/~t~~~~f~~
t9/~t~9~~9~~t~/tf~ff't/~~~~1/19~~~/f~~t~~~~t~~/~I/~/tt~ffj~/1~~~~/9f/lt't/
k~'f~f/~~~/f~~~jf'/~1/~/~9~~ltj9~/9f/~~jl~j~S/~~f~jt)t DELETED.
14.
Construct a MEANDERING five-foot wide sidewalk separated from curb and
standard driveway (Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
ON LINCOLN STREET TREES ARE TO REMAIN. ON MACHADO STREET CURB, SIDEWALK
ADJACENT TO THE CURB.
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1984
Page 5
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19925 - MISSION BELL DEVELOPMENT c/o BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC
CONTINUED
15. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
16. Cooperate with the City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping
District.
17. A drainage letter from the Flood Control District dated March 20, 1984
recommends denial until adequate flood control facilities are installed.
Staff is proposing that if the Council desires to approve this Tentative
Parcel Map that the following conditions be imposed:
a) Construct a 42 INCH block wall of a design approved
by the City Engineer, on the property line of Parcel
1 for flood protection.
b) Provide a driveway for Parcell adjacent to Lot 2 to
provide maximum protection to Lot 1 OR NEAR BACK PRO-
PERTY LINE ON LINCOLN STREET.
-
c) All homes to have finish floor level elevated to two
(2) feet above top curb.
d) Pay to the City a drainage impact mitigation fee of
$1,000.00 per lot. Defer and require as a condition
of building permit on ~ny of the lots.
e) Record an agreement with the City to relocate the
three (3) foot high drainage diversion wall to the
northeast side of the 25-foot wide drainage easement,
if requi red by the City for install ation of future
drainage facilities.
f) PROPOSED DRAINAGE FACILITIES BE REVIEWED BY THE
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND FLOOD CONTROL
CONCERNS CONSIDERED BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL BY CITY
ENGINEER.
g) PROVIDE A 3 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT DEFLECTION WALL AT
45 DEGREE ANGLE TO THE REAR LOT LINE OF PARCEL NUMBER
1, FROM THE PROPERTY CORNER TO THE SIDEWALK.
18. Provide a grading plan to the City for approval prior to recording a final
map. If necessary, for drainage, provide an irrevocable offer of dedication
of a drainage easement along the rear property lines.
19. SIGN A DOCUMENT AGREEING TO PARTICIPATE IN A FUTURE ASSESSMENT ABOVE
$1,000.00 (AS PER CONDITION NUMBER 17.d.)
20. A sewer exists to the southwest tract boundary on Machado Street and along
the Lincoln Street frontage. Extend the sewer in Machado Street to serve
the lots as required by the City Engineer. Provide cleanouts at property
- line. (Defer and provide a a condition of building permit. Pay up to
$1,950.00 per living unit in addition to sewer connection fees.)
21. Provide a water service availability letter.
22. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee.
23. Provide fire HYDRANT facilities as required in writing by the County Fire
Department. (Defer and require as condition of building permit).
24. Pay to the City, traffic safety mitigation fees for traffic signals of
$300.00 per lot. (Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1 984
Page 6
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19925 - ~lISSION BELL DEVELOPMENT c/o BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS INC
CONTINUED. '
25. Provide Class II Bike Lane (Defer until street construction).
26. P~a~s and.speci~icati~ns for public improvements shall be prepared by a
C1Vll Englneer lncludlng street signs and striping. (Defer and require
as a condition of building permit).
27. Pay Capital Improvement Fees, as follows:
-
Sewer
Street
Park
Storm Drains
$ 420.00 per lot
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of building area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
28. Pay Publ ic Safety Fees. as follows:
Police
Fire
$ 250.00 per residential unit.
$ 150.00 per residential unit.
29. Record an agreement indemnifying and holding the City harmless against
storm water run-off damage to applicant's property.
30. Pf~*j~~/wfjtt~n/t7~~f~~t~/ff~~/~j;~ftj~~/t~~nti/F7~~~/t~ntf~7/. DELETED.
3. Tentative Parcel Map 19924 - Butterfield Development Corporation - Staff presented
proposal to subdivide 178 acres into four (4) lots, located southeasterly of
Central Avenue between Allen Street and Trellis Avenue.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:35 p.m., asking for those wishing to speak
in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 19924. -
Mr. Jim Welsh, Project Manager for Butterfield Development Corporation, stated
that the intent of this parcel map is to facilitate financing for conveyance on
these parcels and not to facilitate subsequent development on these parcels as
staff has indicated. Mr. Welsh stated that they had a problem with the 24 condi-
tions placed on this project. Chairman asked if it would be to the applicant's
advantage to postpone this to a later date~ so that he can get with staff and go
over the conditions? Mr. Welsh stated that he thought that'it might be possible
to discuss the conditions with staff now. Chairman asked Mr. Welsh if he wanted
to categorically go through the conditions? Mr. Welsh stated that because they
only intend to subdivide for the purposes of financing and conveyance, would like
to suggest that all of the conditions be taken off except for conditions 1 and 2.
Chairman stated that there were a number of the items that they are not empowered
to del ete or defer. Chairman stated for expediency purposes, rather than going
through all of these things at this time, that it might be better and to the.
applicant's benefit for him to get with staff and re-write the application aC~7~
cordingly. Chairman asked for the Commission's feelings about this at this time:
Did they want to hear this matter now or would they rather it be continued? Chair-
man stated that the conditions have to be accepted the..way they are in the public
hearing, unless they are re-written accordingly. Chairman recommended this item
be pos tponed .
Motion by Chairman Steed to continue Tentative Parcel Map 19924 to the meeting of
May 15, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
4. Tentative Tract Map 14639 REVISED - Fred Miller - Staff requested this item be
continued to the meeting of June 5, 1984, to allow staff to meet with River~fde
County Flood Control to alleviate drainage concerns.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:48 p.m., and asked for a motio~ to continue
Tentative Tract Map 14639 REVISED to the meeting of June 5, 1984. Motlon by.Com-
missioner Washburn to continue Tentative Tract Map 14639 REVISED to the meetlng of
June 5, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1984
Page 7
BUSINESS ITEMS
-
1. Site Plan Review lIexisting non-conforming usell - Wi1heim Piche - Staff requested
this item be continued to the meeting of May 15, 1984, to allow time to review
response received from the City Attorney on April 27, 1984. Motion by Com-
missioner Washburn to continue site plan review to the meeting of May 15, 1984,
second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
2. Lot Line Adjustment 84-4 - Margaret L. Hales - Staff presented proposal for a
Lot Line Adjustment to realign the present southerly property line to accom-
modate the existing set~ck requirement under the R-1 Zoning District, located
westerly of the intersection of Gunder Avenue and McPherson Avenue. Chairman
asked if this Lot Line Adjustment would create a substandard lot? Staff replied
in the negative. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Lot Line Adjust-
ment 84-4 with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. City Engineer verification of legal description as accurate.
2. Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
3. Submit corrected and approved Certificate of Survey by applicant.
4.
-
Submit revised legal description for both Lots 79 and 80 such that each
legal description shall describe the lot and the adjustment made to it
for the purpose of having legal independent descriptions.
3. Residential Project 84-1 - Barc1ays Inland Empire -
At this point in time, Chairman Steed left the table, and Commissioner Dominguez
became Acting Chairman.
Staff presented proposal for a 150 unit apartment complex on 4.76 acres, to be
located approximately 660~ feet northwesterly of the intersection of Grand Avenue
and Riverside Drive.
Upon completion of staff's report, Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused
from participating on this project and Residential Project 84-4.
Acting Chairman asked if the applicant was present and had any questions. Mr.
Mark LaPorte replied in the negative. Acting Chairman then asked if there was any
discussion at the table. There being no discussion at the table Acting Chairman
asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Residential Project 84-1 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 3-0 Chairman Steed absent and Commissioner Washburn excused
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six-inch
(6") high concrete curb.
2. Applicant shall provide lighting plan for subject site.
3. Project shall be constructed according to approved site plan and elevations.
Any changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
4. Six foot (61) block wall be constructed as depicted on site plan.
5. Staff recordation of CC & Rls as required by City Councilor Redevelop-
ment Agency.
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1 984
Page 8
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-1 - BARCLAYS INLAND EMPIRE CONTINUED
6. Applicant to provide an enclosed trash area.
7. Meet all County Fire Department requirements.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
8. Dedicate right-of-way for one half of a 100-foot wide street on Grand
Avenue. The General Plan identifies Grand Avenue as a 100-foot wide
major street. A 40-foot wide one-half street exists. An additional
10 feet of right-o'f-way shall be dedicated to the City across the total
frontage of appl icant' s property..
9. Construct curb and gutter (8" curb height) across the total frontage of
appl i cant's property 38 feet from centerl i ne to provi de for a 76-foot
wide roadway as required by the General Plan for a major street.
10. Construct paving to City Standards from new gutter to street centerline
to accommodate traffic wheel loads represented by a traffic index of
8.0. The existing paving to centerline on Grand Avenue must be replaced
unless soils tests show that the existing paving is, or can be up-graded
to City Standards.
11. Construct five (5) foot wide sidewalk adjacent to the property line and
standard driveways.
12. Complete off-site street improvements, must extend to the center of the
flood control channel. Also, pavement transitions shall be provided as
required by the City Engineer.
13. Construct street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
14. Cooperate with the City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping District.
15. Off-site drainage facilities shall comply with the letter from the County
Flood Control District dated February 27, 1984, but shall include a re-
quirement that provisions be made to convey storm flow through the north-
east end of applicant's property from a watershed which includes a 687-
foot uniform depth of property northeasterly from Grand Avenue, from
subject site to Machado Street.
16. Provide water service availability letter.
17. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by the County
Fire Department.
18. Provide Class II Bike Lane.
19. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared by a
Civil Engineer, including street signing and striping.
20. Pay Capital Improvement Fees, as follows:
Sewer $ 420.00 per living unit .
Street $ .03 per square foot of lot area.
Park $ .10 per square foot of building area.
Drainage $ .02 per s q ua re foot of lot area.
21. Provide soil and geology report, on-site drainage and grading plan, certifi-
cation of survey, and grading compliance certification.
22. Deferred agreement for half-street improvements to the centerline of Grand
Avenue over the flood control channel plus half of future catch basin and
1 a tera 1 .
....
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1984
Page 9
4. Residential Project 84-4 - Wilfred Atkinson -
Commissioner Washburn excused earlier on this item.
-
Staff presented proposal for the construction of two (2) Single-Family Residences
on one (1) 7,500 square foot lot, located southeasterly of the intersection of
Chestnut and Peck Street.
At this point in time, Chairman Steed returned to the table.
Chairman asked if there was a representative of the applicant's in the audience.
Receiving no response, Chairman asked if there was any discussion at the table.
There being no discussion at the table Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Residential Project 84-4 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Washburn excused
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on the site plan/elevations be provided for as indicated.
2. Provide two (2) street trees to be approved by Planning Department.
3. Install permanent sprinkler system.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
-
4. Construct curb, gutter and sidewalk with standard driveway approach and
match up paving to the specifications of the City Engineer.
5. Provide a grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
6. Meet and provide fire protection per Riverside County Fire Department with
written verification.
7. Pay Capital Improvement Fund Fees, as follows:
Sewer - $
Water - $
Street Improvement - $
Street Maintenance - $
Parks $
Storm Drain $
420.00
500.00
.02
.01
.10
.02
pe run; t. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
per un; t. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
per square foot of lot area...
per square foot of lot area...
per square foot of building...
per square foot of lot area...
$ 840.00
$ 1,000.00
$ 250.00
$ 11 2 . 50
$ 306.80
$ 225.00
8. Pay Public Safety Fees, as follows:
Police
Fire
- $ 250.00 per unit...................... $
- $ .10 per square foot of building... $
500.00
306.80
-
9. Provide sewer cleanout at property line~
10. Provide certificate of survey by a registered Civil Engineer or land
surveyor.
11. Provide street improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
12. Install ornamental street lighting.
5. Request to Annex - Zimmerman Consulting Engineers/Tomlinson - Staff presented a
request to annex 43.36 acres, located southerly of the intersection of Grand
Avenue and Riverside Drive, to the City of Lake Elsinore. Chairman asked if
there was anyone in the audience that wished to speak on the request to annex.
Mr. George Zimmerman of Zimmerman Consulting Engineers, representing the owners,
stated that he would answer any questions regarding the request to annex. Chair-
man asked if there were any questions from staff or the Commission, and received
no reply. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Request to Annex, second
by Commissioner Barnart.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Washburn absent
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1 984
Page 10
Commissioner Washburn returned to the table.
6.
Request to Annex - Lakeside Estates/Buchanan Development, Inc. - Staff presented
a request to annex approximately 80 acres, located westerly of the intersection
of Corydon Road and Palomar Street, to the City of Lake Elsinore. A brief
discussion was held on location of proposed annexation. Motion by Commissioner
Dominguez to approve Request to Annex, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
7. Request by City Engineer - Determining right-of-way dimensions for Grandview
Garden Tract - Thompson - City Engineer requested that the Planning Commission
review and offer recommendation to the City Council and to the Engineering staff
a determination of right-of-way dimensions within an existing subdivision called
Grandview Gardens re-subdivision. Grandview Gardens re-subdivision is located
westerly of the Ortega Highway and 832 feet southerly of Grand Avenue with Macy
Street providing the primary access to the existing subdivision. Grandview
Gardens re-subdivision is an existing recorded subdivision map which was recorded
February 10, 1939. The existing lots are generally 50' x 100' with interior
streets having 40' right-of-way dimensions, with the exception of Macy Street
(50' right-of-way) and Grandview Avenue (20' right-of-way). Block "B" of the
subdivision has 16 lots within Riverside County with the remaining Blocks "B"
"C" and "F" containing 74 lots within the City Limits. Ordinance 529 and 572
make provisions for additional dedication, but if this dedication is required
it would reduce the lot sizes to 50' x 90' (or 4,500 square foot lots), and the
developer would have difficulty in meeting present grading criteria and would
also eliminate their ability to construct on six (6) of the corner lots.
Considerable discussion ensued on being part of the old Suntown development;
Macy Street being a half-street (paved half-street at present); lot size (50'
x 100' no longer being acceptable by city standards ,these would be substandard
lots, 60' x 100" is minimal and if the streets are brought up to city standards
this will diminish the lot sizes further); whether or not Grandfather Clause
would be inclusive to allow substandard lots; street widths (regarding the park-
ing of vehicles on streets).
-
Mr. Jim Thompson presented a copy of plot plan to each Commissioner and then
placed elevation plan on the board for review. Mr. Thompson stated that for
the past couple of months, he has been seeking direction from the city as to
what to do with this particular situation. This is an existing recorded sub-
division and is under the impression that when a subdivision has been recorded
that the governing body must live with map as recorded. Mr. Thompson stated
that if they have to change the street widths, this would seriously affect the
marketability. Mr. Thompson gave brief summary on concepts for the development
of Grandview Gardens, stating the problem is dedication. If I dedicate the
additional right-of-way, then the setback lines have to move into the lot. 1.
talked to staff about the possibility of offering easements for sidewalks. With-
in the existing 40 feet we could offer 40 feet of street and no sidewalk or we
could offer 32 feet of street and 4 foot sidewalks on either side. Mr. Thompson
suggested that we keep the 40 feet and he dedicate an easement for an additional
2 feet on either side, so the city would then,have a 44 foot right-of-way allow-
ing for a 36 foot street and 4 foot sidewalk in place of a 5 or 5-1/2 foot side-
walk on either side. Mr. Thompson stated he could provide the additional dedica-
tion on Macy Street, but on Grandview Avenue he does not have the room for addi-
tional dedication. However, the developer lying adjacent to them is submitting a
tentative map and we have been working with them for several months. They also
control the strip of land adjacent to this property. There is some downstream
drainage problems adjacent to our property, my solution would be that the city
require those people to solve that problem, use my 20 feet of stre:t and another
20 or 30 feet that they would dedicate to solve the downstream dralnage problem.
-
Discussion continued on concept of total project, regarding street widths; pos-
sibility of sidewalk on one side; zero lot line on side yard; grading (slope on
the first tier going up to the second tier mid block, each step mid block sloping
up so we get the terrace effect, would applicant be able to build on corne~ lots
with doing the zero lot line in certain cases, because he can't meet the slde yard
setbacks); alignment for Grandview Avenue; County vacation of certain portions of
Laguna Avenue, as well as Lincoln; Lot Line Adjsutment (if there is unbuildable
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1, 1 984
Page 11
REQUEST BY CITY ENGINEER DETERMINING RIGHT-OF-WAY DIMENSIONS FOR GRANDVIEH GARDEN
TRACT - THOMPSON
-
lots); density; Lot Line Adjustment to recreate 6,000 square foot lots for
entire tract map; size of house to be placed on lots; elevations coming
before Design Review Board for approval; street widths that will not diminish
the size of the 6 lots in question; adjacent tentative tract map location and
street widths; alignment of Grandview Avenue; some partial Lot Line Adjustment
if necessary, but if we can go with a street alignment that will align with the
other project and give a 4 foot sidewalk instead of 5 foot, and if it can be
worked out so the lots don't have to be shaved, then a Lot Line Adjustment would
not be required; and there should be a mix in the elevations with zero lot line
and the single-family to break-up the neighborhood.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn, to approve, in concept, right-of-way dimensions
for Grandview Garden Tract conditioned as follows:
A. If zero lot line adjustment is necessary, provide elevation mix
and bring back before Design Review Board for approva1.- The streets
will be 36 foot curb-to-curb with 4 foot sidewalk on all streets
except for Macy Street (Macy Street will line up with adjacent tract
to make proper alignment).
B. Dedicate to provide 60 foot right-of-way with 40 foot curb separation
with corner cutback dedications (Standard 104A) for Macy Street.
C. Coordinate street alignment and dedication requirements for Laguna
Avenue, Grandview Avenue and Lincoln Street with the developer of
Tentative Tract 20139 and the County of Riverside.
-
second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Planner Corcoran stated the Community Development Director had nothing to report,
but would like to inform the Commission of the Spring Planning Commissioner's Conference
to be held May 10, 1984, at the Royce Resort Hotel in Cathedral City, California.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Barnhart - Has a question of staff, there was a gentleman in the office
today and one of the brokers told him on his commercial property (the property is in
escrow), he could build below elevation 1270. I thought elevation 1270 pertained to
everything commercial, residential, etc. Commissioner Barnhart was informed that
below elevation 1270 was done on a case-by-case basis, and as a policy the Planning
Department does not suggest any construction under elevation 1270.
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Dominguez - None
-
Commissioner Washburn - Would like staff from both Engineering and Planning Department
to get together, if we give them the consensus to talk to City Council to talk to
County Flood Control and come up with some kind of concept for future planning on
hydrology of the west end.
Chairman Steed - None
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MI NUTE ACT! ON
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
1 ST.
DAY
OF
MAY
1984
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of April 17, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0 -
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Landscape Plan for Conditional Use Permit 83-13 - Jess Rodriguez Disposal Company -
Staff presented Landscaping Plan as required by condition number 5 of Conditional
Use Permit 83-13. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Landscape Plan for
Conditional Use Permit 83-13 as submitted, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
2. Elevations for Tract Map 18195 - Art Nelson - Staff presented Elevations for Tract
Map 18195, located east of Terra Cotta Road and Lakeshore Drive. Mr. Art Nelson
stated he did not receive the conditions. Staff read the four (4) conditions. A
brief discussion was held on providing street trees. Mr. Nelson stated he had no
opposition to the conditions as listed. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to ap-
prove Elevations for Tract Map 18195 with staff recommendations, second by Com-
missioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1.
All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from neigh-
boring property or public streets.
-
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any proposed
changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. All homes to be equipped with sprinkler systems.
4. Provide street trees at 301-401 intervals along all street frontages.
3. Residential Project 84-4 - Wilfred Atkinson -
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused.
Staff presented proposal for the construction of two (2) Single-Family Residences
on one (1) 7,500 square foot lot, located southeasterly of the intersection of
Chestnut and Peck Street.
Chairman asked if there was a representative for Mr. Wilfred Atkinson. Receiving
no response, Chairman asked for a motion. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to
approve Residential Project 84-4 with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Washburn excused
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1.
All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from neigh-
boring property or public streets.
-
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any proposed
changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Provide block wall as depicted on site plan.
4. Provide two (2) street trees.
Minutes of Design Review Board
May 1, 1 984
Page 2
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-4 - WILFRED ATKINSON CONTINUED
5. All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler systems.
-
6.
Implementation of landscaping plan to commence within 30 days after
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
10:11 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0 -
Approved
Whi t Steed
Chairman
-
Respectfully su~:ed,
~~~
Linda Grindstaff ~
Planning Commission
Secretary
'<
,--.
-
...
--
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
15TH.
DAY
OF
MAY
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:31 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Steed.
",.-...
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Steed.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Culp and Associate Planner
Fi e 1 ds .
'"
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve minutes of May 1, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
PUBLI C HEARl NGS
1. Tentative Parcel Map 19924 - Butterfield Development Corporation - Staff pre-
sented proposal to subdivide 178 acres into four (4) lots, located southeaster-
ly of Central Avenue between Allen Street and Trellis Avenue.
City Engineer presented to the Commission a revised copy of the conditions for
Tentative Parcel Map 19924, stating minor changes were made on conditions 4, 5,
6, 7. b ., 1 0, 1 2, 1 3 and 22.
-
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 19924.
Mr. Jim Welsh, Project Manager for Butterfield Development Corporation, stated
that they were in agreement with the revised conditions.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map
19924. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:35 p.m.
Commissioner Saathoff asked staff to briefly point out the few changes made on
the conditions. City Engineer stated the revised conditions are as follows:
Condition # 4:
Condition # 5:
Adding verbiage "and Lots In., B, C and D; Defer as a
condition of buil di ng permi t"
Adding verbi age "and 104 feet, as shown on Tentative
Parcel Map"
.l\ddi ng verbi a ge "and Lots .A., B, C and 0"
Condition # 4.a.:
Condi tion # 6:
Add the word "ultimate"; Adding verbiage "Defer items
6 and 6.a. and require as a condition of building
permit"
Condition # 7.b:
Change from 5 foot to "6 foot meandering sidev/alk"
Condition # 10:
Change the word "building" to "grading"
Condition # 12:
Add verbi age" Defer and requi re as a condition of
building permit"
Condi tion # 13:
Add verbiage "Defer and require as a condition of
building permit"
Conditi on # 22:
Add the words "Per condi tions 4 and 5"
Commissioner Dominguez stated that on the revised conditions, condition number
18 was omitted, should this condition be included in the revised conditions as
Minutes of-Planning Commission
May 15, 1984
Page 2
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19924- BUTTERFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CONTINUED
contained in the original list of conditions? City Engineer stated iD the
affirmative. A brief discussion was held on condition number 4 (realign-
ment of Highway 74) and condition number 24 (standard subdivision agreement;
whether or not the Specific Plan Ordinance would take precedence over this.
City Planner Corcoran stated that the Specific Plan Ordinance would take
precedence over any development occuring within those boundaries).
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Tentative Parcel Map 19924 with
revised staff recommendations and the inclusion of condition number i8,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
....
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. Meet all requirements of County Fire Department.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONOITIONS:
4. Central Avenue: State Highway 74, AND LOTS A, B, C AND D.
The existing half-street right-of-way is 50 feet. Required half-street
right-of-way is 55 feet. Dedicate 5 feet of additional right-of-way to
provide a 55 foot wide one-half street and, in addition, dedicate the
additional right-of-way on the southwest side of Highway 74 needed for
realignment as approved by the City and Ca1-Trans. Applicant shall meet
all requirements of dedication and realignment as required by Ca1-Trans
District No.8 and the City. DEFER AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERt1IT. ....
a) Lots A, B, C and D (STREET)
Dedicate 124 AND 104 FEET, AS SHOWN ON TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP,
the ultimate right-of-way from northwesterly boundary to the
southeasterly boundary to include a planted median for 1241
right-of-way section. Use standard corner cutback dedication
at the intersection of Central Avenue (State Highway 74 and
Lots A and B) .
5. Central Avenue: AND LOTS A, B, C AND D.
Install curb and gutter 43 feet from street centerline. Ca1-Trans will
require that no raised median be constructed as a center divider along
the total project frontage. Applicant shall provide a street signing
and striping plan for Ca1-Trans and City approval. (Defer and require
as a condition of building permit).
a) Lots A, B, C and D
Install curb and gutter 42 feet from street centerline and
install curb and gutter 10 feet from street centerline for
proposed raised median. Provide a street striping and sign-
ing plan for total length of these street dedications to
include left turn movements and Class II Bike Lanes per the
approved Specific Plan dated April, 1984. Provide a planting
and automatic irrigation system plan for the 20-foot wide
median. (Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
b) Driveway locations along Central Avenue shall be limited
access as recommended and approved by Cal-Trans District No.
8 and shall be constructed to City and/or State standards and
specifications. (Defer items 5, 5.a., and 5.b and require as
a condition of building permit).
....
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1 5, 1 984
Page 3
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19924 - BUTTERFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CONTINUED
-
I
6. Paving for Central Avenue (State Highway 74) from ULTIMATE street center-
line to curb1ine to include additional paving required for any realign-
ment approved by Ca1-Trans. Paving to be to City Standards to resist
wheel loads represented by a traffic index of 8.0. (DEFER ITEM 6 AND
REQUIRE AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERMIT).
a) Paving of streets on Lots A, B, C and D shall be from
street centerline to curb1ine for new street sections.
Paving shall be to City Standards to resist wheel loa~
represented by a traffic index of 8.0. (DEFER ITEM 6.a.
AND REQUIRE AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERMIT).
7. Install sidewalk to City standards and specifications.
a) Commercial 8 foot wide adjacent to property line. (Defer
and require as a condition of building permit).
b) Residential 6 FOOT MEANDERING SIDEWALK. (Defer and require
as a condition of building permit).
8. Install street lights to City standards and specifications as approved
by the City Engineer. (Defer and require as a condition of building
permit) .
-
9. Cooperate in the formation of a street Lighting and Landscaping District.
10. Provide City Engineer with preliminary geological and soils report to
accompany the grading plan. Provide grade certification. The soils
report must include the street pavement design data. (Defer and require
as a condition of GRADING permit).
11. All off-site improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by
developer's engineer to include street signing, striping. (Defer and
require as a condition of building permit).
12. Comply with the requirements of the City, Elsinore Valley ~1unicipa1 Hater
District. County Health Department and Regional Hater Quality Control
Board for proposed sewer servi ce. (DEFER AND REQUIRE AS A CONDITION OF
BUILDING PERMIT).
13. Provide the City with a will serve letter for water availability from
serving agency. (DEFER AND REQUIRE AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERMIT).
14. Comply with the written requirements of the Riverside County Fire Depart-
ment for fire protection. (Defer and require as a condition of building
permit) .
15. Subject property is adjacent to and westerly of Fire Area No.9, estab-
lished by City Resolution No. 83-87.
a) Pay Public Safety fees. required for Area 9, as follows:
(To be paid as a condition of building permit).
Police (Area
9) :
$
$
250.00 per residential unit.
.15 per square foot of gross floor area.
Residential:
Commercial:
Fi re (Area 9):
_$i>entia1 :
Cormnercial :
$ 150.00 per residential unit.
S .15 per square foot of gross floor area.
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 15, 1984
Page 4
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19924 - BUTTERFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CONTINUED
16. Pay Capital Improvement fees, as follows: (To be paid as a crin~ition '
of building permit).
Street fee for residential area:
Street fee for commercial area:
Park fee for residential area:
$ .03
$ .03
$ .10
$ .01
$ -- .02
$ .02
$ 420.00
$ 420.00
per square foot of lot area.
per square foot of lot area.
per square foot of building
a rea.
per square foot of lot area.
per square foot of lot area.
per square foot of lot area.
per residential unit.
for first twenty fixture
units.
~
Park fee for commercial area:
Drainage fee for residential area:
Drainage fee for commercial area:
Sewer fee for residential area:
Sewer fee for commercial area:
17. Provide hydrology and hydraulic studies to the City Engineer. Meet all
requirements of the City and/or Flood Control District for easement
dedication, facility alignment, improvement and construction for drainage
and flood control facilities. Provide drainage release and provide
indemnification and hold harmless agreements as required by the City.
(Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
a} Pay drainage impact mitigation fees in the amount of
$ 350.00 per residential unit and $1,500.00 per acre
for commercial areas. (Defer and require as a condition
of building permit).
18. Pay traffic safety mitigation fee for traffic signalization in the amount
of $ 225.00 per residential unit and $1,000.00 per acre for commercial
areas. (Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
19. Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee.
20. Submit an approved Engineer's Cost Estimate approved by Ca1-Trans for
bonding purposes along the entire Parcel Map 19924 frontage of Highway 74.
....
21. Submit an approved Engineer's Cost Estimate approved by the City Engineer
for bonding purposes for access Lots A, S, C and D.
22. Construct or bond for total off-site improvements along the entire Parcel
Map 19924 frontage of Highway 74 (PER CONDITIONS 4 AND 5). Defer and
require as a condition of building permit).
23. Construct or bond for total off-site improvements for access, Lots A, B,
C and D. (Defer and require as a condition ob building permit).
24. Enter into a standard subdivision agreement with the City of Lake Elsinore.
25.
This Parcel Map has been prepared for purposes of obtaining financing and
conveyancing and not for purposes of development. Approval of this Parcel
Map does not entitle the land divider to the issuance of building permits.
However, in the event building permits are issued for the parcels created
herein, the conditions of this Parcel Map will apply to such building
permits; otherwise conditions 15 through 18 will be void; and the condi-
tions and fees to be imposed for development will be determined at the
time of approval of Tentative Tract Map 19934, (Parcels 1, 2, 3, and 4
of Parcel Map 19924), or at the time of further division of the parcels
crea ted herei n .
....
2. Conditional Use Permit 84-5 - Lake Elsinore Chamber of Commerce -
Commissioner Barnhart asked to b~ excused, due to conflict of interest.
Staff presented proposal for a Conditional Use Permit to sponsor the annual
Frontier Days Rodeo, project envisions rodeo, horse shows (bi-monthly), bucking
chutes, corrals, a food facility and mobile offices, located on Avenue 5 and
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1 5, 1 984
Page 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-5 - lAKE ELSINORE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CONTINUED
--
Franklin Street. Staff stated a petition has been received opposing said
proposal. .
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-5.
r.1r. Robert W. lynn, President of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of
Conditional Use Permit 84-5 and stated he would be happy to answer any
questions. ~
Mr. Dave Vic, Chairman Board of Govenors of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke
.in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-5.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use
Permit 84-5. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. The
following peopl e spoke in opposition to Conditional Use Permit. 84-5 stating
concern on conditions placed on proposal (whether or not they were sufficient);
location of proposal; tra ffi c control (regardi ng ingress/egress, sa fety
hazards); parking; fire protection and insufficient police patrol in the area:
Caren Will is
James Gunther
Patricia Godding -
George Alongi
Paul Godding
800 Parkway
764 Acacia (Also presented additional petition)
358 Avenue 6 (Also presented additional petition)
629 Mill Street
358 Avenue 6
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Staff stated a
petition was received on May 11 and one on May 14, 1984 in opposition to Condi-
tional Use Permit 84-5 of which copies have been supplied to you.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the publiC hearing at 8:21 p.m.
A lengthy discussion ensued covering all the concerns as brought out by the
above listed persons, as well as time limit for proposal; acceleration of
weed abatement program in this area; insufficient time to relocate proposal
to another site; signage to direct traffic on Franklin Street and Casino Drive;
and blocking off Franklin Street and Avenue 6 to vehicular traffic.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-5 with
staff recommendations, amending condition number 1 to read: "Approval is for
Chamber of Commerce Rodeo and bi -monthly horse show for a two (2) year period
subject to annual review"; amending condition number 3 to read: "Traffic and
parking to be directed and controlled during Frontier Days weekend. Signage
to direct traffic on Franklin Street and Casino Drive, and blocking off
Franklin Street at Avenue 6, and blocking off Crescent (for fire protection)";
and amending condition number 7 to read: "t1eet County Fire Department require-
ments. Provide fire perimeter (staff to determine) and acceleration of weed
abatement program in this area", second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Commissioner Saathoff asked for and received additional discussion on time
limit; parking and fire protection.
Vote 2-2 Commissioner Barnhart excused. Motion failed to pass due to tie vote.
COMMISSIONER BARNHART RETURNED TO THE TABLE.
3. Zone Change 84-3 - Charles O. Pease - Staff presented proposal for zone change
from County Zoning A-l-10 (Farming) to City Zoning designation R-l (Single-
Family ReSidence) and C-2 (General Commercial) Zoning District (to provide pre-
annexation zone change for 123.6: acres for proposed Annexation No. 34 into the
City of lake Elsinore), located westerly of the intersection of Mountain Street
and Robb Road.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:48 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Zone Change 84-3.
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 15, 1984
Pa ge 6
ZONE CHANGE 84-3 - CHARLES O. PEASE CONTINUED
tk. Bob Kipper, Engineer for the applicant, spoke in favor of Zone Change
84-3 and stated that he would be happy to answer any questions.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Zone Change 84-3.
Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:50 p.m.
Commissioner Washburn asked Mr. Pease if he had filed the official Notice
of Cancellation to cancel the contract under the Williamson Act. Mr1 Pease
answered in the affirmative.
"
-
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Zone Change 84-3 with staff recom-
mendation, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
4. Zone Change 84-4 - Terry W. Shook - Sta ff presented proposal for zone change
from R-1 (Single-Family Residence) to Limited Industrial for 1.5 acres,
located southerly of Flint Street between Mohr Street and Silver Street.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:54 p.m., asking for those wishing to
\ speak in favor of Zone Change 84-4.
Mr. Terry W. Shook spoke in favor of Zone Change 84-4 and stated that he would
be happy to answer any questions.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Zone Change 84-4.
Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m.
A brief discussion was held on location; this location was discussed at the ...
last General Plan Amendment hearing, and it was felt that industrial would be
the proper use.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Zone Change 84-4 with staff recom-
mendation, second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
5. Zone Change 84-5 - Lakeside Estates, Ltd./Ken Buchanan - Staff presented pro-
posal for zone change, to provide pre-annexation zone change for ~ 93 acres
for proposed Annexation No. 35, from City Public/Semi Public and County Low
Density Residential (R-l) to City Low Density Residential (R-l) with five (5)
acres at Union and Corydon designated as Limited Commercial (C-l), located
westerly of the intersection of Union and Corydon Road.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 9:02 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Zone Change 84-5.
Mr. Lloyd Zola, representing Lakeside Estates, spoke in favor of Zone Change
84-5 and stated that he would be happy to answer any questions.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Zone Change 84-5.
Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed.
Ms. Mary Reardon stated that she has no objection to the low density housing,
but is opposed to the commercial aspect of this proposal.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition to Zone Change 84-5.
Receiving no response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:08 p.m.
Discussion was held on if proposal is approved with Limited Commercial and with
the new Zoning Ordinance being re-written would applicant be allowed to operate
under the existing Zoning Ordinance? Staff stated that this proposal is in
conjunction with a General Plan Amendment, and believes that at that time the
General Plan Amendment would address this commercial parcel, and that designation
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1 5, 1 984
Page 7
ZONE CHANGE 84-5 - LAKESIDE ESTATES, LTD./KEN BUCHANAN CONTINUED
-.
would take effect at the time the new zoning is brought into conformance
with the General Plan; and on large acreages should direct the applicants
to look toward Specific Plan.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Zone Change 84-5 with staff
recommendation, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
..
6.
Zone Change 84-6 - Zimmerman Consulting Engineers/Tomlinson - Staff presented
proposal for zone change, to provide pre-annexation zone change for 43:t acres
for proposed Annexation No. 36, to R-l (Single-Family Residence) and C-P
(Commercial Park), the R-l designation is proposed for 36 acres and the C-P
designation for 7 acres; also, rezoning 50.2:t acres from R-3 (Multiple-Family
Residential) to C-l (Limited Commercial) and R-l (Single-Family Residential)
to R-3 (Multiple-Family Residential), the C-l proposal is for approximately
21.4 acres and the R-3 designation is proposed for approximately 28.8 acres,
located southerly of the intersection of Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive, and
located at the corner of Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive, known as Amfac
Nurseri es .
Chairman opened the public hearing at 9:19 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Zone Change 84-6.
-
Mr. George Zimmerman, representing the property owner, spoke in favor of Zone
Change 84-6 and stated that he would be happy to answer any questions.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Zone Change 84-6.
Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. The following people
spoke in opposition to Zone Change 84-6:
Cheryl French
Emilio Valequez
r1a u no A. Sa 1 0
Del fina Gargos
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition to Zone Change 84-6.
Receiving no response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:30 p.m.
A brief discussion was held on the location of commercial area; the north-
westerly portion (Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive) falling within the Specific
Plan Area (likewise for the following parcels) remaining as Specific Plan Area;
Specific Plan development process; and amount of acreage allocated to the
particular use.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Zone Change 84-6 with staff recom-
mendation, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Site Plan Review "existing non-conforming use" - \~ilheim Piche - Staff presented
for review plot plan for autorrobile and trailer sales (B.F. Foreign ,ll.uto),
located 286 feet westerly of the intersection of East Lakehsore Drive and Lucerne.
Chairman Steed asked if the City Attorney was informed as to actually what tran-
spires at that particular address, pertaining to the number of vehicles that
are there, trailers, the auto body work and spray painting that is going on.
Staff answered in the affirmative. Also, Chairman Steed stated it is his under-
standing that there is close to 100 cars on the property (40 plus vehicles in
the front portion, somewhere near 50 vehicles in the rear portion in various
state of disrepair). Also motor homes, trailers and so forth on the back portion
of the property.
Staff stated the auto repair and auto sales would have to follow certain guide-
Minutes of Planning Commission
~1ay 15, 1 984
Page 8
SITE PLAN REVIEH IIEXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE" \4ILHEIM PICHE CONTINUED
lines and the spray painting would have to be done indoors, as I believe Mr.
Piche has been informed of and corrected, but the conditions that would be
placed on it, if it was a discretionary project such as a Conditional Use
Permit cannot be applied in this instance because it is a permitted use in
that zoning designation.
\'
Discussion was held on the number of vehicles on the property; proposal
coming before the Commission after the fact; size of property (includes three
parcels); commercial distance from Lakeshore Drive (depth 150-200 fe~t); auto-
mobile and trailer sales area (or an area 203 x 150) if granted anything else
on the property would be illegal. Staff stated that this was correct, but it
doesn't encompass the whole area, it would be limited to the front portion
because of structures existing; what applicant will be allowed to do with the
property, will he be allowed to continue to use the full length for vehicle
storage or merely the commercial 150 foot depth plus the 203 foot width on
Lakeshore. Staff answered in the affirmative and stated that we are not extend-
ing on the plot plan; and the Grandfather Clause allowing him to continue the
operation of a repair shop, auto sales in the front, even though it was expanded,
and that is the reason they can put some conditions on it such as asphalt.
Staff stated the reason we can put conditions on this proposal is for automobile
sa 1 es .
-
Mr. Gordon Burkhart, attorney for the applicant, commented on the following:
Mr. Piche resides on this property with his wife; son and daughter-
in-law also reside on the property. There is also a total of five
[5) single-family residences on the three (3) parcels; some are
rented out. The vehicles, for the most part, are the personal
vehicles of people who reside there. It is not an auto storage
yard - was never intended to be. There are 2-3 cars in disrepair,
but are being renovated and restored, personal property of Mr.
Piche;
-"
RE: BACKGROUND OF STAFF REPORT - Mr. Piche never received official
approval from City Councilor Planning Commission. He went into
business in 1966. The laws that are currently on the books were not
on the books at that time. The laws that we are operating under now
were enacted subsequent to 1970. Mr. Piche started sales in 1966
along with his repair shop;
Mr. Piche erected a sign and did not realize it was illegal because
he was replacing an old sign, and has since complied and received
the required permit;
RE: ANALYSIS OF STAFF REPORT - points out there are approximately
25 cars. Mr. Piche, states the normal number is between 20-22 cars
actually parked on the front portion of this property. These are
the cars for sale, not including those which are in the repair shop,
personal vehicles and the 2-3 miscellaneous vehicles. Mr. Piche
informed him that this is not a particularly heavy traffic area for
those coming to look at automobiles. He sells approximately 3-4
cars per month, has an average of one customer per day, and ap-
proximately 7-8 customers per day for the repair shop. They do
have traffic in the area but it is unrelated to this business;
Mr. Burkhart stated he concurs fully with the City Attorney's com- _
ments that no additional conditions can be placed upon this business,
because it is in fact a non-conforming use.
~1r. Burkhart commented on the exi s ti ng and future ri ght-o f-way for
Lakeshore Drive; paving area with asphaltic or concrete surfacing
and install bumper guards for the sales area; r1unicipal Code,
Section 17.72, there is a non-conforming use in existence.
Mr. Burkhart suggested two courses of action: perferred course of
action is that any conditions be abandoned, because he does not
believe it is authorized by the ordinance. But if the Board does
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1 5. 1 984
Page 9
SITE PLAN REVIEW "EXISTING NON CONFORMING USE" - ~JILHEIM PICHE CONTINUED
--
impose conditions. that the conditions be imposed in a more
reasonable manner. in that when and if. the precise boundary
lines are established for where this road and right-of-way
is going to be. then and only then should he be required to
comply.
Discussion continued on signage; auto sales (in 1979-80 business license stated
no auto sales to be conducted from this location); Section 17.72 of the Munici-
pal Code (meeti ng exi sti ng codes); App1 i cant I s Attorney and City Attllrney to
get together to discuss legal matters; relocate operation out of existing right-
of-way; restoring street to original condition (dirt); and forward to City
Council for determination.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Site Plan for "Existing Non-Conform-
ing Use" with staff recommendations amending condition number 2 to read: ",I\p-
p1icant to relocate present operations out of street right-of-way and restore
street to condition prior to applicant's use as a sales yard. second by Com-
missioner Dominguez.
Approved 5-0
1. Sales area shall be paved with an asphaltic or concrete surfacing and
shall have appropriate bumper guards where needed. Area shall be en-
closed with an ornamental fence. wall or compact evergreen hedge having
a height of not 1 ess than two feet and mai ntai ned at a hei ght of not
more than six feet. Such fence. wall or hedge shall be maintained in
good condi tion.
-
2. APPLICANT TO RELOCATE PRESENT OPERATIONS OUT OF STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY
AND RESTORE STREET TO CONDITION PRIOR TO l-\PPLI CANT I S USE AS A SALES
YARD.
2. Commercial Project 84-4 - John Vosi11a/Diana L. Mastrangelo - Staff presented
proposal to construct a commercial facility for automobile transmission re-
pair on a 501 x 90' lot. located at the easterly corner of the intersection
of Lowell Street and Graham Avenue.
Staff stated a petition has been received from the Lake Elsinore Woman's Club
and one from Lake Elsinore Citizenls Association stating opposition to Com-
mercial Project 84-4.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he had received a
copy of the conditions that have been proposed by staff. Mrs. Katrina Vosi11a
stated they had received a copy of the conditions. Mrs. Vosilla asked why the
recommendation was for denial when they have the parking. will construct a new
building. provide landscaping and they are in the proper zoning. Staff stated
the zoning was proper for the use. but the area. along Graham Avenue. has
development representing office/professional. Staff also stated that the recom-
mendation is not denial. but deny without prejudice, which would allow you to
come back and work with staff making sure that the project site is in conformance
with the General Plan.
Motion by Commissioner Hashburn to deny without prejudice Commercial Project
84-4. second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
At this time. Ms. Mickie Miller spoke in opposition to Commercial Project 84-4.
COMMISSIONER BARNHART ASKED TO BE EXCUSED DUE TO ILLNESS.
3. Single-Family Residence - 18044 West Lakeshore Drive - Robert Green c/o Larry
Prie1ipp - Staff presented proposal for a single-family residence to be located
at 18044 West Lakeshore Drive.
Chairman Steed asked for clarification on access. stating the property runs
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 15, 1 984
Page 10
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 18044 WEST LAKESHORE ORIVE - ROBERT GREEN C/O LARRY PRIELIPP
from Lakeshore to Heald and you are asking for access to come off of Heald, "
\'/hen in fact it fronts Lakeshore. Staff stated the reason for this is' the
15-20% slope.
Discussion was held on deleting condition number 1 and 2; last paragraph on
condition number 8; and installing street lights on condition number 10 being
deleted. ...
Motion by Chairman Steed to approve Single-Family Residence at 18044~Aest Lake-
shore Drive with staff recommendations and deleting condition number 1 and 2;
deleting the following from condition number 10: "Install street lights as ap-
proved by City Engineer", second by Commissioner Vlashburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. ~j~jt/~tt~~~/t~/~~~J~/~*~~~~/~~Ji/.//~~~ft~~/~fj*~w~j/t~/n~t~n~/~~tt~~t~/.
DELETED.
2. ~PpJjt~~t/~~i/j~t~fp~t~t~/~/$/f~~t/~~tfj/w~J~w~j/~J~~t/w~~t~tlj/~J~*~tj~~
~f/pt~p~i~~/f~ji~~nt~/t~/tj~/jnt~/~tj*~w~j/'/ DELETED.
3. Use remainder of yard space for landscaping purposes.
4. Applicant to submit landscaping plan to be approved by Planning Division.
5. Applicant to meet all City Codes and Ordinance governing residential
development on hillsides and within Planned District.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
...
6. On Lakeshore Drive there is an existing 60 feet of right-of-way. City
General Plan Amendment 83-4 reclassified this portion of Lakeshore Drive
from a Major to Modified Secondary (801 right-of-way and 641 curb-to-
curb). Dedicate 10 feet of additional right-of-way along total property
frontage of Lakeshore Drive.
a) On Heald Avenue there is an existing 50 feet of
right-of-way. No additional right-of-way will
be required.
7. Install curb and gutter 32 feet from street centerline on Lakeshore Drive.
Install standard 6 foot residential sidewalk adjacent to curb, and
standard driveway approach.
a) Install curb and gutter 18 feet from street
centerline on Heald Avenue. Install standard
6 foot residential sidewalk ajdacent to curb,
and standard driveway approach.
Staff at this time, would recommend that item 7 be deferred under the
standard lien agreement.
8. Construct asphaltic paving to City Standards from street centerline to
curbline on Lakeshore Drive (Traffic Index = 7.5), and Heald Avenue
(Traffic Index = 6.0). There is existing paving on both Lakeshore Drive
and Heald Avenue. Tests must show that the existing paving is to City
Standards and will support the traffic loads represented by the traffic
index.
-
Staff at this time, would recommend that the paving be deferred along
Lakeshore Drive under the standard lien agreement.
9. Provide City Engineer with grading plan, Certificate of Survey, and soils
report to include soils test for pavement design.
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 1 5, 1 984
Page 11
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 18044 WEST LAKESHORE DRIVE - ROBERT GREEN C/O LARRY PRIELIPP
10.
J~~t~11/~tf~~t/1j8~t~/~~/~ppf~*~~/~j/t~~/tjtj/ZnGjn~~f/. Cooperate
with the City of Lake Elsinore in forming a Lighting and Landscaping
District.
~
11 . P1 ans and speci fi cations for pub1 i c improvements to be prepared by a
Civil Engineer, to include striping and signing as approved by the City
Engineer.
12. There is an existing fire hydrant on the northeast corner of H~a1d
Avenue and Chaney Street. Provide written assurance that the County
Fire Department requirements for fire protection (to include hydrant
locations) have been met.
13. Pay Capital Improvement fees, as follows:
Street
Park
Storm Drain -
Sewer
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of building area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
$ 420.00 per residential unit.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Planner Corcoran stated the Community Development Director has nothing to report,
but he would like the Commission to note that we have new binders for our agendas, arid
it will be each Commissioner's responsibility to turn in the binder to the Planning
Secretary, either after each meeting or the morning after each meeting.
-
tk. Corcoran also stated that on behalf of the community he would like to thank
Chairman Steed for his continued support as Chairman of the Planning Commission. Com-
missioner Washburn stated he concurred with Mr. Corcoran.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - Interested in knowing the status of the new zoning ordinance"
and also whether or not the Planning Commission and/or City Council will have the
opportunity to review this document at various states, or will it just be seen \'Jhen
it is completed. Staff stated that he will be meeting with the consultant next Tues-
day, and wants to clean up the loose ends before Planning Commission reviews it, and
then City Council.
The Mixed Use that was brought up, that requires an ordinance before it is even in-
corporated in the zoning, is this correct? Staff stated no. Hhat could occur is
that a Mixed-use Ordinance can be written and adopted in the whole package of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Commissioner Saathoff asked if they would have something on the new zoning ordinance
in a coupl e of weeks. Sta ff stated perhaps in a month.
Commissioner Dominguez - None
.---
Commissioner Washburn - I would hope that the Planning Commission and Commissioners
would encourage applicants to put their name in for positions that will be coming
available in the Planning Commission, that have some degree of education, interest in
the community, and can do a good job.
Chairman Steed - I understand that Title 25 is going to be re-written, but we do have
Title 25 and we are not in accordance with the law pertaining to the State of Cali-
fornia in regards to Title 25. Temporary trailer parks not to exceed 11 consecutive
days then they must be removed; incidental camping areas (any tract of land where
camping is incidental to the primary use of the land or for agriculture, timber, etc);
one or more camp sites for rent or lease the density usage shall not exceed 25 parties
within a radius of 265 feet. I think we are in error here, because we get far more
usage than that and also, on travel trailer parks this is again out of Title 25.
Dates of occupancy not to exceed 30 days annually, and we have several that are in bad
violations. If you go down and look at some of these so called "travel trailer parks"
they have the owner and/or manager and one custodian which are allowed two trailers on
Minutes of Planning Commission
May 15, 1984
Page 12
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
the site, and you will find many of them with trees, shrubs and skirting'afl the
way around them. We are also in violation of this and could probably be sat down
real hard by the State of California and perhaps lose some funding because we are
not acting according to Title 25. Chairman Steed stated that staff should look
into this and try to bring some of these things into line. Staff stated that it
was his understanding that additional personnel may be hired to handle the Housing
Abatement and Title 25.
~
---
Commissioner Barnhart - Excused due to illness.
~
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Dominguez.
Approved 4-0
~
---
~HNUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
15TH.
DAY
OF
MAY
1984
MINUTE ACTION
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of May 1, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 84-4 - John Vosil1a c/o Diana L. Mastrangelo - Mo{ion by
Commissioner Washburn to deny without prejudice Commercial Project 84-4,
second by Commissioner Dominguez.
Approved 4-0
2. Single-Family Residence - 18044 West Lakeshore Drive - Robert Green c/o Larry
Prie1ipp - Staff presented proposal for a single-family residence to be
located at 18044 West Lakeshore Drive.
A brief discussion was held on the landscaping plan.
Motion by Commissioner Dominguez to approve Single-Family Residence at 18044
West Lakeshore Drive with staff recommendations and sprinkler system to be
provided (not necessarily automatic), second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
1.
All ground support or roof mounted equipment incidental to development
shall be effectively screened from view.
2. Provide landscaping plan to be approved by the Planning Division.
SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO BE PROVIDED (NOT NECESSARILY AUTOMATIC).
3. All items depicted on design elevations shall be as indicated.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 11 :00 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Dominguez, second by Chairman Steed.
Approved 4-'0
Approved
Whit Steed
Chairman
-
Respectfully s~l~ted.
cYrdu A??
Linda Grindstaff
Planning Commission
Secretary
-
--
-
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON THE
5TH.
DAY
OF
JUNE
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Saathoff.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Dominguez, Commissioner Wash-
burn and Commissioner Barnhart. Chairman (seat vacant).
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Culp, Associate Planner Fields
and Assistant Planner Coleman.
Chairman Steed resigned his position with the Planning Commission by letter to
City Council effective May 22, 1984, therefore nominations to fill said position
were held at this time.
Commissioner Barnhart nominated Fred Dominguez as Chairman of the Planning Com-
mission, second by Commissioner Washburn with discussion. Commissioner Saathoff
moved that nominations be closed, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
Commissioner Washburn stated that Mr. Dominguez was most qualified.
Chairman Dominguez opened nominations for Vice-Chairman. Commissioner Saathoff
nominated Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Barnhart. Chairman asked
if there was any discussion. There being no discussion, Commissioner Barnhart
moved that nominations cease, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
MI NUTE ACT! ON
-
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of May 15, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Tentative Tract Map 14639 Revised - Fred Miller - Staff presented proposal to
subdivide 51 .93~ acres into 242 single-family residential lots, located south-
erly of Washington Avenue and northerly of Lincoln Street.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 14639 Revised.
Mr. Robert Vatcher, representing the applicant, gave background report on the
Tentative Tract Map addressing Riverside County Flood Control concerns on
drainage from McVickers Canyon. Mr. Vatcher requested that on conditions 13,
17, 18 and 19 where it indicates approval by both Flood Control and City
Engineer, that you give yourself the latitude, that should there be some dis-
agreement between the City and County Flood Control, that the City retains
flexibility of making their own mind up, and say and/or; also, asked for
clarification on condition number 22.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map
14639 Revised. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed.
Receiving no response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:48 p.m.
A lengthy discussion was held on drainage; ultimate design for McVickers
Canyon (1700 CF:); Focused Environmental Impact Report (pertaining to circula-
tion); conditions 13, 17, 18 and 19 adding the words "and/or"; condition
number 22, whether or not a site has been selected, it was asked if staff was
asking fer dedication of a lot? City Engineer stated whatever size of parcel
to f:.dlita~e.-drilling of a well and installation of facilities, and that this
is something that he would like to work out with the applicant; dedication of
a lot for a fire station and well site being combined on the same lot; and
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 2
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED - FRED MILLER CONTINUED
dedicate future site for well construction on Lot 119. Discussion continued
on size of Lot 119 and moving location of well site to upper boundary, to
Lot 172. Applicant suggested vicinity of Lot 154.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Tentative Tract Map 14639 subject
to Planning and Engineering conditions with a correction on items 13, 17, 18
and 19 verbiage to read "and/or"; condition number 22 amended to read: "Dedi-
cate to provide future water well site construction facil ities in the vicinity
of Lot 154", and the only other restriction would be that the Focused Environ-
mental Impact Report would be re-presented to the Planning Commission for ap-
proval added as condition number 30, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
--
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Acceptance of a Final Focused Environmental Impact Report mitigating
all concerns regarding drainage/hydrology, traffic circulation and
geology.
2. Bonding for drip or sprinkler irrigation system.
3. Recordation of City Council CC & R's.
4. Agreement with the Elementary and High School District to off-set
overcrowding.
5. Provide transit facilities as deemed necessary by Transit System
Chairman.
6. Comply with all requirements of Subdivision Map Act and City Codes.
....
7. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system.
8. Meet all requirements of County Fire Department.
9. Meet all requirements of County Health Department.
10. Dedication of Lot 119 as a fire station site.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
A. NON-DISCRETIONARY CONDITIONS:
11. Pay all applicable capital improvement fund fees.
12. Pay all publ ic safety fees.
13. Easement to provide for storm drain and Lincoln Street channel facilities
as approved by Riverside County Flood Control AND/OR CITY.
14. Grading Plan to be prepared by Registered Civil Engineer and to be ap-
proved by the City Engineer.
15. Dedicate additional street right-of-way as approved by the City Engineer.
16. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer,
designed to the specifications of the City Engineer.
17. Submit drainage improvement plans with complete supporting calculations
to be r.eviewed and approved by Riverside County Flood Control AND/OR"THE
CITY ENGINEER.
....
18. Submit plans for the extension of utilities including storm drain and
storm channel extension off-site as may be required by Riverside County
Floor Control AND/OR the City Engineer.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 3
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED - FRED MILLER CONTINUED
19.
-
B.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Construct street improvements, on-s ite storm drai n channel s to the
satisfaction of the Riverside County Flood Control AND/OR the City
Engineer as they are applicable.
DISCRETIONARY CONDITIONS:
Pay traffic safety mitigation fee in the amount of $ 20,000.00.
Dedicate ground water rights for tract to the City of Lake Elsinore.
Dedicate to provide future water well site construction facilities
IN THE VICINITY OF LOT 154.
Obtain will-serve letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District (E.V.M.W.D.).
Provide fire protection facilities as required by County Fire Depart-
ment.
Pay required school district fees.
Pay required Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (E.V.M.W.D.)
sewer hook-up fees.
Applicant to form Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District.
Applicant to form Road Maintenance Assessment District.
Applicant to provide soil and geology report including street design
recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with
preliminary report.
30. FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WOULD BE RE-PRESENTED TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL.
2. Tentative Tract Map 20041 - Art Nelson c/o Butterfield Surveys, Inc. - Staff
presented proposal to subdivide 11.8: acres into 50 single-family residential
lots, located south of Lakeshore Drive between Machado Street and Terra Cotta
Road.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:23 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 20041.
Mr. Fred Crowe, representing the applicant, questioned conditions 11 .a., stat-
ing he believes this right-of-way exists and was created by an earlier
recorded tract map (for additional 10 foot ingress/egress easement); condi-
tion number 12.c. (8" A.C. dike), and condition number 13, instead of traffic
index of 6.5 for the design of pavement or structural section of the street,
would like to have worded that traffic index as determined by the City Engineer.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map
20041. Mr. Forrest, Brilty asked for clarification of boundaries and annexa-
tion proceedings. Mr. Brilty was informed that this proposal would join the
back of his property, and his property would not be within the annexation proposal.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map
20041. Mr. Art Nelson spoke in favor of Tentative Tract Map 20041 and stated
that he would be happy to answer any questions.
Chairman asked rif anyone else wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map
20041. Recei~ing no response, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no
response, Chalrman closed the public hearing at 8:32 p.m.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 4
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20041 - ART NELSON C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. OONTlNUED
Discussion was held on condition number ll.a.(pertaining to easement);
condition number 13 (traffic index of 6.5 would it be a problem to staff
to say to meet with City Engineer, rather than spelling out 6.5? Staff
stated that this would not be a problem.); condition number 12.c. (8" A.C.
dike along southeasterly side of Orange Street) being deleted; and includ-
ing striping on Lakeshore Drive for Class II Bicycle Lane being added as a
condition. ....,
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Tentative Tract Map 20041 with
staff recommendations, amending condition number ll.a. to read: "Dedicate
right-of-way for Orange Street to provide a 30 foot half-street right-of-
way. Provide adequate street right-of-way as determined by City Engineer;
condition number 12.c. deleted; amend condition number 13 by deleting
"traffic index of 6.5" and adding" as determined by City Engineer"; and
adding condition number 25, which will read: "Striping for the intersection
only at Lakeshore Drive for Class II Bicycle Lane" t second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. A finding of conformity to the existing General Plan.
4. Bonding for drip or sprinkler irrigation system. All planting areas
shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
5. Meet requirements of Ordinance 572.
6. Recordation of City Council CC & R's
7. Agreement with the Elementary and High School District to off-set
overcrowdi ng.
....,
8. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and City Codes.
9. Construction and Sales Office Trailers utilized during the construction
phase of this project shall be approved by the Planning Division.
10. Condition upon approval of Annexation by LAFCO and City of Lake Elsinore.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
11. RIGHT-OF-WAY:
a) Dedicate right-of-way for Orange Street to provide a 30 foot
one-half street right-of-way. Provide adequate street right-
of-way as determined by City Engineer.
b) Dedicate 60 feet of right-of-way for all interior streets
'within the subdivision.
c) Dedicate standard corner cutbacks at curb intersections of
interior streets and Orange Street, and at Orange Street and
Lakeshore Dri ve.
....,
12. CURB AND GUTTER:
a) Curb and gutter and 6-foot residential sidewal k adjacent to
curb at 20 feet from street centerline on Orange Street.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 5
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20041 - ART NElSON C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. CONTINUED
-
b) Curb and gutter and 6-foot residential sidewalk adjacent to
curb at 20 feet from centerline on all interior streets.
Construct standard driveways per City standards and specifica-
ti ons .
c) InttjJJ/t~~p~tjti/~Y//At~t/~j~~/j1~nn/t~~t~~~tt~t1i/tj~~/~f/
0fjnn~/~tt~~t/t~/t~n*~i/t~tfjt~/t~nf~ff/t~/lj~~t~~t~/~f~*~t
DELETED.
13. Construct asphalt paving to City standards and speci fications from
street centerline to curb line on Orange Street and all interior
streets. AS DETERMINED BY CITY ENGINEER.
14. Provide soils and geology report including street design. Provide
final soils report showing compliance with preliminary report and
grade certification for compliance with approved grading plan to be
submitted to City Engineer for approval.
15. FLOOD CONTROL:
a) Comply with requirements of Flood Control report dated May 8,
1984. The City Engineer shall judge as to interpretation and
appl ication of flood control recommendations.
b) Provide detailed hydrology and hydraulics studies and show
how requirements of the Flood Control report can be complied
with.
-
c) Pay an off-site drainage impact mitigation fee of $ 350.00 per
lot for the lakeshore Drive (Four Corners) storm drain extension.
16. SEWER:
Provide City with will-serve letter guaranteeing sewer service
availability from the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
17. Provide City with will-serve letter guaranteeing water service
availability from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water.
18. LIGHTING:
a) Install street lights as approved by the City Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a lighting and Landscaping
District.
19. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS:
-
Plans and specifications for off-site public improvements to be
prepared by a Civil Engineer to include street signing and striping.
20. Pay Capital Improvement fees, as follows:
Streets
Parks
Storm Drains -
Sewer-
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of building area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
$ 420.00 per residential unit.
21. Pay Public pafety fees, as follows:
Police $ 250.00
Fi,.~ $ 1 50 .00
tOTAL $ 400.00 per residential unit
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 6
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20041 - ART NELSON C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. CONTINUED
22. Pay Traffic Mitigation fee of $ 225.00 per residential unit for
the lakeshore Drive/Machado Street intersection.
23. Comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and local
land Division Ordinances for filing of final map, bonding for sub-
division and subdivision agreement for construction of this project
as approved by the City Engineer.
24. Provide centerline ties for street monumetitation prior to final
acceptance of public improvements and release of all bonds.
-
25. STRIPING FOR THE INTERSECTION ONLY AT lAKESHORE DRIVE FOR CLASS II
BICYCLE lANE.
3. Zone Change 84-7 - Art Nel son c/o Butterfi el d Surveys, Inc. - Staff presented
proposa 1 for a zone change from County des i gnation 0 f C-P (Res tri cted Com-
mercial) to City zoning designation of R-l (Single-Family Residence), to pro-
vide pre-annexation zone change for 11 .8~ acres (proposed Annexation Number
37), located south of lakeshore Drive between Machado Street and Terra Cotta
Road.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:43 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Zone Change 84-7.
Mr. Fred Crowe, representing applicant, spoke in favor of subject Zone Change.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor of Zone
Change 84-7. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed.
Receiving no response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:45 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Zone Change 84-7, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
-
4. Tentative Parcel Map 20208 - Art Nelson c/o Butterfield Surveys, Inc. - Staff
presented proposal to subdivide 2.2~ acres into two (2) parcels, located at
31701 Riverside Drive.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:47 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 20208.
Mr. Fred Crowe, representing applicant, questioned condition number 15, re-
questing that the words" under the sidewalk" be deleted.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor of Tentative
Parcel Map 20208. Receiving no response, Chairman asked for those opposed.
Receiving no response, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:50 p.m.
Discussion was held on condition number 13 (pertaining to drainage over side-
walk, if it would be feasible to drain it out the ingress/egress through a
v-trough rather than over the sidewalk); traffic index of 8.5 changed to as
determined by the City Engineer; and providing for wheelchair ramps. Staff
stated that this should be addressed at the commercial process (site plan stage).....
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Tentative Parcel Map 20208 with staff
recommendations. amending condition number 13, "traffic index of 8.5" to be
changed to "as determined by City Engineer"; condition number 15, deleting the
wods "under the sidewalk", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All conditions on Commercial Project 84-7, shall apply to Tentative
Parcel Map 20208.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 7
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20208 - ART NELSON C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. CONTINUED
2. Provide 30 foot wide driveway access off State Highway 74.
3. Provide Class II Bicycle Lane on State Highway 74.
4. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
5. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
6. Reciprocal parking agreement for the entire project.
7. Meet requirements of County Fire Department.
8. Meet requirements of County Health Department.
9. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
-
10. Riverside Drive (State Highway 74):
a) Dedicate 20 feet of right-of-way along Riverside Drive frontage.
b) Existing right-of-way is 60 feet.
c) State wants 100 feet of right-of-way. General Plan calls for
100 feet of right-of-way.
11. Install curb and gutter 38 feet from street centerline to Cal-Trans
standards and specifications along Riverside Drive. Existing curb
and gutter does not conform to the General Plan nor State requirements.
(Defer and require as a condition of the building permit).
12. Construct 8 foot wide sidewalk on Riverside Drive. Construct two (2)
30 foot driveway approaches to City standards. Sidewalk and driveways
exist at this time, but do not conform to required standards. (Defer
an,d requi re as a condition of the buil di ng permit).
13. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from centerline to curbline
on Riverside Drive to carry traffic wheel loads represented by a
Traffic Index TO BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. Tests must show
that existing paving is to City standards and will support the required
traffic loads. (Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
-
14. Provide City Engineer with Soils Report to include street design.
(Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
15. Drainage for subject project must be directed to Riverside Drive, and
conveyed in an acceptable manner ~~~~t/t~~/U~~'/I_l'/. as approved by the
City Engineer. Pay equitable drainage impact mitigation fee in the
amount of $10,000. (Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
16. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer. There are
existing power poles along the property frontage on which street light
luminaires might be mounted if approved by the City Engineer. (Defer
and require as a condition of building permit).
17. Plans for off-site work shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer. (Defer
and requirQ as a condition of building permit).
18. Existi~g sewer facilities are located in Riverside Drive. Applicant to
conform to City standards and speci fications for connection to City
sewer tystem and pay sewer connection fees. (Defer and require as a
condition of the building permit imposed by the City and/or Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District (E.V.M.W.D.). Provide cleanout at pro-
perty line.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 8
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20208 - ART NELSON C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. CONTINUED
19. Provide to City a water availability letter from Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District (E.V.M.W.D.). Dedicate underground water
rights to City or its assignee.
20. Provide written assurance the County Fire Department requirements
have been complied with to include fire hydrant locations. (Defer
and require as a condition of building permit).
21 . Pay Capital Improvement fees, as fo 11 ows :'
Street $ .03 per square foot of lot area.
Storm Drains - $ .02 per square foot of lot area.
Park $ .10 per square foot of lot area.
Sewer $ 420.00 for twenty fixture units.
(DEFER AND REQUIRE AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERMIT).
-
22. Obtain encroachment permit from Cal-Trans. (Defer and require as a
condition of building permit).
23. Provide traffic signs and street striping as approved by Cal-Trans
and City Engineer. (Defer and require as a condition of building
permit).
24. Pay $ 3,828.00 Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for traffic signalization.
(Defer and require as a condition of building permit).
25. Pay Public Safety Mitigation fee, as follows:
Police $ .15 per square foot of gross floor area.
Fire $ .15 per square foot of gross floor area.
(DEFER AND REQUIRE AS A CONDITION OF BUILDING PERMIT).
-
26. Agree to participate in a Lighting and Landscaping District.
5. Conditional Exception Permit 84-1 - Chapin-Sumner and Associates - Staff pre-
sented proposal to construct a mi ni -warehouse faci 1 ity and caretaker's
residence as Phase I and a commercial building with a parking lot as Phase
II, located northwesterly of Campbell Street and Mission Trail.
Staff informed the Commission of a letter received from Mr. David Kruger
(adjacent property owner) on June 4, 1984 stating opposition to Conditional
Exception Permit 84-1 .
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:56 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Conditional Exception Permit 84-1.
Mr. David Sumner of Chapin-Sumner and Associates, representing Mr. Lester Hill
(the property owner) spoke in favor of proposal and stated having looked at
all the zoning C-l, C-2 and C-P, similar compatible types of business (house-
hold goods storage, storage garages, frozen food lockers and mortuaries) are
listed. Mr. Sumner stated they would suggest that since these seem to be a
compatible type of business, that the Commission consider them under the sub-
mission given you. Mr. Sumner also addressed the General Plan Land Use Designa- ..-
tion.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor of Conditional
Exceptfon Permit 84-1.
Ms. Joann Chapin of Chapin-Sumner and Associates, engineer for the project,
spokp in fa.,.r and stated that after discussion with staff regarding what type
of use they could use on the property, the zoning and what process they would
have to go through in order to put a mini-storage on the property, it was
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 9
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION PERMIT 84-1 - CHAPIN-SUMNER AND ASSOCIATES CONTINUED
-
established, at that time, that under the General Commercial designation
there was a possibility of permitting goods and other types of storage
with a Conditional Exception Permit.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor of
Conditional Exception Permit 84-1. Receiving no response, Chairman asked
for those opposed.
Mrs. David Kruger spoke in opposition to Conditional Exception Permit 84-1,
stating when they purchased the property it was with the understanding that
this would be used for commercial buildings (stores), and there were many
restrictions imposed. Does not feel this would be in the best interest of
property owners within that area, to have a mini-storage in a shopping center.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in opposition to
Conditional Exception Permit 84-1. Receiving no response, Chairman closed
the public hearing at 9:01 p.m.
Discussion was held on previous CC & R1s placed on property; location and
use of property.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to deny Conditional Exception Permit 84-1,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Commissioner Barnhart asked to deny without prejudice, so the applicant
could come back with something else on the same property. Commissioner
Barnhart was informed that this would be for that particular use, and it
was not for site plan.
Chairman stated that we have a motion and a second and asked for the vote.
Approved 3-1 Commissioner Barnhart voting no
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Request to Annex - Art Nelson c/o Butterfield Surveys, Inc. - Staff presented
proposal to annex approximately 11 .8! acres (Annexation No. 37) into the City
of lake Elsinore, located south of lakeshore Drive between Machado Street and
Terra Cotta Road. A brief discussion was held on location; creation of islands
of uni ncorporated territory CCommissioner Washburn asked if the City has the
right after it becomes an island, to go ahead and annex. Staff stated that
LAFCO has recommended that we go ahead and annex territories that become islands
or pockets of unincorporated territory, but we would need a certain percentage
of registered voters agreeing to annex).
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Request to Annex, second by Com-
missioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
2. Single-Family Residence - 16912 Ulmer Street - Danny Celeketic - Staff pre-
sented proposal to construct a single-family residence at 16912 Ulmer Street.
-- Staff stated proposal meets all Planning Division requirements.
Chairman asked the applicant if he had received a copy of the conditions. Mr.
Celeketic answered in the affirmative, and questioned condition number 7 re-
quirement of grading plan. Mr. Celeketic was informed that this was required
by ordi nance.
Motion by Commi~sioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 16912
Ulmer Street with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DrVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items on plot plan and elevations shall be provided as indicated
uniess otherwise modified by Design Review Board's conditions.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 10
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16912 ULMER STREET - DANNY CELEKETIC CONTINUED
2. Applicant to meet all required setbacks.
3. Provide written clearance from County Health Department for septic
system.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
-
4. Right-of-way:
a) A 60 foot right-of-way exists on Gunnerson Street. No
additional right-of-way will be required for Gunnerson
Street.
b) A 40 foot right-of-way exists on Ulmer Street. No
additional right-of-way will be required on Ulmer Street.
5. Curb, gutter and sidewalk:
a) Install curb and gutter 20 feet from street centerline
on Gunnerson Street. Install 6 foot wide sidewalk
adjacent to curb1ine. Install residential driveway
approach per City standards and specifications.
b) Install curb and gutter 18 feet from street centerline
on Ulmer Street. Install residential driveway approach
per City standards and specifications. No sidewalk is
required on Ulmer Street.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL OF ITEM 5 (a) AND 5 (b) BY STANDARD LIEN
AGREEMENT RECORDED AGAINST PROPERTY.
6. Paving:
a) Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to curb-
line for both Gunnerson Street and Ulmer Street. (Traffic
Index = 6.0).
STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL OF ITEM 6(a) BY STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT
RECORDED AGAINST PROPERTY.
-
7. Submit plot planes), showing access and building locations, grading
plan, certificate of survey, and soils report (to include street
design) to the City Engineer for approval.
8. Plans and specifications for off-site public improvements shall be
prepared by a Civil Engineer. (STAFF RECOMMENDS DEFERRAL OF ITEM 8
BY STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT RECORDED AGAINST PROPERTY).
9. Comply with requirements of the City, Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District, County Health Department, and Regional Water Quality
Control Board for sewer service.
10. Provide will-serve letter guaranteeing water service availability from
servi ng agency.
11. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department requirements
(to include fire protection and fire hydrant locations) have been
compl i ed with.
...."
12. Pay Capital Improvement fees, as follows:
Street
Storm Dr'a in
Park
SeYler
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of lot area.
$ 420.00 per residential unit.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 11
3. Commercial Project 84-5 - The Centennial Group, Inc. - Staff presented proposal
to construct banking facility with office spaces (two-story commercial building
consisting of a bank, retail shops and second floor offices), located within
Stater Brothers Shopping Center on Mission Trail.
C~airman asked if the applicant had received a copy of the conditions. A
representative from the Centennial Group answered in the affirmative, and
stated he had a question on condition number 11, pertaining to street light-
ing on Mission Trail and Casino Drive, stating they do not believe that Casino
Drive is app1 icab1 e to this project,and they feel that portion of the condi-
tion should be deleted.
-
Discussion was held on condition number 11, pertaining to Casino Drive; and
adding provide Class II Bicycle Lane.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Commercial Project 84-5 with staff
recommendations, deleting the words lIand Casino Drivell from condition number
11; and adding condition number 19 which will read: IIProvide Class II Bicycle
Lane along Mission Trailll, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Appro ved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
l.
2.
3.
- 4.
5.
6.
Finding of no significant impact.
Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Provide designated employee parking areas.
All signs to be approved by Planning Division.
Provide written clearance and approval from County Health Department
and California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Project shall be constructed according to approved site plan and
elevations. Any changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review
Board.
7. After issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, Conditional Use Permit
82-12 (for temporary trailer) will be null and void.
8. Applicant to post Performance Bond of $ 3,000.00 for implementation of
approved Landscaping Plan.
ENClINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
9. Repair the center 14-foot width of existing paving, which is deteriorat-
ing, as required by the City Engineer. Completely reconstruct this 14-
foot width if test indicate this is needed in the opinion of the City
Engineer. Sand seal the remainder of the existing paving from curbline
to street centerline. This requirement to be imposed as condition of
building permit issuance.
10. Before building permit issuance, submit soils and geology report which
includes street design.
11. Provide street lighting on Mission Trail ~n~/~~~jn~/~fj;~, at time of
building permit issuance, conforming to standards approved by the City
Council.
12. Agree to participate in a Lighting and Landscaping District.
13. Agree to participate in the cost of Regional Collection and Treatment
of Sewage. Comply with the City of Lake Elsinore, County of Riverside
Health Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board written re-
quirements on sewage disposal, at time of building permit issuance.
14. Provide letter from E.V.M.W.D. for water service availability and comply
with the County Fire Department's written requirements for fire pro-
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Pa ge 12
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-5 - THE CENTENNIAL GROUP, INC. CONTINUED
tection. Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee.
15. Pay Capital Improvement fees, as follows:
Sewer
Street
Park
Storm Drain -
$ 420.00 for twenty fixture units.
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .01 per square foot of lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
--
16. Pay storm drain run-off mitigation fee of $ 8,000.00.
17. Install dry sewer lateral for connection to future sewer in street.
18. Install street trees along Mission Trail of a type and at a location
approved by the City.
19. PROVIDE CLASS II BICYCLE LANE ALONG MISSION TRAIL.
Engineering comments on Commercial Project 84-5: Discretionary conditions
which should be applied as a condition of Parcel Map 19261 rather than this
Commercial Project 84-5:
20. Pay Traffic Signal Mitigation fee of $ 1,790.75 as imposed by Resolution
No. 83-19.
21 . Pay Pub 1 i c Sa fety fees:
Po 1 ice
Fire
$
$
.15 per square foot of gross floor area.
.15 per square foot of gross floor area.
I
-
4. Commercial Project 84-6 - Michael Maltby - Staff presented proposal to con-
struct a Preschool/Day Care Center, located at the northwest intersection
of Riverside Drive and Richard Street.
Discussion was he1 d on access on Richard Street; type of fencing; protecting
all of the concerns from October 11, 1983 (Special Permit 83-1 for Preschoo1/
Day Care Center), with the 13 conditions. Staff stated that these would auto-
matically be incorporated; and condition number 13 (pertaining to the location
of the no parking signs).
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 84-6 with staff
recommendations, and adding condition number 14 which will read: "the peri-
meter property line along Riverside Drive to have an ornamental 6 foot block
wall (wrought iron combination) fence for children's protection", second by
Commiss ioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Finding of no significant impact.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. All items depicted on plot plan, landscape plan and elevations shall be
provided as indicated on the plot plan, unless otherwise modified by
the Planning Commission or Design Review Board's conditions.
4. All operations shall be conducted within the enclosed property boundaries.
5. All signs shall conform to the City's Sign Ordinance and shall be issued
prior to being erected.
6. Applicant to pave all driveway and parking areas.
7. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
....,
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 13
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-6 - MICHAEL MALTBY CONTINUED
8. Provide Class II Bicycle Lane.
-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
9. Meet all the conditions previously placed on Special Permit 83-1.
This includes the deferral of off-site improvements along Riverside
Drive and Richard Street.
10. Install ornamental street light.
11. Dedicate to provide standard corner cutback at Riverside Drive and
Richard Street.
12. Applicant to maintain proper vehicular access on Richard Street on
a continuing basis.
13. Applicant to pay for installation of two (2) NO PARKING signs prior
to occupancy.
14. THE PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE ALONG RIVERSIDE DRIVE TO HAVE AN ORNAMENTAL
6 FOOT BLOCK WALL (WROUGHT IRON COMBINATION FENCE) FOR CHILDREN'S
PROTECTION.
5. Commercial Project 84-7 - Art Nelson - Staff presented proposal to construct
a two-story building in order to complete two phase shopping center (reference
commercial remodel of Aloha Pools as first phase), located approximately
1,200 feet southwesterly of the intersection of Joy Street and Riverside Drive.
Staff informed the Commission that after meeting with the applicant's representa-
tive regarding condition number 1, we have alleviated those concerns, there-
fore request that condition number 1 be deleted.
Mr. Fred Crowe, representing the applicant, stated that this is in conjunction
with the Parcel Map on Riverside Drive heard earlier, and it has basically the
same conditions, condition number 18 speaks to the drainage under the sidewalk
versus over the sidewalk; condition number 16 regarding traffic index, would
request that these conditions coincide with the conditions on the Parcel Map.
Commissioner Saathoff asked if there were any concerns on condition number 2.
Mr. Crowe stated that this will not be a problem, and the 30 foot driveway
would be better.
A brief discussion was held on condition number 15 (8 foot wide sidewalk on
Riverside Drive); and wheelchair ramps.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Commercial Project 84-7 with staff
recommendations, and deleting condition number 1; on condition number 16 delete
the words "Traffic Index 8.5" and insert the words lito be determined by City
Engineer"; on condition number 18 delete the words "under the sidewa1k", second
by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1 . Pt~pj~~/f~~f/l~l/~~~jtJ~n~l/p~t~jna/tp~t~t/t~/~~~t/p~t~jna/f~~~Jf~~~ntt~
t~~p_tt/t~t/ip~t~t/lfl/l/~/l~t DELETED.
2. Provide 3V foot wide driveway access off State Highway 74.
3. Provide Class II Bicycle Lane on State Highway 74.
4. ?rovid~ two (2) additional handicapped parking spaces oriented towards
second phase building.
5. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
6. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 14
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-7 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
7. All facilities shall be constructed as approved on site plan.
8. Recordation of City Council CC & R's, prior to transfer of plans
to the City's Building Division.
9. Reciprocal parking agreement for the entire project to be implemented
with the CC & R's.
-
10. Meet requirements of County Fire Department.
11. Meet requirements of County Health Department.
12. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
13. Riverside Drive (State Highway 74):
a) Dedicate 20 feet of right-of-way along Riverside Drive frontage.
b) Existing right-of-way is 60 feet.
c) State wants 100 feet of right-of-way. General Plan calls for
100 feet 0 f ri gh t-o f-way .
14. Install curb and gutter 38 feet from street centerline to Ca1-Trans
standards and specifications along Riverside Drive. Existing curb
and gutter does not conform to the General Plan nor State requirements.
15. Construct 8-foot wide sidewalk on Riverside Drive. Construct two (2)
30 foot driveway approaches' to City standards. Sidewalk and three (3)
driveways exists at this time, but do not conform to required standards.
,
-
16. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from centerline to curb1ine
on Riverside Drive TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY ENGINEER. Some paving
exists on Riverside Drive. Tests must show that existing paving is to
City standards and will support the traffic index.
17. Provide City Engineer with Soils Report to include street design.
18. Drainage for subject project must be directed to Riverside Drive, and
conveyed in an acceptable manner ~n~~tlt~~/tj~~w~l~ as approved by the
City Engineer. Pay equitable drainage mitigation impact fee in the
amount of $ 5,000.00.
19. Provide street lighting. There are existing power poles along the pro-
perty frontage on which street lights could be mounted.
20. Plans for off-site work shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer.
21. Existing sewer facilities are located in Riverside Drive. Applicant to
conform to City standards and specifications for connection to City
sewer system and pay sewer connection fees.
22. Provide to City a water availability letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District (E.V.M.W.D.)
-
23. Provide written assurance the County Fire Department requirements have
been comp~ied with to include fire hydrant locations.
24.
Pay Capital Improvement
Streets $
S~rm Drains - $
Park $
Sewer $
fees, as fo 11 ows :
.03 per square foot of lot area.
.02 per square foot of lot area.
.10 per square foot of lot area.
420.00 for first twenty fixture units.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 15
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-7 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
--
25. Obtain Encroachment Permit from Ca1-Trans.
26. Provide traffic signs and street striping as approved by Ca1-Trans
and City Engineer.
27. Provide for landscaping in Phase I.
6. Clarification of Ambiguity - Staff stated that in reviewing sections of
Lake Elsinore's Municipal Code, Title 17, pertaining to zoning it is often
cumbersome to discern the appropriate zoning designations of specific uses.
Such is the case before us this evening.
Currently, there exists a snack bar approximately 210 feet northwesterly of
the intersection of Riverside Drive and Lakeshore Drive. Subject structure
could be deemed as a permanent facility if it was anchored to a foundation
according to the Building Department. Surrounding land uses indicate similar
types of fast food operations. With this in mind, and with reference to
Limited Commercial District (C-1) .Permitted Uses - Section 17.44.0~0, of
Lake Elsinore's Municipal Code, I respectfully request guidance from this
honorable body on this matter.
Staff informed the Commission of a written complaint received on said opera-
tion. Also, presented a copy of the business license to the Commission.
Staff stated that the business license, as a condition of approval, was condi-
tioned upon approval and/or clarification of Planning Commission. Staff then
presented photographs of subject site.
-
Commissioner Saathoff stated that this was a new commercial structure and it
should be presented to the Planning Commission like any commercial project.
There should be plans and drawings which should go through as a business item
to Planning Commission and Design Review Board as any other commercial project.
-
Staff stated they were asking for guidance on how the Commission interprets.
this, stating they could interpret it as a commerical project, where it would
have to go through the commercial process, but that would be deeming it as a
permitted use, and it would just be for site plan approval. Also, staff stated
that in reviewing subject matter, there are three avenues they see that can be
taken: perceive as a permitted use and interpret as a commercial use and go
through the process; require a Conditional Use Permit for subject structure
and to deny and do not consider as,a permitted use.
Commissioner Washburn stated the business license submitted (dated May 22, 1984)
the condition of approvals tates II condition upon approval and/or c1 ari fi cation
of Planning Commission". The sequence would be that he received this, went
ahead and put the installation up and started operating. There were some
complaints brought forward and clarification was not given by this body.
Staff stated this was put down as clarification for the next possible Planning
Commission meeting, which was June 5th.
Commissioner Washburn stated his interpretation is that it is a temporary
facility used for the demonstration of openings and for special events, and
views this as a special event type of retail business for the general public.
Does not view this as a permanent type of use and should not be taken as such.
Commissioner Barnhart stated she sees this as a permitted use, we have several
fast food practically on every corner, but agrees with Commissioner Washburn
that this looks like a temporary moveable type operation, and would like to
see the applicant come back as a commercial use.
Commissioner Dominguez stated that he did not like the fact that the applicant
was operating. and then coming before the Commission after the fact, and the
applicant should have to go through the regular process, but agrees that the
use is in conformance with the C-1 Zoning District.
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5, 1984
Page 16
CLARIFICATION OF AMBIGUITY CONTINUED
Commissioner Saathoff stated that he feels it is a compatible use to the
area as such, and it should come to the Planning Commission and Design Review
Board as a commercial project, submitting site plans and drawings.
It was asked if this wou1 d go before the City Council by Commissioner Washburn.
Staff stated that it would not. Commissioner Saathoff and staff stated that
if the project was denied, the applicant would have the right to appeal to ....,
City Council.
Commissioner Washburn stated that the use is fine, but the structure is not.
Also, should reimburse the business license and amortize its non-use and
applicant being able to utilize the trailer for special events, if desired.
(Applicant could get a one day permit or a permit for up to three days ac-
cordi ng to s ta ff) . .
Commissioner Saathoff stated the business license should not have been issued
under the circumstances and obviously, something needs to be done by ordinance
or something to eliminate this type of thing from happening.
The applicant stated that he has gone to quite a10t of expense putting this
installation in and followed the guideline to the best of his ability.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to accept the installation (hot dog stand) as
a permitted use in that area, that if the applicant wishes to continue the
operation, he should go through the commercial project process, and if he does
not wish to proceed with the commercial project process then he would be en-
titled to a total refund of his business license fee, second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 4-0
Applicant asked if he could continue his operation as normal? Chairman stated
that they did not place a time limit on this. Commissioner Washburn stated
that he should submit immediately, if you are going to do that. Commissioner
Washburn also stated that he fel t the appl icant woul d have a prob1 em, bel ieves
that Code Enforcement, probably after the consensus of tonights meeting, will
close you down.
-"
Commissioner Saathoff informed the applicant that if he does submit this as a
corilmercial project, there will be fees, and the building (trailer) probably will
not be acceptable.
Staff stated that this business license was issued after the expenses were
incurred, it was not issued prior to those expenses, and we were hoping to work
out something in the interim period. This is why we asked for the clarification
of ambiguity, the expenses were there, prior to the issuance of a business
license and we were looking to' alleviate those expenses in that interim.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that staff ask the City Manager
that this item be a walk-on item, if the applicant so desires, for the June 12,
1984 City Council meeting.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
City Planner Corcoran stated the Community Development Director had nothing to report,
but he would like to introduce the new Assistant Planner Mark Coleman. i
-
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Washburn - Would like to have the City Engineer direct the paint squad
to re-stripe the crosswalks at Graham and Main; Heald and Main; Sumner and Main;
Spring and Graham;' and, Riverside Drive and Lakeshore. City Engineer stated that
Heald and Main was being done.
Would like direction from staff, would they perfer that I wait to see if we are
still around at the joint study session to bring up how important it is to have the
Minutes of Planning Commission
June 5,1984
Page 17
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONTINUED
hydrology master plan evaluated by our staff, and recommended for County's approval,
or would you perfer that I ask you to tell them that I think it is important and
we had better look at it. Staff stated that he would perfer that this be brought
up at the joint study session.
-
Comrni ss io ner Barnhart - None
Cha i rman Dominguez - Graham and Scri vener, we approved a project there and the
developer came in and took out all of the improvements. He was directed by Council
about 9-10 months ago to put the improvements back, and nothing has happened.
Would like to find out the status on the project at Mohr and Lakeshore Drive. City
Engineer stated that this was a phased project, presently the first phase has been
constructed. Chairman stated that they should have at least cleaned up the area.
Chairman asked that this be looked into.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
-
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
5TH.
DAY
OF
JUNE
1984
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of May 15, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
-
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 16912 Ulmer Street - Danny Celeketic - Staff pre-
sented proposal to construct a single-family residence at 16912 Ulmer Street.
Commissioner Washburn asked if the applicant had received approval from the
County Health Department on his septic system? Staff answered in the negative.
Commissioner Washburn stated that staff should recommend to everyone that comes
in, in that area to make sure they receive their percolation approval first.
A brief discussion was held on the architectural design.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence at 16912
Ulmer Street with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant to provide street trees at 30 foot intervals along frontage
of Ulmer Street.
2.
All ground support and roof mounted equipment shall be architecturally
screened from public view.
I
'-'
3. Applicant to install permanent sprinkler system.
4. All items depicted on the elevations shall be provided as indicated
unless otherwise modified by the Deisgn Review Board's conditions.
5. All areas not designated for buildings, parking, patios, and walkways
shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall be approved by Planning Division.
2. Commercial Remodel - 113 North Main Street - Mel and Ellen Todd - Staff pre-
sented proposal to remodel the existing frontage at 113 North Main Street,
which would consist of enlargement of front window from 4 feet to 5 feet 11
inches, and the incorporation of a new front door.
A brief discussion was held on the enlargement of the window and type of door.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Commercial Remodel at 113 North
Main Street with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
1. All items shall be constructed as indicated.
2. All signs must be approved by Planning Division.
-
3. Commercial Project 84-5 - The Centennial Group, Inc. - Staff presented proposal
to construct banking facility with office spaces (two-story commercial building
consisting of a bank, retail shops and second floor offices), located within
Stater Brothers Shopping Center.
A brief discussion was held on previous CC & R's placed on site, pertaining
to interior planting; reciprocal parking; signage and elevation.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 84-5 with staff
recommendations, and adding condition number 10 which will read: "Provide
Minutes of Design Review Board
June 5, 1984
Page 2
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-5 - THE CENTENNIAL GROUP, INC. CONTINUED
wheelchair access ramps to sidewalk", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
--
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
6.
7.
8.
- 9.
10.
1. Project shall be constructed according to approved site plan and
elevations. Any changes will require resubmittal to the Design
Review Board.
2. All signs shall be approved by the Planning Division.
3. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler
systems.
4. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six
(6) inch high concrete curb.
5. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the
development shall be architecturally screened so that they are not
visible from neighboring property or public streets.
Provide Class II Bicycle Lane along Mission Trail.
Provide 6 foot block wall along westerly property line.
Provide a flag pole.
All trash areas and storage shall be screened and approved by the
Planning Division.
PROVIDE WHEELCHAIR ACCESS RAMPS TO SIDEWALK.
4. Commercial Project 84-6 - Michael Maltby - Staff presented proposal to con-
struct a Preschool/Day Care Center, located at the northwest intersection
of Riverside Drive and Richard Street.
A brief discussion was held on condition number 5, pertaining to block wall. '
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Commercial Project 84-6 with staff
recommendations, and amending condition number 5 to read: lithe perimeter pro-
perty line along Riverside Drive to have an ornamental 6 foot block wall
[wrought iron combination fence) for children's protection", second by Com-
missioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans. Any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
--
2.
All trash areas and storage shall be screened and approved by the
Planning Division.
3. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they lare not visible
from the neighboring property or public streets.
4. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six (6)
inch high concrete curb. All planting areas shall have permanent and
automatic sprinkler systems.
5. THE PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE ALONG RIVERSIDE DRIVE TO HAVE AN ORNAMENTAL
6 FOOT BLOCK WALL (~ROUGHT IRON COMBINATION FENCE) FOR CHILDREN'S
PROTECTION.
6. Implementation of Landscaping plan to commence within 30 days after
Minutes of Design Review Board
June 5, 1984
Page 3
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-6 - MICHAEL MALTBY CONTINUED
issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
7. All frontage area between sidewalk and proposed wall shall be land-
scaped and approved by Planning Division.
5. Commercial Project 84-7 - Art Nelson - Staff presented proposal to construct _
a two-story building in order to complete two phase shopping center (reference
commercial remodel of Aloha Pools as first phase), located approximately 1,200
square feet southwesterly of the intersection of Joy Street and Riverside Drive.
Chai rman asked the app1 i cant if he had recei ved a copy of the conditions. Mr.
Nelson answered in the affirmative. A brief discussion was held on color
scheme and condition number 8.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 84-7 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All signs shall be approved by Planning Division.
2. All roof mounted and ground support equipment incidental to develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened from public view.
3. All items depicted on Plot Plan/Landscape Plan and Elevations shall
be provided as indicated unless, otherwsie modified by the Design
Review Board's conditions.
4.
Provide enclosed trash areas.
..",
5. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler
systems.
6. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six
(6) inch high concrete curb.
7. Provide two (2) additional handicapped parking spaces oriented
towards second phase building.
8. Provide five foot (5') wide landscaping planter along frontage of
Riverside Drive.
9. Incorporate raised planter for landscaping with seating.
10. Provide landscaping plan to be approved by the Planning Division.
11. Provide lighting plan to be approved by the Planning Division.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
10:30 P.M. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
y~~o
~d~
Chairman
-
Respectfully su
~
;;/
Linda Gri nds ta ff
Planning Commission
Secretary
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 19TH
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
JUNE
1984
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Washburn.
-
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Washburn, Commissioner Barnhart
and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Culp, Associate Planner Fields,
and Assistant Planner Coleman.
MINUTE ACT! ON
Commissioner Saathoff stated he would like the following changes made to the minutes
before approval: On page 16, 6th paragraph, last sentence, add the words "of his
business 1 icense fee" after the word "refund;" and in the 8th paragraph, second
sentence, add the word "probably" between the words "will not." Motion by Commissioner
Saathoff to approve the minutes of June 5, 1984, as corrected, second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. General Plan Amendment 84-1 - Krouse Builders/Ron Christian - City 'Planner
Corcoran presented this proposal to redesignate 2.4 acres located north of Pottery
Street, between Lindsay Street and Kellogg Street from Medium Density Residential
(6.1-12.0 d.u./acres) to High Density Residential (12.1-32 d.u./acre). Staff
further stated the applicant requested and received a Zone Change on subject pro-
perty from R-2 (Two-Family Residence) to R-3 (Multiple-Family Residence) from
City Council on September 8, 1981. The Planning Commission and Design Review
__ Board approved applicant's plans for a 57-unit apartment complex on July 21,1981.
On December 14, 1982, the City Council adopted a new General Plan which designated
subject property as Medium Density Residential. In order to resolve the incon-
sistency of the R-3 Zoning and the General Plan Land Use Designation of Medium
Density Residential, the. applicant has filed this General Plan Amendment 84-1.
The Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-1. Receiving no reply, the Chairman
asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to this Amendment.
The following persons spoke in opposition:
George Alongi questioned sewer capacity for this development.
Ann Armstrong questioned sewer capability and commented on problems already
existing.
Barbara Roberts asked if any research had been done on how much low-income
housing the City needs. Asked if City has a General Plan and
what is a General Plan -- can it change from day-to-day.
--
Chairman Dominguez enquired if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiv-
ing no response, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:44 p.m.
The Chairman asked if staff would answer the questions asked by the opposition
participants before discussion at the table.
City Planner Corcoran stated the City has a General Plan that was adopted on
December 14, 1982. The General Plan is typically a dynamic document. The City
is allowed by law four (4) public hearing meeting dates per year to amend the
General Plan. The hearings tonight will constitute one of those four (4) hear-
ing dates. At time, we find that it is necessary to amend or to change our Land
Use designations. We are caught right now in a state of transition from our
current zoning and trying to amend that current zoning to the adopted General
Plan. We have before us tonight the residue of some Zoning inconsistencies and
some General Plan inconsistencies which should have been addressed when the
General Plan was adopted but, for whatever reasons, they were missed. There are
a number of those projects coming refore the Commission this evening. In terms
of the Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential, this particular
proposal went before City Council and received a Zone Change but when the General
Li
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 2
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-1 - KROUSE BUILDERS/RON CHRISTIAN - CONTINUED)
Plan was adopted they, in effect, down zoned it back to the original zoning they
had previously. Whereas, if the people who did the General Plan had. realized
the Zone Change had occurred, they would have made it a higher density at that
point.
Regarding the low-income housing question, the City Planner stated a portion of
the General Plan is called the "Housing Element" which assesses the City's need -
for a certain percentage of low-income housing and the projects that come into
our community can receive different types of financing depending on the number
of low-income units - the minimum being the 20 percent. A project is looked
upon more favorably when it does provide those 20 percent low-income units.
This project before us this evening is providing this 20 percent. As part of
the Housing Element of the General Plan, a study was performed and was included
in the General Plan. The Planning Department has copies of the General Plan
available for public perusal and also copies may be purchased. The General Plan
will, more or less, explain the mixes the City currently has, the ratios that
are being developed and the exact acreage devoted to each of the housing cate-
gories - commercial, industrial, etc.
Regarding the sewer capacity question, the City Planner stated the City does not
have any responsibility now in this matter -- it will be handled by Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
Commissioner Washburn stated all the General Plan Amendments tonight are dealing
with the General Plan Land Use Map. That all they are addressing is the density
relating to the Land Use Map of the General Plan. They are not addressing the
question of engineering or particular projects. These questions or concerns will
be considered at Site Plan or Tract Map stage.
Mr. Alongi stated they were considering zone changes.
Staff replied these General Plan Amendments are not zone changes; they are General
Plan Land Use designation changes. There is a difference. Zoning is parcels
spec i fi c .
-
At this point, the Chairman called for discussion at the table.
forthcoming~ Commission Barnhart moved approval of General Plan
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
With no comments
Amendment 84-1,
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-1 be read by title only, as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 84-1
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-1.
2.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adopt Resolution No. 84-1, second by Commis-
sioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
General Plan Amendment 84-2 - SQS, Inc./Wi11iam Seers - City Planner Corcoran
presented this proposal to redesignate Lots 12 and 13 of Tract Map 15480, located
at the end of Nashland Avenue, from Medium Density Residential (6.1-12.0 d.u./acre)
to High Density Residential (12.1-32.0 d.u./acres). At the time approval for
Tract Map 15480 was granted (January 22, 1980), each lot within said Tract was
zoned R-3 (Multiple-Family Residence), allowing four (4) multiple-family units
for each lot. The newly adopted General Plan (December 14, 1982) designated
subject site as Medium Density Residential whereby only two (2) units per lot
could be constructed. The current zoning (R-3) is inconsistent with the General
Plan and General Plan Amendment 84-2, amending the Land Use Element of the
General Plan, has been filed by the applicant in an effort to equitably rectify
his situation.
-
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 3
--
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-2 - SQS, INC./WILLIAM SEERS - CONTINUED.)
Chairman Dominquez opened the public hearing at 7:49 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-2.
William Seers, applicant, stated before they bought the lots in June, 1983, they
checked to see if there would be any problem and were told the other lots had
four (4) units and they would be treated accordingly. Their lots are the largest
in the development and are at the end of a cul-de-sac. It would be a hardship
on the applicants as they based their costs of the property on being able to
build four (4) units on each lot. They had their plans drawn up and didn't
anticipate the present problem until they took their plans in to obtain a build-
ing permit. There are no residential homes on Nashland Avenue. There are unit
properties on both sides and back up to commercial property. They feel the four
(4) unit apartment buildings they have designed will be an asset to the area,
having tile roofs and Spanish decor.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
George Alongi stated he had a real problem with going from Medium to High Density
-- the City should take a look at where they're going.
Howard Hurd said his comment was more for a "point of information." These Amend-
ments, discussions and recommendations, are they making efforts to do something.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition, receiving no
response the public hearing was closed at 7:44 p.m.
-- The Chairman asked for discussion at the table. Commissioner Barnhart said she
would like to clarify a point with Mr. Alongi and Mr. Hurd -- these Amendments
they are considering tonight are from applicants who had done everything properly
and according to the Code, but when they applied for building permits to complete
their projects, were made aware of the General Plan Land Use change in density
which had let their projects "fall through the cracks." All they (the Commis-
sioners) are trying to do is rectify that and allow these people to complete
their projects. Their projects have the proper zoning but when the new General
Plan was adopted these particular project sites were overlooked - "fell through
the cracks" - and a lower land use density was placed on their property.
The City Planner explained that by State law the General Plan can be amended
four (4) times a year. Lake Elsinore has a Resolution that allows the General
Plan to be amended three (3) times a year -- once in June, once in November,
and one floating time that can be picked up any time during the year. These
Amendments are designed to give some flexibility to more or less a dynamic docu-
ment, as is the General Plan, and they provide for that flexibility in providing
for the community's needs and what is perceived as the community's interest.
The Chairman called for discussion at the table. With no comments forthcoming,
it was moved by Commissioner Washburn to approve General Plan Amendment 84-2,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
Chairman Dominquez requested Resolution No. 84-2 be read by title only, as
fo 11 ows :
RESOLUTION NO. 84-2
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-2.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to adopt Resolution No. 84-2, second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 4-0
Jt
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 4
3. Ge~eral Plan Amendment.84-3 - Har~ld F. Kempe - City Planner Corcoran presented
thlS proposal to redeslgnate 3.53- acres, located southwesterly of the inter-
section of Lincoln and Flannery Streets, from Medium Density Residential
(6.1-12.0 d.u./acre) to High Density Residential (12.1-32.0 d.u./acre). The
property is presently zoned R-3 (Multiple-Family Residence) but when the
General Plan was adopted in December, 1982, this property was effectively
down zoned to a Medium Density Residential use. The current zoning and
adoption of the General Plan have created an inconsistency of large magnitude.
Therefore, this General Plan Amendment is the proper method to resolve this ...
matter as it will serve to maintain the integrity of the General Plan.
Staff informed the Commission of a letter received from Troy and Nancy Roberts
on June 19, 1984, stating opposition to General Plan Amendment 84-3. Copies
of said letter were passed to each Commissioner.
Chairman Dominquez opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-3.
Harold F. Kempe, applicant, stated he purhcased his property in 1973, and,
at that time, it was zoned R-3 (Multiple-Family Residence), as it is now, but
with the General Plan Land Use change his property was put into another
category. He had to come up with a little piece of money to get things where
they were originally. He is surrounded, at this time, by high density pro-
perty. He respectfully asked that the Commission give him some consideration.
Dane Hilliard spoke in favor and feels it would be good for the area.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
George Alongi stated again he had the same problem -- from Medium to High.
Was it always High Density. If it was, he has no problem with it. He just
doesn't think Medium ~hould be changed to High -- the City hasn't the facil-
ities for it.
....
Dean Blackwelder stated he lived near this area and doesn't feel they need
any more apartments in the area. He feels traffic is bad and it won't hel~
the sewer system.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition and, receiv-
ing no response, the public hearing was closed at 8:18 p.m.
A short discussion at the table ensued covering the High Density property
around subject site, commercial nearby, and current R-3 zoning of applicant's
property.
Upon request from the Chairman, City Planner Corcoran responded to Mr. Alongi's
questions. He stated this property was always designated as Multiple-Family
Residential. It was not always designated as High Density Residential. Once
again, he believes they are getting confused between the General Plan and the
Zoning. In effect, the General Plan said this area should be Medium Density
Residential. The Zoning said this area was Multiple-Family Residential. By
State law, the City is required to have a mesh, or a compatibilit~ between
those two. If there isn't a compatibility, the General Plan takes precedence.
Now, at this point, we are trying to rectify any discrepancies that the General
Plan, being newly adopted, has created.
Motion by Gommissioner Washburn to approve General Plan Amendment 84-3, second
by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
....
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-3 be read by title only, as
follows:
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 5
-
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-3 - HAROLD F. KEMPE - CONTINUED.)
RESOLUTION NO. 84-3
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-3.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to adopt Resolution No. 84-3, second by
Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
4. General Plan Amendment 84-4 - Charles O. Pease - City Planner Corcoran pre-
sented proposal to redesignate 114.6t acres from Very Low Density Residential
(1 d.u./2 acres) to Low Density Residential (0-.6.0 d.u./acre) and approxi-
mately 9 acres from Very Low Density Residential to Tourist Commercial,
located westerly of the intersection of Mountain Street and Robb Road. On
June 12, 1984, the City Council approved Zone Change 84-3, which provided
prezoning to subject property of R-l (Single-Family Residence) and C-2
(General Commercial). It is the intent of this General Plan Amendment to
ensure compatibility between Lake Elsinore's General Plan and it's Zoning.
-
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 8:25 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-4.
Bob Kipper, representing the applicant, stated they had applied for annexa-
tion of subject property to the City of Lake Elsinore (Annexation No. 34).
The City Council has approved commencement of annexation proceedings and
approved the prezoni ng for sa i,d property. They have submitted the Land Divi-
sion Map to the Planning Department. They ask the Commission's favorable
consideration of General Plan Amendment 84-4.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, he enquired if' anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
response, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:28 p.m.
The Chairman called for discussion at the table. With no comments forth-
coming, Commissioner Barnhart moved approval of General Plan Amendment 84-4,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-4 be read by title only, as
follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 84-4
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-4.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adopt Resolution No. 84-4, second by
Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
5. General Plan Amendment 84-5 - Terry W. Shook - City Planner Corcoran presented
this proposal to redesignate 1.5 acres, located on Flint Street, situated
between Mohr and Silver Streets, from Medium Density Residential (6.1-12 d.u./
acre) to Limited Industrial. Subject site is situated at the northerly base
of an existing hill, part of the geological extension of hilly terrain asso-
ciated with the Country Club Heights area. Although subject site is relatively
flat, slopes in excess of fifteen percent (15%) are in close proximity to the
site's southerly boundary. The current zoning of R-l (Single-Family Residence)
does flot conform to the General Plan Land Use designation of Medium Density
Residential (6.1-12.0 d.u./acre). Staff feels that due to steep slopes and
other environmental considerations, intensive residential development may not
be the optimum use for subject property. With creative site development
techniques, the land use relationships between the existing residential and
J:1
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 6
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-5 - TERRY W. SHOOK - CONTINUED)
proposed industrial uses (Light Manufacturing) would be effectively compatible
to each other.
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 8:33 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-5.
Terry W. Shook, applicant, stated he believes
problem they have there. It should have been
and it was erroneously zoned Medium Density.
give him favorable consideration.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
the Commission is aware of the
zoned M-1 (Manufacturing District)
He hopes the Commission will .
....
George Alongi stated he didn't think the City should take the position that
a piece of R-1 property cannot be developed.
Marvin Lavine read Memorandum from the Redevelopment Agency dated August 4, .
1981, sent to property owners, regarding exemption of residential property
from condemnation action. If the Agency rezones the property, the exemption
would still remain. If the property owner requests a change of zone from
residential, the exemption would not remain and he wanted Mr. Shook to be
aware of this.
The Chairman enquired if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiv-
ing no response, the public hearing was closed at 8:38 p.m.
City Planner Corcoran stated subject property is not in the Redevelopment
Area and the City is not looking to condemn anyone's property. He does not
believe it was ever mentioned. He believes the proposal is to change this
person's designation for his property, which is not in the Redevelopment
Area, to a Manufacturing District.
....
The Chairman called for discussion at the table. Receiving no response, it
was moved by Commissioner Washburn to approve General Plan Amendment 84-5,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-5 be read by title only, as
follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 84-5
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-5.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adopt Resolution No. 84-5, second by Com-
missioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
6. General Plan Amendment 84-6 - The Grayson Companies - City Planner Corcoran
presented this proposal to redesignate 13.3 acres, located southerly of Grand
Avenue between Ortega Highway and Macy Street, from Neighborhood Commercial
to Low Density Residential (0-6.0 d.u./acre). Applicants are requesting this
General Plan Amendment to allow the construction of single-family homes on a
portion of their project. A commercial site of approximately 12.1 acres on
the frontage of Grand Avenue would remain unchanged. This site could ade-
quately address the designation of Neighborhood Commercial and serve the
adjacent communities. Said proposal would provide for additional permanent
residents to utilize proposed commercial facility and existing commercial
center directly to the east (Ortega Oaks).
....
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 8:44 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-6.
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Pa ge 7
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-6 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES - CONTINUED)
-
Bill Tackaberry, Psomas & Associates, representing the applicant, stated
that prior to his association with psomas & Associates, he was president of
a firm named Southwest Engineering and they worked on this piece of property
in late 1977 and 1978. They had a Tentative Map approved by the City of Lake
Elsinore with the construction of the project very similar to what they are
now proposing. In 1982, when the General Plan was adopted, they were advised
of the adoption and were so advised that the project they were proposing was
consistent with the zoning and the General Plan, in that the City's zoning
allowed a down use. In other words, residential could be built on commer-
cial zoned property but commercial could not be built on residential zoned
property. So, essentially, they went for about a year or so with an approved
Tentative Map with the General Plan designation of commercial and a zoning
underneath it of kind of a mixed thing. Last year, at this time, their Map
expired. At which time, he appeared before the Council asking that they
consider extending the Map under some changes in the Subdivision Map Act.
The City Attorney felt that the City couldn't do that and asked that they
come back and resubmit this and that they would h~lp the. applicants in what-
ever way they could to go on with their project. The project they have now
is basically, for all 'intents and purposes, identical to the project they
had with the exception that they have gone, he believes, from 78 to 63 lots
-- about same amount of land but less lots. He urged the Commission to
approve General Plan Amendment 84-6.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
-
George Alongi stated again it was the same problem - adding more to this
community than the community could handle. Now they were taking commercial
and going to residential.
Cheryl French stated she strongly opposed this change. She thinks it will have
only an adverse effect on the environment. She recommended and requested
the City require an Environmental Impact Report on this project.
Chairman Dominguez stated he would like to recognize Mrs. French. She used
to sit in the chair at the table for many years. She was the first lady
mayor of Lake Elsinore. He tanked her for being present tonight.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition and receiving
no reply, closed the public hearing at 8:55 p.m.
The Chairman called for discussion at the table. Commissioner Barnhard asked
if an E.I.R. had been required or asked for.
-
City Planner Corcoran replied that an Environmental Assessment was prepared.
That for a General Plan Amendment there really is no need for an Environmenal
Impact Report because they don't know what projects will be going in there.
It mayor may not be required, depending on what the project is and on what
the Environmental Review Committee suggests at that point.
Chairman Dominguez asked Mrs. French if she had heard what the City Planner
had just said. She answered in the negative and the City Planner reiterated
his previous comments.
Commissioner Washburn addressed remarks to Mrs. French further explaining
the time for requiring an E.I.R. on a project.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve General Plan Amendment 84-6, second
by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-6 be read by title only, as
fo 11 ows :
,Q
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 8
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-6 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES - CONTINUED)
RESOLUTION NO. 84-6
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-6.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to adopt Resolution No. 84-6, second by
Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
....
7. General Plan Amendment 84-7 - Lakeside Estates, Ltd. - City Planner Corcoran
presented proposal to amend the General Plan Land Use designation on 13 acres
within the City Limit boundary from Public/Semi-Public to Low Density Resi-
dential (0-6.0 d.u./acre) and on 5 acres of contiguous County property appli-
cant is annexing to the City (Annexation No. 35) from Low Density Residential
to Neighborhood Commercial. The entire site consists of 93t acres, however,
this General Plan Amendment is redesignating the Land Use for only 18 acres
of said project located on Corydon Road, southwest of Palomar Street, situ- .
ated on the west side of Corydon Road and bounded by Palomar Street and Union
Street, Corydon Road and Skylark Drive. The City Council approved commence-
ment of proceedings for Annexation No. 35 on May 8, 1984, and approved Zone
Change 84-5 prezoning 80 acres of unincorporated County territory to R-l
(Single-Family Residence) (75 acres) and to C-l (Limited Commercial) (5 acres).
The 13 acre portion of subject 93 acre site was designated as the proposed
Regional Wastewater Treatment site, but has since been abandoned and an alter-
native site chosen. This General Plan Amendment will bring the prezoning into
consistency with the General Plan.
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 8:58 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-7.
Lloyd Zola of FORMA, representing the applicant, stated the General Plan
Amendment being proposed is really pretty similar to what is there now. The
basic changes would be to add a 5 acre commercial site at the corner of
Palomar Street and Corydon Road, and also to remove that existing designation
for the treatment plant. He further stated that regarding the 13 acre site,
even though the only designation they could come up with was Low Density
Residential, it is not being proposed for residential development because it
is subject to lurching by Wildomar Fault. That area would be utilized as a
park area.
....
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor.
Mamie Moore stated she would just like to ask a question -- What are they
going to do about sewers? Will there be sewers or septic tanks or what?
The Chairman enquired if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving
no reply, asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. With no response
forthcoming, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:00 p.m.
The Chairman asked staff to answer Mrs. Moore's question.
The City Planner responded with the information that there are a couple of
sewer proposals under consideration right now. For a more detailed expla-
nation, he requested Mr. Zola to give reply.
Mr. Zola stated there will be a hearing at the Water District on the 27th
to discuss that. One of the alternatives is construction of on-site plan
similar to that being used in Upland at the Upland Hills Country Club. It
has. worked fairly successfully. They will be coming back before the Planning
Commission for their Tract Map on July 3 which will be after the Water
District meeting and he will have more definite plans at that time.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve General Plan Amendment 84-7,
as recommended by staff, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
....
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 9
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-7 - LAKESIDE ESTATES, LTD. - CONTINUED.)
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-7 be read by title only, as
follows:
-
RESOLUTION NO. 84-7
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-7.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to adopt Resolution No. 84-7, second by
Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
8. General Plan Amendment 84-8 - Zimmerman Consulting Engineers/Tomlinson -
City Planner Corcoran presented proposal to redesignate approximately 7 acres
of County property located southerly of the intersection of Grand Avenue and
Riverside Drive and within the City's Sphere of Influence, from Medium Den-
sity Residential (6.1-12.0 d.u./acre) to Neighborhood Commercial. Applicant
is in the process of annexing 43t acres, which includes this 7 acre parcel,
into the City of Lake Elsinore (Annexation No. 36). Staff feels proposed
commercial designation is a logical extension of commercial designation along
a Major Highway. Subject proposal will facilitate commercial development
along Grand Avenue and also provide for a greater utilization of this commer-
cial corridor.
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 9:05 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-8.
-
George Zimmerman, representing the applicant, requested the Commission approve
the Amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission. He stated the pur-
pose of this work that is going on now, as far as the owners are concerned, is
largely to arrange the matters of their estate. They own quite a bit of land
in various locations .of which this is a part and they are attempting to get it
in proper condition for best use. There are no immediate plans for develop-
ment or sale of it. He stated if there were any questions he would be glad to
answer them.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
-
Mrs. French asked for and was given the exact location of subject 7 acre parcel.
Mr. Levine asked why they were changing the designation of the property if they
don't intend to do anything with it. Why don't they wait until they want to
do something with it instead of doing it now just to enhance the value of the
property.
The City Planner responded that it really doesn't matter if they develop it
or not. It is up to them to bring it to the City. We cannot say whether
they can develop it now or three years down the road. We can provide con-
straints at that time for Site Plan approval for whatever is developed. At
this time, this is part of an annexation proposal that was prezoned and it
has been the policy of the City to actively promote annexations because we
feel we could have more local control to regulate those developments that
would provide for the uses of our services also.
With no one else wishing to speak, the Chairman closed the public hearing at
9:10 p.m.
Considerable discussion ensued at the table regarding reservations on size of
parcel for commercial use only; proximity of residential; need of population
to support that commercial threshold and problems to support it; overkill of
commercial zone; Cal-Trans curve at Riverside Drive and Grand Avenue.
.:
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Pa ge 1 0
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-8 - ZIMMERMAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS/TOMLINSON -CONTINUED)
Mr. Zimmerman was asked to come forward for further comments. He stated he
had been contacted by some of the neighboring property owners who. actually
felt that they would like to join in the development of this parcel as commer-
cial. This is on the side of the property away from Riverside Drive. The
owner has offered that in the event this land is ever sold, or to be developed
as commercial, to give these people an opportunity to join in so that they
would not be included in residential. They would not, as residents, be next ..-
to the property.
Further discussion ensued covering need for size of commercial site; who
builds commercial first will make other commercial property owners request
a zone change later on; similarity;o Four Corners area; demands of the City
and community; demands for the community are more for residential orientation
than for commercial; changing to Specific Plan Area and being able to have
a mix of commercial, residential, etc., whatever the case may be.
Mr. Zimmerman asked and was granted permission to speak. He stated the purpose
of this General Plan Amendment is to have a specific designation which would
apply to the land. He doesn't feel the Specific Plan Area designation would
accomplish that. Since it would not set a specific use on the land, it would
not accomplish their purpose. He feels that under that circumstance, the
applicants probably would not wish to go ahead with the annexation.
The Chairman asked staff to give a definition as to what the Specific Plan
Area means.
The City Planner responded that he had explained this designation to Mr.
Zimmerman previously and he is pretty well versed on what it stands for.
At the conclusion of the discussion, Commission Washburn moved approval of
General Plan Amendment 84-8 redesignating the 7 acre parcel from Medium ..-
Density Residential to Specific Plan Area, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 3-1 (Commissioner Barnhart voting "NG!'~)
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-8 be read by title only, as
fo 11 ows :
RESOLUTION NO. 84-8
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-8.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adopt Resolution No. 84-8 with change from
Medium Density Residential to Specific Plan Area and deleting the rest of -
that paragraph, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 3-1 (Commissioner Barnhart voted "No"~)
At this time, Chairman Dominguez asked to be excused, turned over the Chair-
manship to Acting Chairman Washburn and retired from the Council ~hamber.
.
9. General Plan Amendment 84-9 - City of Lake Elsinore/Planning Division - City
Planner Corcoran presented the City's proposal to establish a Land Use area
for senior citizen housing with an associated community center conversion by
redesignating 41.1! acres, contained on the North by Heald Street, on the
South by Flint Street, on the West by Langstaff Street and on the East by
Kellogg Street, from Medium Density Residential (6.1-12.0 d.u./acre) and
Special Purpose Public/Semi-Public to High Density Residential (12.1-32 d.u./
acre - apartments). This area is proposed to be developed as a senior citizen
community with associated support services and facilities. Also this Land Use
redesignation will assist in alleviating the need for affordable housing with-
in the City for income groups that are less able to purchase a new single-
family unit.
-
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 11
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-9 - CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE/PLANNING DIVISION - CONTINUED)
-
Acting Chairman Washburn opened the public hearing at 9:41 p.m., asking if
anyone wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-9. Receiving
no response, the Acting Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
Christa Head asked for the exact location of the Amendment area and then
stated she was not in favor of tearing down the school. Asked what would
happen to the single-family dwellings that are there now. She suggested
rather than make such a zone sweep change, let the owners of vacant lots who
want to put up apartments ask for zone changes.
Marvin Levine asked if this proposal site was in the Redevelopment Area. He
then said it was and the letter he had read earlier in the meeting from the
Redevelopment Agency pertained to this area. They are concerned about what
is considered to be a delapidated building. They don't want to lose their
property.
Warren Jorgenson commented that this Amendment seems to be eliminating the
~chool and since he lives
be a shame to remove it.
ities the children need.
opposes it.
right across the street from it he thinks it will
It looks like a good building and has all the facil-
He doesn't feel this Amendment is a good idea and
Mary Link stated she was not in favor. She has a V1Slon of high density being
tall buildings and as many people as you can get on your property. She doesn't
feel hilly school area is 'suitable for senior citizens. She feels the empty
lots in the area could put up the high density buildings. She requested an
E.I.R. if high density is going into this area.
-
The Acting Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition.
Receiving no reply, the public hearing was closed at 9:52 p.m.
The City Planner, in an effort to answer the questions raised by the opposi-
tion, responded as follows:
The City has no plans or desire to condemn any property. The City was trying
to find a location basically suitable for senior citizen housing. A proposed
plan is to use the school, to refurbish it, not to tear it down and replace
it with a big multi-family dwelling unit. Just to try to refurbish the
existing school because it is a very sound structure. Also to try and pro-
mote environment within that school structure conducive to senior citizen
housing.
Regarding the emply lots, it would be alright to go ahead and provide them
with the higher density but it would also constitute IIspot zoningll where
you have a jumbled type use and it is not conducive to a good neighborhood
environment.
-
Acting Chairman Washburn stated that when the Redevelopment Agency adopted
the Rancho La Laguna Redevelopment Project Area I, they excluded single-
family residences so there is no possibility of them coming in and taking
your property. The only time they could would be if the applicant requested
they become a participant in the Redevelopment Area and then they could
initiate that activity.
Considerable discussion ensued covering concept of project; being very pleased
with it; infill and need for it; more homes built in the older communities;
concentration of services; to stimulate the downtown area; significant
changes in standards in recent years as far as high density is concerned;
developments now requiring a lot of open space and off-street parking; con-
cern on the Heald, Kellogg, Lindsay, Sumner block and area adjacent having
very nice single-family dwellings and allowing this area to remain Low Density
or Medium Density;
Commissioner Barnhart asked staff if the school itself was at capacity or does
it have a low enrollment. She knows that the children from Canyon Lake attend
this school but if a school is built up there, is it the idea that Elsinore
Elementary will not be needed anymore?
.It:
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 12
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-9 - CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE/PLANNING DIVISION - CONTINUED)
The City Planner responded that he believes it has reached a point of obsoles-
cence and the alternatives presently are to vacate the school and. leave it
vacant or perhaps find a different use for it.
Commissioner Washburn commented that the School District owns the property and
they can do as they please with it. The City has no jurisdiction in the sense
of telling them what to do or what to put on it. ..-
Discussion continued on the number of delapidated houses in subject area whiih
was partially, but certainly not in whole, one of the reasons for selecting
this area; another reason the delapidated houses were mentioned was that this
zoning designation may provide tha~ infill development.
With no further discussion forthcoming, the Acting Chairman called for a
motion.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve General Plan Amendment 84-9 with
the following modification: "The area from the property facing Heald Street
from Poe Street northerly to the alley, the property in this area that is
inclusive of Heald Street, Kellogg Street, Sumner Avenue and Linsay Street,
to retain General Plan Land Use designation of Low Density Residential, the
rest is as staff recommends," second by Commissioner Barnhart.
A'pproved 3-0
Acting Chairman Washburn requested Resolution No. 84-9 be read by title only,
as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 84-9
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-9.
..-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adopt Resolution No. 84-9 with wording to
conform to approved General Plan Amendment 84-9, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-0
At this time, Chairman Dominguez returned to his seat at the table.
10. General Plan Amendment 84-10 - City of Lake Elsinore/Engineering Department -
City Engineer Culp presented proposal to amend the Circulation Element of
the General Plan by changing vehicular traffic corridor classification due
to certain constraints and changed existing conditions, and to make additions
to the Circulation Element of the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan. The
purpose is to minimize impacts on existing commercial, residential, and indus-
trial development and to recognize topographic constraints. There is no sig-
nificant impact upon the environment with the proposed changes. The proposed
changes will lessen the impacts upon the environment because of proposed
reduced widths for some streets. The following list identifies the proposed
corridor classifications and limits:
l. Machado Street: From Grand Avenue to Lakeshore Drive
From (100-76)-to (88-64)
2. Lincoln Street: From Machado Street northwesterly
From "none" to (88-64) -
3. Chaney St reet : From Lakeshore Drive to Flint Street
From (100-76) to (80-64)
4. Ortega Highway (SH 74): From Grand Avenue to City Sphere of Influence
From (80-64) to (100-76)
5. Strickland Avenue: From Chaney Street to Riverside Drive (SH 74)
From "none" to (66-62)
6. Baker Street: From Riverside Drive (SH 74) to Pierce Street
From (88-64) to (66062)
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 13
(GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-10 - CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT) -
CONTINUED)
-
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 10:15 p.m., asking if anyone
wished to speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-10. Receiving no reply,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. With no response
forthcoming, the public hearing was closed at 10:16 p.m.
Commissioner Saathoff asked would it be prudent on Strickland Avenue to perhaps
have a higher classification and more width.
The City Engineer replied that the reason they chose the 66-62 classification
was that they felt they would get the maximum amount of roadway and as small
a right-of-way as they could possible get. The purpose for this was the size
of lots that are adjacent to Strickland Avenue in the old Country Club Heights
area. The City has very substandard size lots in that area and the dedication
requirements that would be placed upon proposed developments would be quite
prohibitive to development. Therefore, they wanted to keep the right-of-way
as narrow as possible yet get as wide an improvement within that 66 foot as
they could. Engineering is assuming that it would be a collector for the
Country Club Heights on this side of the hillside away from the lake as well
as it will provide emergency route to the central part of the City. They are
also assuming there won't be improvements such as sidewalks.
Commissioner Washburn asked if on Baker Street, it should read "From River-
side Drive (State Highway 74) to Pierce Street" instead of "Nichols Road." The
City Engineer replied in the affirmative - that it should read Pierce Street.
He then asked if a builder could now build on land that he previously could
not build on since now the reduced right-of-way would allow him to meet the
-- setbacks and requirements.
The City Engineer answered "yes" and said a good example of that would be on
Chaney Street.
With discussion completed, the Chairman called for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve General Plan Amendment 84-10,
amending #6 from "Nichols Road" to "Pierce Street," second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 4-0
Chairman Dominguez requested Resolution No. 84-10 be read by title only, as
foll ows:
RESOLUTION NO. 84-10
A RESOLUTION O~ THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
GENERAL PLAN ~1ENDMENT 84-10.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adopt Resolution No. 84-10, as amended by
changing "Nichols Road" to ",Pierce Street," second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
--
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None
City Planner - None
City Engineer Culp - At the last Commission meeting the Commission requested that
he contact owners/developers and find out what the status of certain projects are
within the City; particularly Mohr and Lakeshore and Scrivener and Graham. He has
been in contact with both of these owners/developers and particularly the property
on Mohr and Lakeshore. He has found out the owner/developer ran into some finan-
cial difficulty at this time. However, he is in the process of trying to "pick
up the ba,ll" and run again. City crews were recently sent out to abate weeds in
the area. There was some sedimentation build-up on the corner and City crews
J:
Minutes of the Planning Commission
June 19, 1984
Page 14
(COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT - CONTINUED)
cleaned that up. He has cleaned up his lot and he is intending on continuing
development of those parcels.
As for the development on Scrivener and Grand, the developer is Krouse Builders
and he informed them about the reconstruction of the sidewalk. Krouse Builders
informed him they have received financing for that project and they will have an
active application into the City within the next two weeks and will complete ...
project as originally proposed. In view of what they have told him, he feels the
City can allow them that time period but if they fail to bring in an ~pplication,
then the City can say "put the sidewalk in."
PLANNING CO~1MISSIONER I SREPORT AND RECO}1MENDATIONS
Commissioner Saathoff - Wanted to commend staff on the well planned presentation.
Commissioner Washburn - Would like to see the Assessor's Parcel Map included as
part of the packet with the application so they know
exactly which pieces they are dealing with. They still
want the Vicinity Map too.
Commissioner Barnhart - Wants to pass on a rumor that she hopes is true;
people across the street from her are moving out.
said the owner was going to tear down the building
build something else. She hopes it won't be large
mentscbecause of parking.
The
They
and
apart-
Chairman Dominguez
- None
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commissioner Barnhard.
Approved 4-0
-
-
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
19TH
DAY
OF
JUNE
1984
-.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of June 5, 1984, as sub-
mitted, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 10:25 p.m. Motion by Com~issioner Saathoff, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
Approved
4~~
{ Fred ml n , ha.
-
Respectfully submitted,
&f
Commission
Acting Secretary,
-
~
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 3RD.
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
JULY
1984
THE ~EETING WAS CALLED TO'ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
Chairman Dominguez introduced Randy Mellinger as the new Planning Commissioner.
-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Mellinger.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, Assistant City Engineer Rubel, Associate
Planner Fields and Assistant Planner Coleman.
NOMINATIONS FOR CHAIRMAN
At this time Chairman Dominguez opened nominations for Chairman. Commissioner Barn-
hart nominated Fred Dominguez as Chairman of the Planning Commission, second by
Commissioner Washburn. Commissioner Saathoff moved that nominations be closed,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
NOMINATIONS FOR VICE CHAIRMAN
Chairman Dominguez opened nominations for Vice Chairman. Commissioner Barnhart
nominated Gary Washburn as Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission, second by Com-
missioner Saathoff. Commissioner Barnhart moved that nominations be closed, second
by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Resolution Number 84-11 (Supplemental Resolution for General Plan Amendment 84-8,
Zimmerman Consulting Engineers/Tomlinson). This Supplemental Resolution establishes
density at 6.0 dwelling units per acre for General Plan Amendment 84-8. Motion by
Commissioner Saathoff to adopt Resolution Number 84-11, entitled as follows, second
by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
RESOLUTION NO. 84-11
A SUPPLEMENTAL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE,
CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT 84-8.
MI NUTE ACT! ON
Commissioner Saathoff stated that on page 12, second paragraph, should read Com-
missioner ~ashburn commenting on School District. Chairman Dominguez stated that on
page 7, fourth paragraph, the name should be Cheryl French; page 13, under COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT, first sentence, should read Scrivener and Graham.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of June 19, 1984, as corrected,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1 . Conditional Use Permit 84-7 - Rick and Krista Aguado - Staff presented proposal
for a Conditional Use Permit to utilize eleven (11) acres in the R-l (Single-
Family Residence) and R (Recreational) Districts for the purpose of a race track
for recreational vehicles, located on the westerly side of Mission Trail, ap-
proximately 1,570 feet north of the intersection of Mission Trail and Corydon
Road.
Chairman asked staff if there was a copy of the site plan on the board. Staff
answered in the affirmative. Chairman asked staff, for the benefit of the
audience, to point out the location of subject site. City Planner complied
using site plan on display pointing out parking; elevation of site; temporary
trailer; chemical sanitary facilities; front entrance and location in relation-
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3t 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-7 - RICK AND KRISTA AGUADO CONTINUED
ship to Mission Trail and Corydon Road.
Chairman asked if there was any written communications. Secretary stated that
a letter was received on July 3t 1984t from Mr. Charles H. Doner (a copy of
this letter has been provided to each Commissioner). Chairman asked the Com-
mission if they would like to have this letter read. The Commission answered
in the affirmative. Secretary read the letter from Mr. Charles H. Doner.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m.t asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-7.
Mr. Rick Aguadot applicantt stated he would like to clarify the proposed usage
of the property. It was mentioned that it was going to be a race trackt it is
not going to be a race trackt proposed use is for rental of Odyssey vehicles
that will be governed as far as the mileage per hour and estimated mileage will
be any where from 15 to 20 miles per hourt and it is aimed at family recreation.
The operational hours will be so that we will not cause any noise affecting the
public as far as after hourst late or early in the morning. The vehicles will
be on the track itselft and we are looking at six (6) vehicles to start witht a
maximum of eight (8) on the lot itselft and outsiders will not be bringing in
their own vehicles. Mr. Aguado presented renderings of the lot showing the
aesthetics. Mr. Aguado gave a brief presentation on each rendering.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Mr. George Alongi
spoke in favor stating that we do live in a recreational area and we should
promote itt howevert the Commission should see that a special type of material
is used on the track that will hold down the dust.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. A gentleman from the
audience asked for a description of an Odyssey. Chairman stated that he would
like to finish the favor and opposition portion of the public hearing and then
a description of an Odyssey can be provided.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no replYt
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
Mr. Todd Thomas stated concern on dust and noiset and asked for a description
of an Odyssey. Chairman stated that a description will be provided later.
Chairman asked Mr. Thomas if he had any other concerns. Mr. Thomas stated the
City addressed concerns about noise and dust alsot the 33 conditions -- do any
of those conditions address those problems? Chairman stated that he was sure
they did.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Ms. Mary Cheek
stated that she lives on Mission Trail and would be interested in the noise and
dust.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no replYt
Chairman asked the Commission if they would like to hear the gentleman's commentt
he is not opposed, just has a comment.
Mr. Doug Roberts stated that he would like to know what an Odyssey is; what the
horsepower is; and what kind of muffler system it has.
Chairman asked if anyone else had any comments.
The Secretary stated that a petition with fifteen (15) names was just received
stating opposition to Conditional Use Permit 84-7. Chairman asked that the
petition be read. Secretary read the petition.
Chairman asked the applicant if he had a copy of the conditions? Mr. Aguado
answered in the affirmative. Chairman directed the Secretary to provide to the
appl;'~iilnt a copy of the letter from ~~r. Doner and a copy of the petition for his
records.
--
There being no one else wishing to speak in favort in opposition or to make
comments, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-7 - RICK AND KRISTA AGUADO CONTINUED
,-
Commissioner Saathoff asked the applicant to describe the Honda Odyssey, and
asked what is the noise level and what muffler system do you have.
Mr. Aguado presented a one page brochure on the Honda Odyssey, and stated
that an Odyssey is a four-wheel drive vehicle and is a little bit bigger than
a go-cart. The noise level is as loud as an ATC. There is a muffler system,
but I am not quite sure of the specifications on the muffler, but we will be
able to give you the specifications if you request them at a later date. Mr.
Aguado stated that the Odysseys that they will be operating will be governed
so that they can not excel the full capacity that it has been generated for,
and again the estimated miles per hour is any where from 15 to 20. Mr. Aguado
stated the horsepower is rated at 250 cc on the Odyssey and we will govern them
so that they do not excel.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that he had two comments about this application.
First, generally I am not in favor of a temporary facility. Secondly, I feel
that within the next few years this area will conceivably have a higher
potential than usage for a race track. I don't feel this usage is conducive
to a proper environment for the highest and best development of the surrounding
properties.
Chairman stated that one thing that they are going to have to address, the ap-
p1 icant mentioned it himsel f, it is not a race track. Commissioner Saathoff
stated that he understands that it is not a race track, it is a recreational
track.
-
Commissioner Mellinger stated concerns about zoning (R-1 ,Single-Family Residence
and R, Recreational -- intent of Recreational Zoning was quoted, we do have a
zone called Rural Residential that does allow this type of activity as a permitted
use; zoning -- compatibility with surrounding area, and obviously noise and dust
is going to be a problem. If approved, there are a number of conditions that
should match the limitation that the applicant said that they would be putting on,
for example: conditions should include the mufflers, maximum number of Odysseys
on the tract at anyone time. Noise problems, we have no decible, no noise study,
even the Honda Factory does not have a noise reading for this, even if they had
one individually that is fine, but cumulative effects of eight maybe even more,
in the future, may be a problem. Hours of operation, asked applicant if they
would be operating during the winter? Mr. Aguado stated that they would be
operating year-round. What about lighting, will there be on-site lighting? Mr.
Aguado stated that there will not be on-site lighting and they would operate only
during day light hours. Dust control is another problem (reference condition
number 15) if approved, watering should take effect so that there would be no
dust detectable on Mission Trail. Condition number 16, if approved, would like
this amended to no alcholic beverages on site and this would be up to the ap-
plicant to police. Notice that the site plan did not show any trash enclosures
(~ontainers) these should be well placed, if approved. Asked what the age
restriction would be? Mr. Aguado stated the age restriction would be 14 years
and over. Protection for patrons, bel i eves we shoul d condition that this pro-
tective wear, straps and eye protection be worn at all times. Also, should add
a condition that the mufflers are installed on all the Odysseys and maintained
at all times and the governors are installed on all the Odyssesy and maintained
at all times.
-
Commissioner Washburn stated that under Title 17, it doesn't indicate that type
of use which is why they are asking for a Conditional Use Permit. We are in the
process of re-writing or looking at that whole east end of the valley. Conceptual-
ly I have no problems with the idea of recreational in the area of the lake, but
I do have a concern and it was el uded to, is the fact of dust control especially
under high temperatures. In reading the conditions of approval by staff it
indicates that staff felt a little uneasy with this and was looking to tie it
down, and I think to tie it down with this many conditions on a Conditional Use
Permit for a short financial period of time, maybe one or two years, would be
detrimental to the applicant. I think the use could fall within the valley's
east end, I just think to allow a Conditional Use Permit, and ask the applicant
to put forth thousands of dollars to comply with the conditions would be a hard-
ship.
Commissioner Barnhart stated she agrees with Commissioner Washburn and asked
about condi tion number 23 (provi de sani tary sewer servi ce as approved by the
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-7 - RICK AND KRISTA AGUADO CONTINUED
County Health Department), the applicant has two chemical sanitary facilities
and they are temporary, the mobile is temporary, agrees with Commissioner
Saathoff everthing seems to be so temporary. The dust control and all the
mitigation measures I don't know if they can come up with.
Chairman Dominguez stated that the hours of operation was a concern, but the
applicant stated that he would operate until dusk. As far as the dust control,
Chairman Dominguez stated that he would suggest a decomposed granite base as
this would eliminate alot of dust. Alcoholic beverages, feels the same as ---
Commissioner Mellinger, believes a sign right at the entrance, no alcoholic
beverage~, would help. Had a 'question ~n the age limit, but that has been
answered.
Chairman asked Mr. Aguado if he had any questions on the conditions. Mr. Aguado
stated he did have some questions. and he stated he would also like to state
that the area of usage is within one-half mile of the airport, nearby the BMX
track, which is a dirt track and has alot of use, and is also on the same by way
as the Ultralight Airport which also has alot of use. Mr. Aguado asked that
condition number 3 be clarified. City Planner Corcoran stated that the asphalt
paving from the parking lot to Mission Trail, we would not want uncontrolled
access onto your property. We felt that we wanted to have one entrance or the
entrance set, so this way it would divide people so we would not have the traffic
problems when entering Hission Trail. Hr. Aguado asked if this could be a
fence of some sort or if it has to be a concrete curb? City Planner Corcoran
stated he was a .little hesitant about a fence, fences are not maintained. We've
made some consideration for a landscaping planter along there ,also, so that
could be used in conjunction with that. Mr. Aguado stated that he had no problems
with the Planning Division conditions and they were within their plans to do.
Mr. Aguado questioned Engineering Conditi.pns 19, 20 and 21. City Planner Corcoran
stated that conditions 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27, 30, 32 and 33 are all condi-
tions or take effect when a building permit is issued. This would not require a
building permit so they could record a lien agreement until that site is develope
as a commercial site, but the City would have those lien agreements recorded so---
if and when a person comes in to develop that property these would then take
effect. The Chairman stated that on something like this we should go ahead and
specify this condition so that the applicant is aware. The Chairman was informed
that the above mentioned conditions were so specified.
Discussion continued on impact, services being required whether it is temporary
or permanent.
Chairman Dominguez stated that we are a recreational area and he would like to
see more recreational activities.
City Planner Corcoran stated with your concerns you may want to put a one-year
review period. Discussion continued on review time period six months or one-year.
Commissioner Washburn stated that it would probably be a hardship all around and
he moved to deny Conditional Use Permit 84-7 without prejudice, because he is not
denying the concept. Chairman asked what was the problem? Commissioner \4ashburn
stated that he thinks the project, on a Conditional Use Permit to ask the ap-
pl icant to go into all .of these conditions on a temporary basis is a hardship.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that this is not our place to determine whether or
not it is a financial hardship or not, but he would move denial on his premiss
that he is definately not for temporary facilities and does not feel it is
conducive to the surrounding area for the proper development that he would like
to see go into that area, and feels there is a noise problem.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to deny without prejudice Conditional Use Permit
84-7, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 3-2
---
City Planner Corcoran asked for direction as to t'/hat they should be looking for.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that he thinks this should be written down for
staff because there are alot of concerns.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 5
2. Tentative Parcel Map 19261 REVISED - Centennial Properties, Inc. - Staff pre-
sented proposal to subdivide 9.95! acres into four (4) parcels, located ap-
proximately 1,200! feet southeast of Railroad Canyon Road.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. Chairman asked if there were
any written communications. Secretary answered in the negative." Chairman
- asked for those wishing to speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 19261 REVISED.
Mr. Bob Belzer, applicant, stated after reading and reviewing the conditions
appl icab1 e to this project he concurs with them, and wou1 d be happy to answer
any questions the Commission may have.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak in favor. Receiving
no reply, Chairman asked for those opposed. Receiving no response, Chairman
closed the public hearing at 8:17 p.m.
Commissioner Barnhart questioned condition number 14 (pertaining to storm water
run-off and equitable share ($15,000.00) of cost to provide off-site facilities
to collect and carry storm water run-off to an adequate point of disposal); and
condition number 21 (Storm Drain fee of $ 8,668.00). Assistant City Engineer
Rubel stated that condition number 21 is the public capital fee taken out of
the City Code and is the amount in the ordinance that provides for developing a
storm drain master plan through out the City. The other storm drain fee, condi-
tion number 14, is to provide for the storm drainage immediately surrounding
this site, in order to get rid of the storm drain water to a catch basin across
~he street out into the lake without interfering with adjacent properties. Com-
missioner Barnhart stated the applicant is being required to pay $15,000.00 and
clean the drain pipe under Mission Trail, if he is paying the $15,000.00 what
is he paying it for? Assistant City Engineer Rubel stated the catch basin in
the street is not big enough to receive all the storm water that comes from the
site.
-
Commissioner Saathoff stated that condition number 14 is an immediate type of
storm drain problem. Condition number 21 is a fee that is of a longer range
magnitude.
Commissioner Washburn stated he had a question of staff, you said earlier there
were 27 conditions what happened to the other two? Commissioner Saathoff stated
there were two conditions numbered 21, there should be a total of 26 conditions.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that since at time of building permit issuance was
on a number of the conditions what building permits are involved? City Planner
Corcoran stated it was for a shopping center existing, and these conditions did
apply at the first approval of the Parcel Map and we felt we did not want to
leave out certain ones. Commissioner Washburn stated that they were building
another building on the site.
t1otion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Tentative Parcel ~1ap 19261 REVISED
with staff's 26 recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS
-
1. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act an~ City Codes.
2. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
3. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
4. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
5. Verification of the legal description by City Engineer.
6. All conditions of approved Tentative Parcel ~1ap 19261 shall be in full
fo rc e .
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
7. Casino Drive in the General Plan is 80 feet right-of-way and 64 feet of
roadway, curb-to-curb. Therefore, no dedication will be required. No
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 6
TENTATIVE PARCEL M~P 19261 REVISED - CENTENNIAL PROPERTIES, INC. CONTINUED
additional dedication is required on Mission Trail. The General Plan
requires 50 foot one-half street right-of-way on Mission Trail with
the curbline 38 feet from centerline.
8. Install curb and gutter across the Casino Drive frontage of this pro-
perty at time of permit issuance. The curb shall be 32 feet from
centerl i ne.
9. Install an 8-foot wide commercial sidewalk across the Casino Drive ---
frontage of this property at time of permit issuance.
10. Construct paving on Casino Drive from curbline to centerline to City
standards. Submit tests to show that existing paving conforms to
City standards. The paving to be deferred to permit stage.
11. Repair the 14-foot width of existing paving adjacent to centerline,
which is deteriotating, as required by the City Engineer. Completely
reconstruct this 14-foot width if tests indicate this is needed in the
opinion of the City Engineer. Sand seal the remainder of the existing
paving from curbline to street centerline. This requirement to be
imposed as condition of permit issuance.
12. Before permit issuance, submit Soil and Geology Report which includes
street design.
13. Provide a plan to be approved by the City Engineer for receiving,
channel ing and discharging into Mission Trail the storm water run-off
discharged onto applicant's property from pipes under Casino Drive.
14. Applicant must sign an acceptance letter to the satisfaction of the
City Attorney to eliminate any City liability, for storm water run-off
discharged onto applicant's property from existing pipes under Casino
Drive. Provide an equitable share ($15,000.00) of cost to provide off- ---
site facilities to collect and carry storm water run-off to an adequate
point of disposal. Applicant to clean drain pipe under Mission Trail.
This condition to be enforced at time of permit issuance.
15. Provide street lighting on Mission Trail and Casino Drive, at time of
permit issuance, conforming to standards approved by the City Engineer.
16. Plans and specifications for off-site public improvements, as required
by Ordinance No. 572, must be prepared at time of issuance of permits.
17. Agree to participate in a Lighting and Landscaping District.
18. Agree to participate in the cost of Regional Collection and Treatment
of Sewage. Comply with the City of Lake Elsinore, Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District, County of Riverside Health Department and
Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements on sewage disposal,
at time of Building Permit issuance.
19. Provide letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (E.V.M.W.D.)
for water service availability and comply with the County Fire Depart-
ment regarding fire protection requirements.
20. Dedicate underground water rights to the City.
21. Pay, at time of Building Permit issuance, a Traffic Signalization fee of -
$30,000.00 to mitigate traffic safety hazards.
22. Pay Public Safety and Capital Improvement fees, at time of Building Permit
issuance:
Street Capital Improvement fee:
Park Capital fee:
Storm Ora in fee:
TOTAL
$ 13,003.00
$ 4,334.00
$ 8,668.00
$ 26,005.00
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 7
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 19261 REVISED - CENTENNIAL PROPERTIES, INC. CONTINUED
-
23. Provide trees in sidewalk along Mission Trail and Casino Drive, at
Building Permit issuance, if required by the City Council.
24. No vehicular access from parcel 2 to parcel, to be subject. to City
Engineer's discretion.
25. Mechanical appurtenances to be screened, as other commercial projects
in town.
26. Pay street maintenance mitigation fee in the amount of $200.00 per
parcel.
3. Tentative Tract Map 19344 - Lakeside Estates Ltd.jBuchanan - Staff is recom-
mending that Tentative Tract Map 19344 be continued to the next scheduled
meeting on July 17, 1984, to allow applicant sufficient time to revise their
current map.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:23 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 19344.
Mr. Lloyd Zola, representing the applicant, stated that he concurs with the
continuance. Mr. Zola stated that he would like to take the opportunity if
anyone is going to speak in opposition to answer any issues that come up
tonight.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else \'lished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
~.1s. Mary Rearden stated she would like to ask a question. 14hat kind of sewer
system planned; what about the fault running through it; how they intend to
handle the traffic with 310 houses also, the commercial traffic; how many
square feet per house; the roads that will go through this track, will they
be paved and will there be a block wall on Corydon; will there be lighting;
police protection also, would like to know where the entrance to the com-
mercial will be.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in opposition.
Mr. George Alongi asked if there would be another public hearing in two weeks?
Mr. Alongi was answered in the affirmative.
Chairman asked if anyone else was in opposition. Receiving no reply, he closed
the public hearing at 8:25 p.m.
Chairman asked the Commission if they wanted staff to answer Ms. Rearden's
questions. The Commission answered in the affirmative.
-
City Planner Corcoran stated that perhaps Ms. Rearden would 1ike.to come in
and he would be more than happy to go over the proposed Tentative Tract Map.
t10tion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Tentative Tract Map 19344 to the
meeting of July 17,1984, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
4.
Tentative Tract Map 20139 - The Grayson Companies - Staff presented proposal to
subdivide 13.3 acres into 63 single-family residential lots and 12 acres of com-
mercial development, located westerly of the intersection of Ortega Highway and
Grand Avenue.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:29 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 20139.
Mr. Bill Pierce of Psomas and Associates, Civil Engineer for the Grayson Companies,
stated this map is a re-study of a map that was previously approved by the
Planning Commission, about four years ago. Mr. Pierce stated they have made a
few changes and have been working closely with the Engineering and Planning
Departments and the Riverside County Flood Control, and with these meetings we
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 8
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20139 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONTINUED
have improved the drainage problems and traffic problems. As far as the
commercial site is concerned, the Grayson Companies are presently working
on the design of the first phase and that consists of 40,000 square feet.
The project is designed to be built in two phases. Mr. Pierce stated if
the Commission has any questions regarding the engineering or the map he
would be happy to answer them.
Chairman asked if anyone else would like to speak in favor.
-
Ms. Cappy Carpenter spoke in favor stating we need development within the
entire Sphere of Influence.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
Mr. George Alongi stated he was not in opposition to the commercial, but in
direct opposition to approving any more houses in this area, until the City
reaches a point where they can provide proper police; fire; school; sewage
and water supply.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in opposition.
Receiving no reply, he closed the public hearing at 8:33 p.m.
A lengthy discussion was held on Engineering Department conditions 18 and 19
(reduci ng "A" Street two di fferent wi dths, it was recommended that "A" Street
be 40 feet all the way); commercial portion of project; storm sheet flow on
Grandview; easement between lot 16 and 17, why map does not show a continua-
tion of this easement to the proposed storm drain; radius of lots greater
than 25 feet; condition number 2, itwasrecommended that the CC & R's provide
for screening of rear yard t.V. disk receivers; condition number 30, regarding
the street sweeping maintenance fee; condition number 31, changing the 6 foot
high decorative block wall to 3 foot decorative block wall with wrought iron
along Ortega Highway and rear of commercial boundary; condition number 39, -
changing the 6 foot high retaining wall to 3 foot high retaining wall; and
condition number 52, regarding the fault lines.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Tentative Tract Map 20139 with staff
recommendations amending condition number 2, by adding verbiage "screening of
any ground base disk, no roof mounted or front yard disks allowed"; condition
number 18, changing to 4Q foot entire distance; condition number 19, 40 foot
entire distance; condition number 31, amended to 3 foot high decorative block
wall with flexibility between the applicant and Planning Department and along
perimeter of Ortega Highway for commercial; condition number 39, change 6 foot
retaining wall to 3 foot retaining wall; and condition number 52, to be for
information only on the fault 1 ines.
Commissioner Hashburn asked the maker of the motion if she \./ou1 d consider making
condition number 39 the same as condition number 31 ornamental wall. Com-
missioner Barnhart stated that she would amend her motion to reflect said change,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS
1. Applicant shall meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
2. Applicant shall record CC & R's for the tract prohibiting on-street
storage of boats, motorhomes, trailers, and trucks over one ton
capacity. CC & R'S SHALL ALSO INCLUDE SCREENING OF ANY GROUND BASE
DISK, NO ROOF MOUNTED OR FRONT YARD DISKS ALLOWED.
-
3. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
4. Iss'tm'WCe of a Negative Declaration.
5. Pay applicable Public Safety fees.
6. A finding of conformity to the existing General Plan and all future
elements to be adopted.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 9
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20139 - THE GRAYSON CO~1PANIES CONTINUED
8.
-
9.
10.
ll.
12.
13.
14.
7. Applicant shall bond for sprinkler irrigation system. If the major
improvements for this Tract are bonded for, this item shall be
included.
Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Elementary and
High School District to off-set overcrowding.
Applicant shall plant trees at 3D' intervals on both sides of
street. Submittal of street trees to Planning Division is required.
Trailers utilized during the construction phase of this project shall
be approved by the Planning Division.
All slopes shall be planted with erosiion control vegetation to be
approved by the Planning Division.
~1eet County Fire Department requirements.
Participate in City-wide entry signage program.
Provide transit facilities as deemed applicable by' Chairman of L.E.T.S.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
15. Meet all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
16. Dedicate 10 feet of additional street right-of-way width along Grand
Avenue and Ortega Highway and construct 38 foot wide one-half street
measured from centerline to curbline. Total future right-of-way to
be 100 feet wide.
17. Grandview Avenue to have 60 foot right-of-way width with 40 feet curb-
to-curb roadway.
18. "A" Street to be 60 feet ri ght-of-way with 40 feet curb-to-curbroad-
way from Macy Street to Grandview Avenue.
19. "A" Street to be 60 feet ri ght-of-way wi dth with 40 feet curb-to-curb
roadway from Grandvi ew Avenue to southeast end and in the "0" Street
cul-de-sac.
20. "BU and "C" Streets to be 56 feet right-of-way width and 36 feet curb-
to-curb roadway from "A" Street to Laguna .l\venue. Eliminate the cul-
de-sacs.
21. Dedicate 10 feet of additional street right-of-way width along Laguna
Avenue from Macy Street to Grandview Avenue. Grandview Avenue will
have paving constructed to 24.5 feet from the street right-of-way line.
A 4.5 foot sidewalk is to be constructed adjacent to the curb.
22.
Macy Street and Laguna Avenue shall be constructed with curb, gutter,
sidewalk and paving across the frontage of the existing single-family
dwelling at the east corner of the intersection of Laguna Avenue and
Macy Street. Make necessary transition to construct street improve-
ments across the Laguna Avenue frontage of this existing corner lot.
Coordinate this street alignment with County Transportation Planner.
23. (a) Coordinate alignment of Grandview Avenue with Grandview Gardens'
developer's engineer.
-
Sidewalk along commercial frontages shall be 8 feet wide and on
residential streets shall be 6.0 feet wide, measured from face of curb.
24. Construct paving to City standards from centerline to new gutter on
Ortega Highway, Grand Avenue and Macy Street. Existing paving Must be
replaced unless tests show that the paving is to City standards and will
support the loads represented by the City ~ngineer's traffic index.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 10
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20139 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONTINUED
25. Construct curb, gutter and paving on all proposed interior and
perimeter streets to the specifications of the City Engineer.
26. Provide Class II bicycle lane on Grand Avenue.
27. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
-
28. Obtain Cal-Trans approval and permits for improvements on Grand Avenue
and Ortega Highway, including compliance with Cal-Trans access, parking,
sight distance and signing restrictions.
29. t1ake finding that IID" Street cul-de-sac length of 700 feet can vary
from Code requirement of 600 feet, because of the circumstances of the
land, beyond control of owner and the need of owner to enjoy a sub-
stantial property right.
30. Pay Street Sweeping Maintenance Mitigation fee in the amount of $50.00
per lot and $500.00 for the commerical site.
31. Construct 3 FOOT high decorative block wall WITH WROUGHT IRON ALONG
ORTEGA HIGHWAY AND REAR OF COMMERCIAL BOUNDARY of residential develop-
ment where six-foot high retaining walls are not otherwise required.
GRADING
32. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 20.
33.
Provide Soils and Geology Report including street design recommendations.
Provide Final Soils Report showing compliance with Preliminary Report
and Finish Grade Certification.
-
34. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer, as well as street trees.
35. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
36. All property lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with
the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
STREET LI GHTING
37. (a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
(b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street lighting and landscap-
ing Maintenance District.
STOR~1 DRAINAGE
38. Drainage improvements shall conform to requirements of the'Riverside
County Flood Control District Report, dated May 11, 1984, and additional
or alternative requirements of the City Engineer and the City Code. The
City Engineer shall judge as to interpretation and application of flood
control recommendations. The drainage facility shall be constructed
across Ortega Highway with appropriate endwall and interceptor facility
as required by the City Engineer. Provide Hydraulic Design for all -
drainage facilities. Provide Hold Harmless Agreements as required by the
City Engineer.
39. Construct 3 foot high ORNAMENTAL retaining wall along the total residen-
tial frontage of Ortega Highway as approved by the City Engineer.
40. Provide drainage easements as required by the City Engineer and as
referred to in the Flood Control District Report dated May 11, 1984.
SPJERAGE
41. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 11
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20139 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONTINUED
County Health Department, and the California Regional Hater Quality
Control Board for sewage disposal.
42.
-
HATER
43.
44.
45.
Construct cleanout on all sewer service lines behind the sidewalk to
City and/or Elsinore Valley MuniCipal Water District requirements.
Provide a "will serve" letter guaranteeing water service from
servi ng agency.
Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee.
Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
FEES
46. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
47. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Hater District schedule.
48. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
49. Pay all School fees.
FINAL MAP
-
50. Pay $300.00 for each residential lot, and $20,000.00 for the commercial
site as fees for Traffic Safety Impact Mitigation for signalization.
51. Prior to the Final Map recordation, a subdivision agreement shall be
entered into with the developer(s), owner(s) and the City.
52. Final Map shall show the following item with a prominent note, TO BE FOR
INFORMATION ONLY:
All Geologic Faul t Lines.
53. Provide Tract Phasing Plan for City Engineer's approval. Bond public
improvements for each Phase as approved by the City Engineer.
5. Planned Unit Development 84-1 - Grandview Gardens - Jim Thompson - Staff pre-
sented proposal for a Planned Unit Development for an existing .recorded sub-
division, located southeasterly of Macy Street and westerly of Ortega Highway.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:56 p.m., asking for those wishing to
speak in favor of Planned Unit Development 84-1.
-
Mr. Jim Thompson, applicant, stated when he was here before they discussed
existing right-of-ways, how we might dedicate easements in order to prevent
the site from disappearing, and thought they were in agreement t~at they would
have 36 foot streets and 4 foot meandering sidewalks, with the new conditions
these items have been changed. Would like the latitude to work with Engineering
and Planning Departments to see what we can agree on. Mr. Thompson then ques-
tioned conditions 15 and 16, requesting these two conditions be eliminated or
something else figured out.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone I"ished to speak in opposition.
Mr. George Alongi, from the audience, stated opposition.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in opposition. Receiv-
ing no reply, he closed the public hearing at 9:02 p.m.
Discussion was held on conditions 4,5,11,15 and 16.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 12
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 84-1 - GRANDVIEW GARDENS - JIM THOMPSON CONTINUED
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Planned Unit Development 84-1
with staff recommendations amending condition number 4, from 56 feet
right-of-way to 52 feet right-of-way; condition number 5,from 28 feet
right-of-way to 26 feet right-of-way; condition number 11, from 6 foot
sidewalk to 4 foot meandering sidewalk, and deleting conditions 15 and 16,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS
-
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. Construction and sales office trailer utilized during the construction
phase of this project shall be approved by the Planning Division.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
.4. Dedicate to provide 52 feet right-of-way for Lincoln Avenue and
Washington Street with 36 feet curb separation.
5. Dedicate to provide 26 feet half-street right-of-way for Rose Street
with curb 18 feet from centerline.
6. Dedicate to provide 30 feet half-street right-of-way for Macy Street
with curb 20 feet from centerline.
7. Dedicate to provide 35 feet half-street right-of-way for Laguna Avenue
with 30.5 feet from mapped centerline or 18 feet from the construction
centerline of Laguna Avenue.
8. Dedicate to provide 30 feet half-street right-of-way for Grandview -
Avenue with curb 20 feet from construction centerline of Grandview.
Grandview Avenue construction centerline shall align with Grandview
Avenue in Tentative Tract Map 20139.
9. Construct part width street section for half right-of-way per Riverside
County standard number 110 for a full 20 feet of traveled way from the
face of curb to the edge of paving. This condition shall apply to
Grandview Avenue, Lincoln Avenue and Rose Street.
10. Dedicate to provide corner cutbacks at all street intersections.
11. Construct 4 foot meandering sidewalk along all streets.
12. Plans and profiles with supporting calculations for all off-site improve-
ments to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. Plans to include
street striping and signing.
13. Install ornamental street lighting.
14. Coordinate street alignment of Laguna Avenue with Edwin Studor, Trans-
portation Planner for Riverside County.
15. P~8~4ee-2Q-feet-8f-A~b~-~aY~R9-aRe-A7b~-ee~ffis-fe~-tAe-eKte~s4eR-8f
l:.a9l::lRa- .ff'em-~Fe~e€t-BeI::lRElaFY- t9-~a€y-~t~eet-: DELETED.
...."
16. P~eY~8e-+g-feet-ef-A~6~-~aYtR~-aR8-g-tR€AeS-A~6~-ee~ffis-a+eR~-tAe-easte~~y
s~ee-ef-Ma€y-St~eet-eetweeR-b4R€e+R-St~eet-aRa-ba~~Ra-: DELETED.
17. Submit list of proposed street names for Lincoln Street and Hashington
Street to the City Planner for his approval.
STORM DRAINS AND FLOOD CONTROL
18. Provide the City Engineer and Riverside County Flood Control with a
detailed hydrology study and hydraulic calculations for their review,
recommendations and approval.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 13
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 84-1 - GRANDVIEW GARDENS - JIM THOMPSON CONTINUED
19. Construct drainage facilities (if required) to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer.
-
20. Coordinate drainage acceptance with Tentative Tract Map 20139, in
the event this development occurs prior to development of Tentative
Tract Map 20139.
21. Provide adequate drainage protection to residential structures along
Rose Street with run-off directed and conveyed in an approved manner
in Grandview Avenue.
SURVEY AND MONUMENTATION
22. Submit certificate of survey for all lots developed.
23. All street intersection and lot monumentation will be required to be
installed and visable at the end of the construction of the project.
A bond must be posted for total monumentation and then released upon
satisfactory completion of this condition.
GRADI NG
24. All grading shall conform to Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code
and the City of lake Elsinore Grading Ordinance 636.
All property lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes
with the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
Grading plan shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
25.
26.
-
HATER
27.
28.
29.
SEW E R
30.
Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing water service.
Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee.
Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
Coordinate with Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District for sewer line
extension to serve the development.
31. Provide will serve letter from Elsinore Valley~1unicipalWater District
for sewer service and availability.
FEES
32.
33.
-
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
Pay all applicable fees per Ordinance 572.
Pay sewer fees in accordance to Elsinore Valley Municipal ~later District
fee schedule.
Pay traffic mitigation fee at the rate of $225.00 per residential unit
for future traffic signalization.
Pay Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution 83-87 schedule.
Cooperate with the City in forming a lighting and landscaping Maintenance
District.
Bond for all off-site improvements including a one-year maintenance bond
for all improvements constructed.
Pay street sweeping maintenance mitigation fee in the amount of $50.00
per lot.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Pa ge 14
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residences - 17241; 17251 and 17261 Bromley Avenue - George
Alongi - Staff presented proposal to construct three (3) single-family
residences at the above mentioned addresses. Staff stated proposal meets
Planning Department regulations and requirements.
t1r. George Alongi questioned conditions 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 16, and
17. Discussion was held on each condition in question.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residences at ...
17241; 17251 and 17261 Bromley Avenue with staff recommendations deleting
condition number 3; del eting the words "and automatic" from condition number
4; amending condition number 16 to read: "Provide street 1ight(s) as required
by City Ordi nance", second by Commi ss ioner Me11 i nger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS
1. All items on plot plan and elevations shall be provided as indicated
unless otherwise modified by Design Review Board's conditions.
2. Applicant is to meet all setbacks.
3. AflflH ea At-~ 5- te -fll"eY~ ae-eAe+esea-b'asl:l-l"eeefltae+e-w4tl:l-al'fH"el'i"'~a te .
Sei"'eeA~A~-tl:lat-W~++-Be-S~B~eet-te-al'l'l"eYa+-By-tl:le-P+aRR4A~-Q4Y4s4eA.
DELETED.
4. Applicant is to install a permanent aAa-a~teffiat4E sprinkler system
for planting area.
5. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
...
6. On Bromley Avenue a twenty-five foot (25') one-half street right-of-way
exists. No additional right-of-way is required. The curb and gutter
which exists at other locations along Bromley Avenue is at 18 feet from
street centerline. Install curb and gutter at 18 feet from street
center1 i ne across the to ta 1 property frontage.
7. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from street centerline to
curbline along Bromley Avenue (Traffic Index = 6.0).
Staff recommends that Condition No. 7be deferred by standard lien
agreement. There is no existing paving along Bromley Avenue from
La Shell Street to Gunnerson Street.
8. Install standard driveway approach to City standards and specifications.
No sidewalk is required along Bromley Avenue.
9. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the County Health Department.
10. Provide City with water service availability letter from serving agency.
11. Provide written assurance that the County Fire Department requirements
have been complied with for fire protection and fire hydrant locations.
12.
Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared by
applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by the City Engineer. "As Built"
plans, if required, shall be submitted to City Engineer for final approval
and acceptance 0 f project.
....."
13. Provide grading plan, soils report, Certificate of Survey, and grade
certification and compaction report to the City Engineer for approval
and conformance to approved grading plan.
14. Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows:
Streets
S to rm Dra i n
$
$
.03 per square foot of gross lot area.
.02 per square foot of gross lot area.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Pa ge 15
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES 17241; 17251 AND 17261 BROMLEY AVENUE - GEORGE ALONGI
CONTINUED
Parks
Sewer
$ .10 per square foot of gross building area.
Per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District fee
schedule with verification of payment .to City.
-
15. Provide City Engineer with a hydrology study for approval to identify
the total drainage area and flows that must be diverted to Bromley
Avenue via La Shell Street and tributary areas within this watershed.
Depending upon the results of this study, certain additional require-
ments may be necessary to handle the diverted flows from their present
course. It is anticipated, at this time, that only grading of Bromley
Avenue is an acceptable solution. Verification of hydrology study will
determine this.
16. Install street light(s) as requried by City ORDINANCE.
17. Cooperate with the City in establishing a Lighting and Landscaping
District. A Letter of Consent must be signed and notarized.
2. Business License for Worn Out Post - Mike Vallefuoco - Staff stated this is
for utilization of 31115 Riverside Drive as a commercial enterprise (custom
upholstery shop). On December 7, 1983, a letter was sent to an applicant
denying them a business license due to Section 17.66.040 (Parking Ordinance)
of Lake Elsinore's Municipal Code. Current applicant contends business will
be owner pickup and delivery only and will not require any customer parking.
Discussion was held on improvements; number of customers coming to the shop;
signage; parking requirements; ingress/egress to property; and no parking
- sign to be placed in front of establishment.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve request for business license at
31115 Riverside Drive subject to the following conditions, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
1. No customer pickup. Delivery of goods and services only.
2. No signage at place of business.
3. No Parking Sign placed in front of establishment.
3. Acceptance of Master Plan of Roadways in the Great Coastal Oil Lease Area -
Jack Higgins - Staff gave a brief outline of the suggested General Plan for
traffic circulation in the proposed development in the Great Coastal Oil
Lease area, and recommended approval in concept of the map of suggested General
Plan for traffic circulation in and around the proposed Jack Higgins I project.
Discussion was held on dedicated right-of-way; development of the whole area;
assessment districts; roadway master plan; placement of streets, and proposed
map being prepared by applicant's engineer and City Engineering Department not
reviewing nor a survey making sure where lot lines are.
-
~10tion by Commissioner vlashburn to deny without prejudice, second by Commissioner
Ba rnha rt.
Approved 5-0
CITY PLANNER/CITY ENGINEER REPORT
None
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Commissioner Washburn - None
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 3, 1984
Page 16
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
Commissioner t1ellinger - Standard and Special Conditions should be distinguished
in the reports. In addition, would like the Standard and Special conditions have
some sort of indication as to where the mitigation measures are, and what condi-
tions are mitigating what.
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Chairman Dominguez - Infringing into public right-of-way. By that I mean, we have
streets that run all the way down into the lake, and here we are trying to keep ---
the people in the places where they should be instead of running over up and down
the lots, and on private property. Somebody goes in there and they put a no
trespassing sign and blocks the street off, I really don't appreciate that. I
think that street should be opened up and be given access to the public to utilize
that right-of-way, so anytime we see anything like this, I would like to recommend
that we, right away, bring it up to the attention of staff, and make sure that we
give the people their right-of-way.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
....
....
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 3RD.
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
DAY
OF
JULY
1984
tUNUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of June 19, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residences 17241; 17251 and 17261 Bromley Avenue - George
Alongi - Staff presented proposal to construct three (3) single-family
residences at the above mentioned addresses. Staff stated proposal meets
Planning Division requirements.
Mr. George Alongi questioned conditions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.
Discussion was held on the conditions in question.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residences at 17241;
17251 and 17261 Bromley Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Chairman asked if there was any more discussion. Staff stated that if the
applicant is going to tear down any trees on any of his lots, we would
recommend that they be replaced with a similar tree.
Commissioner Washburn amended his motion to include staff's recommendation,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1. Applicant shall utilize all four (4) existing trees along the frontage
of Bromley Avenue that are within the boundaries of subject property for
landscaping purposes.
2. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets.
3. All areas not designated for buildings, parking, patios, and walkways
shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall be approved by Planning Division.
4. Applicant shall remove encompassing chain linked fence within interior
of Lot 52 prior to acquiring grading permit.
5. Applicant shall incorporate the intermixing of brick veneer and lap
siding for front elevations on both the two (2) bedroom homes. Spanish
tile roofing shall be used on all three residential units.
6. If feasible, the applicant shall utilize for landscaping purposes the
two (2) existing trees within Lots 52 and 53, if not two (2) 15 gallon
trees (California Sycamore; London Plane Tree; Thornless' Honey Locust)
shall replace them within rear area of said lots.
7.
IF APPLICANT TEARS DOWN ANY TREES ON ANY OF HIS LOTS, HE SHALL REPLACE
THEM WITH A SIMILAR TREE.
-
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
10:25 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
Resp~tfullY sUl:t~ed.
~d~ ~?c/"'7J
Linda Grindstaff. Plannln~
Commission Secretary
~:;;::; ~ ~
Fred Domin~~man
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON THE
17TH.
DAY
OF
JULY
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Barnhart.
-
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were City Planner Corcoran, City Engineer Culp, Associate Planner
Fields, Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant City Engineer Rubel.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of July 3, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Exception Permit 84-2 - Earle Sproule - Staff presented proposal
for a Conditional Exception Permit to convert the use of an existing structure,
a Arcade, to a multi-purpose room and dancing facility in the C-l (Limited
Commercial) Zoning District, located at 31861 Mission Trail.
-
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:33 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Exception Permit 84-2.
Mr. Tom Haley, manager of operation, stated he had questions on conditions 4
and 5. Chairman asked Mr. Haley if he would, at this time, like to speak in
favor and after the hearing is closed we will ask you to come back, and we
will answer your questions at that time. ~1r. Haley stated this is a new type
of recreation in the valley for kids, and thinks it is something that is needed
for them, as there is not too much activity in the valley for kids.
t1rs. Millie Sproule, co-owner, spoke in favor.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response,
Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:35 p.m.
Commissioner Barnhart questioned staff on conditions 4 and 5, stating hours
of operation 6:00 p.m. and 12:00 a.m. on weekdays only and weekends are not
restricted, but there are children, teenagers, that get out of school at 2:00
or 3:30. I don't see why the hour restriction should be there because it is
not in a residential area. Would like to see it open from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00
a.m. On condition number 5, I think part of their plan is to be able to rent
or lease out the multi-purpose room for wedding receptions or private parties,
and I would like to see the alcoholic beverages on a case by case basis, rather
than restricting them to no alcoholic beverages shall be permitted on the
premises because there are occasions and there is a dire need for this type of
use in the area.
Commissioner Washburn asked Mr. Haley to address condition number 4, regarding
hours of operation.
Mr. Haley stated that the hours for dancing in the evening is fine, but they
are also a restaurant, and item 4 limits our operation from 6:00 to midnight.
Staff stated that the applicants may also wish to hold some type of aerobic
classes in the afternoon or morning which would be permissible. We were
referring basically to teenagers, trying to limit their use so they don't skip
school to attend some type of dancing, but if it is conducterl classes we see
no problem with changing or modifying this condition.
Commissioner Saathoff asked staff if there was a concern of limiting hours of
operation because of parking? Staff answered in the negative.
Commissioner Washburn asked if there were plans to install outside speakers?
Mr. Haley answered in the negative. Commissioner Washburn also asked how
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17. 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION PERMIT 84-2 - EARLE SPROULE CONTINUED
applicants propose to handle the control of teen dancing outside? ~1r. Haley
stated that they have been there for three (3) years and have never had a
control problem. we monitor and we have people that we hire on more intensive
evenings to watch outside and take care of problems.
Commissioner Washburn stated that condition number 4 should be modified.
Commissioner Mellinger stated concern about crowd control in the parking area
for dances, and asked if they would have live bands? Mr. Haley answered in
the nega ti ve.
-
Commissioner Saathoff asked Mr. Haley what hours of operation they propose?'
~1r. Haley stated that their current business hours are from 11 :00 to 11 :00
during the week, but if I could rent the hall to a jazzercize group at 9:00
a.m. I would definately like to be able to. Commissioner Saathoff asked Mr.
Haley if he would say 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Mr. Haley answered in the
a ffi rma t i ve .
Chairman stated no problem with business hours of 9 to 12 in the evening as
long as we specify 6:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. for dancing. Mrs. Sproule stated
that in the afternoon they have children from age 5 to 8. Commissioner
Mellinger recommended no dancing during school hours.
Commissioner Saathoff stated under the circumstances on item number 4, we
rarely put restrictive hours on businesses and with the conversation welve
had at the table, I wonder if item 4 may well be deleted.
Chairman stated concern on condition number 5, no alcoholic beverages. Com-
missioner Barnhart stated that they have to go to the ABC Board for a license.
Chairman stated that they would still have to come to the City because they
don1t have a license to have alcohol. Commissioner Mellinger asked if they
would be serving alcohol? Mrs. Sproule answered in the negative; stating
this would be part of the rental of the hall (private parties would furnish
their own beverages). Chairman stated that he would like to see a sign on
the premises stating no alcoholic beverages. This way you cover yourself
and your business, and if they come for a special party, they have to get a
special license or special permit for that.
-
Commiss ioner L~ashburn recommended condition number 5 be amended to read: II No
alcoholic beverages shall be served or permitted on premises except with
special ABC License (permit) and/or wedding function or special functions".
Commissioner Saathoff stated with a ABC License, you are restricted to how
you serve. who you serve, when you serve them, in the company of whom" and
it would be my suggestion that if the applicant is interested in private
parites, and certain other functions other than the teen dancing and catering
just to teenagers, perhaps it would be better for them to come in and apply for
a business license that would in fact include alcoholic beverages. because the
ABC Board is going to restrict who and when you serve, therefore recommends
that ~ondition number 5 be deleted.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Conditional Exception Permit 84-2
with staff recommendations deleting condition number 4 and 5, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS
-
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. Signs shall be approved by Planning Division prior to issuance of
associated licenses.
4. ~e~ps-ef-e~epat~eR-s~a~~-he-hetweeR-6iQQ-~~ffi~-aR~-~2iQQ-a~ffi~-eR-wee~~ays
eR+Yi-wee~eR8s-ape-Ret-pestp~€tee~ DELETED.
5. Ne~qteAAAtte-~eYe~a~e~-!R~tt-be-!e~~ed-o~-pe~m;tted-on-p~emt!e!~ DELETED.
-
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Page 3
2.
Conditional Use Permit 84-6 - Lakeside Mini-Storage Park - Staff presented
proposal for a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing storage build-
ing into a dwelling unit for manager's residence, located at the southwest
intersection of Corydon Road and Cereal Street.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-6.
Mr. Ted Morris, one of the owners of Lakeside Mini-Storage Park, stated that
they have been burglarized on numerous occasions, and this change would
permit, if approved, their manager to live on the premises to provide better
security for their tennants.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response,
Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:56 p.m.
Commissioner Saathoff asked staff if the applicant was converting an existing
office building or an existing storage building? Staff stated the applicant
is converting an office building, which is sometimes used as a storage build-
ing. Commissioner Saathoff also asked about the elevation (stating he assumes
this will be above the 1270 elevation); school mitigation fees or is there
going to be a restriction against children.
Commissioner Washburn asked what is the square footage of the alteration we
are talking about; stating he see this as an alteration of an existing establish-
ed fC\cility.
Commissioner Mellinger stated this is still a residence and thinks it should
not only meet the Uniform Building Code, but also the Uniform Housing Code.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he sees this as an alteration, and as an
after thought to mitigate some of the required fees that should have been
tacked on earlier. I can't concur with the street sweeping mitigation fee, and
traffic mitigation fee, because the applicant is coming back with an alteration.
I would recommend deletion of conditions 17 and 18.
Commissioner Barnhart stated that she agrees with Commissioner Washburn, but on
condition number 14, weren't these Capital Improvement fees paid when the ~ini-
Storage was built? City Engineer stated if a permit was issued, these fees
would have been paid. Commissioner Barnhart stated that she has a concern with
all of the fees that have been tacked on.
Chairman stated that he also has a problem with the fees, but at the same time,
I doesn't see where they are trying to create a residence, it is still going
to be a storage building. Commissioner Saathoff stated that if they have a
family and children they have a residence, and then we have school mitigation
fees. Commissioner Washburn stated can't see housing a family there, sees it as
a caretaker's quarters. Commissioner Mellinger asked if they wanted to restrict
the occupancy there to caretaker only no family.
It was the consensus of the Commission to delete conditions 14 through 18
pertaining to fees, and to delete conditions 11, 12 and 13.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-6 with
staff recommendations deleting conditions 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and
adding a new condition number 11, which will read: "Caretaker's status only,
no,children", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Meet County Health Department requirements.
2. Approval for three (3) year period, subject to yearly review.
3. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
4. Meet all Uniform Building Codes.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1985
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-6 - LAKESIDE MINI-STORAGE PARK CONTINUEn
5. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
6. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
7. All street improvements were installed by previous Commercial Project.
-
GRADING
8. All grading requirements were approved under previous Commercial
Project.
SEWER
9. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and the California Regional Hater Quality
Control Board for on-site sewage disposal.
10. Provide sewer availability letter from Elsinore Valley MuniCipal Water
District.
HATER
11 . Pf'9y;i E1e-wH +-s ef'ye- +eHef'-~l::Iaf'a Rtee:i-fl.~-wa tef'-sef'y:j.ee- ff'91f1-!;+5:j. Ref'e-Va H ey
M~R:j.e;i,a+-Watef'-g:j.stp4et~ DELETED
11. CARETAKER'S STATUS ONLY. NO CHILDREN. (new condition number 11)
12. gee:j.eate-l::IRElef'~P9l::1REI-watef'-f:j.~Rts-te-tRe-b4ty-ef-bake-~+s:j.Refe-ef'-:j.ts
ass;i~Rees~ DELETED.
-
13. Meet-a++-f'e~~:j.f'elfleRts-ef-R:j.vef's:j.E1e-bel::lRty-F:j.f'e-ge~af'tlfleRt-fef'-f:j.pe
~f'9te€t:i-9R7 DELETED.
FEES
14. Pay-a++-a~~+:j.eae+e-Ga~:j.ta+-*IfI~f'eYelfleRt-F~REI-fees-~ef'-Qf'E1;iRaR€e-~e7-e72~
DELETED.
15. Pay-a++-sewef-fees-,ef-e+s;iR9f'e-Va++ey-Ml::IR:j.e:j.,a+-Watef'-Q:j.stf':j.€t-S€AeEl~+e~
DELETED.
16. Pay-a++-Pl::Ie+:j.e-~afety-fees-t,e+:j.ee-aREI-f;if'e1-,ef'-Rese+~t:j.9R-~9~-g~-g77
DELETED.
17. Pay-tf'aff:j.e-~:j.t;i~at:j.eR-fee-f9f'-fl::ltl::lf'e-tf'aff:j.e-safety-aREI-s:j.~Ra+;i~at:j.eR
:j.R-tAe-aIfl9l::1Rt-9f-$2,QQQ~QQ~ DELETED.
18. Pay-~tf'eet-~wee~:j.R~-M:j.t:j.~at:j.9R-fee-:j.R-tAe-alflel::lRt-ef-$eQQ~Qg~ DELETED.
3.
Tentative Tract Map 18719 - Charles o. Pease - Staff presented proposal to sub-
divide ll5~ acres into 341 residential lots, located westerly of the intersection
of Mountain Street and Robb Road.
-
Staff stated on condition number 34, the street sweeping maintenance fee should
be $50.00 per lot not $500.00 per lot.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:11 p.m., asking if there was anyone
wishing to speak in favor of Tentative Tract ~'ap 18719.
Mr. Bob Kipper, representing the property owner, spoke in favor of Tentative
Tract Map 18719, and stated that he would like to discuss a few of the condi-
tions. Chairman stated that after the public hearing portion they would call
him back up to discuss the conditions in question.
Minutes of Planning Commission
J u 1 y 1 7, 1 984
Page 5
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 18719 - CHARLES O. PEASE CONTINUED
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response,
Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:13 p.m.
-
Mr. Kipper stated that most of these questions he has discussed with staff
at various times, but he wants to get them on record. On condition number 11,
meet County Fire Department requirements. We have a letter from the County
Fire Qepartment, that is the standard letter they furnish to the County, and
in that letter it requests $300.00 mitigation fee, later in the conditions
there are fire mitigation fees, and discussing this with staff they told me
that the requirements they were speaking about were fire hydrant spacing, and
water flow and not the $300.00 special fee; on condition number 21, the ap-
plicant will enter into a development agreement to dedicate and fully improve
Lots 81, 82 and 83 for a community swimming pool, we discussed this item and
it is three (3) lots that are pretty much in the center of the property to be
used for recreation, this wasn't too bad, but then they asked for the swimming
pool and the rest of the things to be added on. It seems to be that there
needs to be some kind of dollar fee or a fixed fee. What I was told is that
these fees would be in lieu of the Park Fees, the Park Fees amounted to about
$34,000.00 and this could be in place of that, and in addition to that they
were trying to make up the difference in the Fire Department fees and they
wanted $25,000.00 into that, so that makes this about $60,000.00 plus the land
for that swimming pool, which I think is kind of high, but that is what I was
told where the fee would come from, that was the amount.
-
Chairman asked Mr. Kipper if he wanted this just for the records. Mr. Kipper
stated that he wanted this for the records and that he thinks it is a little
strong asking for that much improvement for the site. The first time we
discussed this, I thought it was for the tracts adjacent, and surroundinq tracts
paying into this to develop this site, but it seems like staff would like to
have this developer completely develop this site.
-
On condition number 24, applicant will contribute pro rate share of construction
of fire station to service western end of City. Amount not be exceed $25,000.00.
There is in Resolution 83-87 a mitigation fee of $150.00 per lot, and I asked
if this was in lieu of that and they said no, it is in addition to that, so we
are looking at about $75,000.00 or $76,000.00 in fire fees. The $25,000.00 is
in addition to the standard mitigation fee, it seems to me that this should be
in lieu of rather than in addition to; on condition number 29, the fourth para-
graph, we have asked to have some of the improvements, particularly along
Running Deer Road which is the far northerly street, be subject to further break-
down, staff agreeded that they could eliminate the improvements in that area, but
the wording is except the paving from Robb Road east to be deferred, that would
mean put in the curb and gutter, which would be subject to being broken up during
farming operations and would not be of any value when it was later developed, so
the intent there is to except the improvements easterly of Rolando Road, so I
think that wording needs to be corrected; on condition number 33, traffic safety
mitigation fee of $250.00, that is not in any ordinance and apparently isa
mitigation fee and seems to be a little bit excessive. The County has a $150.00
fee which seems to be adequate; on condition number 34, staff has clarified
this; on condition number 38, no problem speaks to landscaping/irrigation plan,
I can't figure out where they are going to be except in the medians for Robb
Road and Road Number IIAII; on condition number 49, asking for the dedication of
underground water rights to the City or its assignee. IIm sure that Mr. Pease
would not like to do away with his water rights; on condition number 50, meet
all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire protection, and
again, this was speaking of fire hydrant placement and water volume not the fees.
A lengthy discussion was held on the above mentioned conditions; condition
number 43 pertaining to drainage/road easement; and condition number 58 pertaining
to Lake Elsinore Parks and Recreation District requirements.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Tentative Tract Map 18719 with staff
recommendations with the following changes: condition number 11 to remain as
is; condition number 21 amended to read: "Applicant shall enter into a develop-
ment agreement to dedicate to the City of Lake Elsinore Lots 81, 82 and 83 for
community recreation"; condition number 24 to remain as written; condition
number 29, fourth paragraph, where it says except the paving should read "ex-
cept the improvements"; condition number 34 fee should be $50.00 per lot instead
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Page 6
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 18719 - CHARLES O. PEASE CONTINUED
of $500.00 per lot; condition number 43 add the words "per Ordinance 572";
Provide will-serve letter from Lake Elsinore or its assignee for se\ver added
as condition number 47.a.; condition number 49 amended to read: "Dedicate
underground water rights to the City or its assignee, except for existing
well needed for agricultural purposes; and delete condition number 58 until
we are furnished with ordinances and become familiar with same, second by
Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Approval is contingent upon approval of annexation request by the Local
Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
2. Applicant shall record City Council CC & R's for the Tract prohibiting
on-site street storage of boats, motorhomes, trailers, roof mounted
microwave receivers, and trucks over one-ton capacity. In addition,
CC & R's to include the following: "Floodplains shall be kept free of
buildings, obstructions, including fences which restrict the free flow
of storm waters"; and notification of all homeowners of the close
proximity of the Elsinore Fault Zone.
3. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Portions of Lots 27 through 41 are subject to flood hazards, therefore
fencing in this area should be limited to rail type or other types
that allow free flow of storm waters.
5. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Elementary and High
School Districts to off-set overcrowding.
6. Applicant shall submit landscaping plan for street trees, trees are to
be placed at 30-foot intervals and be approved by Planning Division.
7. All trees planted along streetscape must be a minimum of eight-feet
C8') high.
-
8. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division and Engineering Depart-
ment a map showing all phases of development, if applicable.
9. Trailers utilized during the construction phase shall be approved by the
Planning Division.
10. All building plans shall be reviewed by the City of Lake Elsinore Build-
ing Department and/or International Council of Building Officials (leBO)
for review and utilization of highest Uniform Building Code values
pertaining to seismic structural design.
11. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
12. Meet County Health Department requirements.
13. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
14. Applicant shall submit design elevation and landscaping plan to the
Design Review Board for approval.
15. Participate in City wide entry-signage program.
-
16. All signage must be under permit.
17. Provide transit facilities (i.e., covered bus stops) within said project
as deemed applicable by Chairman of Lake Elsinore Transit System.
18. Participate in Landscaping and Lighting District.
19. All slopes must be planted with erosiion control vegetation to be approved
by Planning.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Page 7
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 18719 - CHARLES O. PEASE CONTINUED
20. Applicant shall provide southerly access route through Lot 32.
21 . APPLICANT SHALL ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO DEDICATE TO
THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LOTS 81, 82 AND 83 FOR COMMUNITY RECREATION.
-----
22. Applicant shall provide landscaped median to be approved by Planning
Division on street labeled Lot A.
23. Applicant shall retain as many citrus trees as possible.
24. Applicant will contribute pro rata share of construction of fire
station to service western end of City. Amount not to exceed $25,000.00.
25. Issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration.
25. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
27. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
28. Robb Road presently has a 50-foot right-of-way. The General Plan re-
quires a 110 foot right-of-way and a 85-foot curb-to-curb roadway with
a median. Dedicate 25 feet additional right-of-way width for Robb
Road for the distance from Mountain Street to the east extension of
the south tract boundary.
Construct curb, gutter and paving on Robb Road from Mountain Street
to the east extension of the south tract boundary to accommodate a
master plan for construction of the future Grand Avenue-Robb Road
intersection with a radius up to 80-feet. This developer shall fund
5Q% of the cost of the design of this future Grand Avenue-Robb Road
intersection.
Construct pavement on Robb Road to the centerline of present and/or
future street right-of-way alignment as required for the larger radius
curve. Existing paving on Robb Road must be replaced unless tests
show that the present paving will resist traffic loads represented by
the City Engineer's traffic index.
29.
Participate in 50% of the cost of a median and City entrance sign on
Robb Road. Required improvements along Robb Road shall not include
sidewalk. The sidewalk will be a requirement of future development.
Lot A (street) to be constructed full width with 64-foot curb-to-curb
roadway with a 15-foot median. Sidewalk can be deferred along the
frontage of the two large lots which will not be developed at this
time. Mountain Street to be 50-foot right-of-way and 40-foot curb-to-
curb roadway.
.....
From Rolando Road to Robb Road on Mountain Street, paving shall extend
to eight-feet (8') north of centerline with header. Remainder of
street improvements on the north side can be deferred until adjacent
land develops.
All other interior streets shall be 50-foot right-of-way and 36-foot
curb-to-curb roadways. On Rolando Road pavement shall extend to
eight-feet (8') east of centerline with header. Remainder of street
improvements can be deferred until adjacent land develops.
Paving on Running Deer Road shall extend eight-feet (8') north of center-
line with header, EXCEPT THE' IMPROVEMENTS from Rolando Road east can be
deferred until the adjacent land develops.
A street shall be constructed through Lot 32 and shall be terminated
at the south boundary. The street shall be 50-foot right-of-way with
a 40-foot curb-to-curb roadway.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Pa ge 8
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 18719 - CHARLES O. PEASE CONTINUED
All interior streets shall have a 6-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to
the curb, except where exceptions are listed elsewhere in these
conditions of approval.
30. Provide a Class II Bicycle Lane along Robb Road.
31. Construct curb, gutter and paving on all proposed streets to the
specifications of the City Engineer.
32. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built streets,
grading utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
-
33. Pay traffic safety mitigation fee for future traffic safety and
signalization in the amount of $250.00 per lot.
34. Pay street sweeping maintenance mitigation fee in the amount of
$50.00 per lot.
35. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and specifications.
Obtain Riverside County permits for public improvements where County
area is involved.
GRADING
36. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Build-
ing Code, Chapter 70.
37. Provide preliminary soils, geology and seismic report including a
street design. Provide final reports showing compliance with pre-
liminary reports (with possible City modifications) and finish grade
certification. ...
38. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer, including street trees.
39. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All
property lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with
the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
40. a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a street lighting and landscaping
maintenance district.
DRAINAGE
41. Comply with the requirements of Riverside County Flood Control report
dated July 2, 1984, and additional or alternative requirements of the
City Engi neer and the City Code. The City Engi neer shall judge as to
interpretation and application of flood control recommendations.
42. Submit hydrology and hydraulic studies, necessary master planning and
detailed plans and profiles of the proposed Flood Control facilities to
Riverside County Flood Control District and to the City Engineer for
review and approval prior to Final Map recordation. Provide drainage
easements as required by the City Engineer.
43. Along the west tract boundary from Running Deer Road and southerly to
the south line of Lot 61, the perimeter drainage collection area shall
be a 3D-foot wide irrevocable easement to provide interim drainage
protection for the subdivision and also a possible future roadway. An
irrevocable easement for a drainage collector only, along the west
perimeter of this tract, from Lot 61 partially through Lot 41, shall ,be
dedicated, which the City shall not accept unless or until permanent
improvements are constructed. The underlying ownership of the drainage/
road easement will remain with the individual homeowners who will be
responsible for maintenance of the drainage facility. PER ORDINANCE 572.
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Page 9
TENTATI VE TRACT MAP 18719 - CHARLES O. PEASE CONTINUED
44. Drainage from Tract 18719 shall be contained on the west side of
Robb Road to allow for elimination of the drainage culvert crossing
Robb Road between Mountain Street and Lot A (street).
-
45. Pay an off-site drainage impact mitigation fee of $400.00 per lot.
SB~ER
46. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley "'1unicipal Hater
District, County Health Department and Regional Water Quality Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal.
47. Design on-site sewage collection and disposal system so that future
connection can be made to the regional sewage system. Install clean-
outs behind the sidewalk on all sewer laterals as required by the
City and/or Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
a) PROVIDE WILL-SERVE LETTER FROM LAKE ELSINORE OR ITS
ASSIGNEE FOR SEWER.
WATER
48. Provide a will-serve letter guaranteeing water service from Elsinore
Vall ey ~,1unicipal ~Jater District.
49. Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee, EXCEPT
FOR EXISTING WELL NEEDED FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES.
50. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
_ protection.
FEES
51. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
52. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedule.
53. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
54. Pay all school fees.
FI NAL MAP
55. Prior to Final ~1ap recordation, a subdivision agreement shall be entered
into with the developer(s), DtoJner(s), and the City.
56. Final r1ap shall show the following items with a prominent note:
a) All geologic fault lines;
b) Areas subject to flood hazards.
57. Provide tract phasing plan for City Engineer1s approval. Sond public
__ improvements for each phase, as approved by the City Engineer.
PARKS
58. Meet-a++-f'eEjl::lff'effleAts-aAeI-f'eSefflffleAelaHeAs-ef-l:aKe-~+sfflef'e-Paf'KS-aflel-
Resf'eaHeA-Qfstf'fst-: DELETED UNTIL FURNISHED tHTH ORDI~l.A.NCF.:S ,A.ND
BECOME FAMILIAR WITH SAME.
4. Tentative Tract Map 19344 - Lakeside Estates, Ltd. c/o Ken Buchanan - Staff
presented request for continuation of Tentative Tract ~1ap 19344 to the meeting
of August 7, 1984, due to concerns on drainage and sewage.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 9:01 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Tentative Tract ~1ap 19344. Receiving no reply, Chairman
asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, Chair-
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Pa ge 10
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344 - LAKESIDE ESTATES , LTD. C/O KEN BUCHANM~ CONTINUED
man closed the public hearing at 9:02 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to continue the public hearing on Tentative
Tract Map 19344 to the meeting of August 7, 1984, second by Commissioner
Ba rnha rt .
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
-
1. Single-Family Residences - 218 and 220 Townsend Avenue - Pat Browning - Staff
presented proposal to construct two (2) single-family residences at the above
mentioned addresses. Staff stated proposal meets all Planning Division re-
qui rements .
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he had a copy of
the conditions.
Mr. Pat Browning, applicant, stated he had a copy of the conditions, and that
he is in agreement with the conditions.
Commissioner Barnhart asked if condition number 6 and 16 was a duplication?
Staff answered in the affirmative.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residences at 218
and 220 Townsend Avenue with staff recommendations deleting condition number
6, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated on the
site plan, unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission condi-
tions.
-
2. Applicant shall meet all setbacks.
3. Applicant shall submit plans to the Planning Division and/or Engineering
Department outlining specific erosion control measures (for rear lot
areas of parcels 18 and 20) to be initiated to mitigate any potential
removal or disruption of top soil manmade or natural occurrences.
4. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
5. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning waste water dis-
po s a 1 .
6. Meet-beHRty-f4~e-Qe~a~tffieRt-~e~H4~effieRts~
DELETED.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
S TRE ETS
7. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
8. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built streets,
grading, utility and drainage improvements or easements as needed.
9. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and standard specifications
for public works.
10. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
---
GRADING
11. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Pa ge 11
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES 218 AND 220 TOWNSEND AVENUE - PAT BROWNING CONTINUED
-
Code, Chapter 70.
12. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All
property lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes, with
the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
SEW E R
13. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County of Riverside Health Department and the Regional Hater Quality
Control Board for sewage disposal.
14. Provide a will-serve letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District guaranteeing sewer availability.
WATER
15. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
16. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
FEES
-
17. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fees.
18. Pay all Plan Checking fees for grading and street improvement plans.
1 9. Pay all schoo 1 fees.
20. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
2. Residential Project 84-5 - Oak Springs Enterprises - Staff presented proposal
to construct two (2) eight-plex apartment buildings on .75t acres, located
150 feet east of Chestnut Street on Peck, between Graham Avenue and Chestnut
Street.
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Mr. Pat Browning stated
he was representing Oak Springs and had no questions on the conditions.
Commissioner Saathoff asked staff why condition number 6 was required? Staff
stated this was asked for because they felt it would provide nice exterior
fencing and compliment the area.
Mr. Bob Jacobson stated he was opposed to this project because of the high
density, would prefer to see single-family or duplex in this area.
A brief discussion was held on the General Plan land Use designation for this
area.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Residential Project 84-5, with
sta ff recommendations, second by Commiss ioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Meet all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
2. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division a landscape/irrigation
plan detailing trees, shrubs~ ground cover and other landscape features.
3. Applicant to provide security lighting to be directed on-site with
effective shields to prevent the emission of glare onto adjacent
streets or residences.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Page 12
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-5 - OAK SPRINGS ENTERPRISES CONTINUED
4. Two (2) ornamental street lamps shall be provided at the two (2)
corners of the driveway approach, adjacent to the project1s northerly
walkway areas.
5. Project shall be constructed according to submitted site plan and
elevations. Any changes will require resubmittal to the Design
Review Board.
6. A three foot (31) decorative pillar wall, intermixed with wrought iron,
shall be provided along the front boundaries of the site. The other
three (3) sides of the project shall be enclosed with a partial six-
foot (61) split block wall.
-
7. Meet all County Fire Department requirements.
8. Applicant shall meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
9. All signs to be approved by Planning Division.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONQITIONS:
STREETS
10. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
11. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
12. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and standard specifications
for public works.
-
13. All street monumentation must be reset if disturbed during construction
and documentation submitted to City Engineer for approval and acceptance.
14. Pay all applicable plan check fees upon first submittal.
GRADING
15. Cooperate with the City in forming a street lighting and landscaping
district.
15. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
17. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All pro-
perty lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
SEWER
18. Comply with the requirement of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department, and California Regional Water Quality Control
Roard for sewage disposal.
19.
Provide will-serve letter guaranteeing sewer service from Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District.
-
~'lATER
20. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass i gnees .
21. Pay all applicable fees for connection to City water system per City
Ordinance.
22. r1eet all requi rements 0 f Ri vers i de County Fi re I'lepa rtment for fi re
protection.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17,1984
Pa ge 1 3
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-5 - OAK SPRINGS ENTERPRISES CONTINUED
FEES
23. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fund fees per Ordinance 572.
-
24.
Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley t1unicipal Water District
schedule.
25. Pay all school fees.
26. Pay traffic mitigation signalization fee in the amount of $100.00 per
unit.
27. Pay street sweeping maintenance mitigation fee in the amount of $500.00.
Commissioner Washburn returned to the table.
Commercial Project 84-8 - Art Nelson - Staff presented proposal to-construct
a 4,800 square foot commercial office building on approximately .43~ acres,
located 160 feet southerly of Lakeshore Drive on the westerly side of Fraser
Drive.
3.
Chairman asked if the applicant had a copy of the conditions? Mr. Art Nelson
answered in the affirmative, and stated he has a question on condition number
18, dedication of underground water rights, assumes that will be to Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District. Staff stated that it may be Elsinore Water
District. Mr. Nelson then question condition number 22, wanting to know if
school fees were due on commercial projects. Commissioner Washburn stated
he did not believe school fees were required on commercial projects.
-
Commissioner Barnhart questioned condition number 9, pertaining to Fraser
Drive, wanting to know if the problem with Mr. Langton was solved on Fraser
Drive. Commissioner Barnhart was informed that the applicant only has to
go to the centerline and this project will not affect Mr. Langton.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 84-8 with staff
recommendations deleting condition number 22, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
2.
3.
4.
- 5.
6.
7.
1. Project shall be constructed according to submitted site plan and
elevations. Any changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review
Soard.
A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Provide written clearance and approval from Riverside County Health
Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Meet all County Fire Department requirements.
All signs to be approved by Planning Division.
Applicant shall relocate handicapped stall on site plan to northwest
corner of parking facility, closest to the entryway of the building.
STREETS
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONOITI0NS:
8. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
9. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17,1984
Pa ge 14
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-8 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
10. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and standard specifications
for publ ic works.
11. Pay all plan check fees as required by Ordinance upon first submittal.
12. Cooperate with the City in forming a street lighting and landscaping
district.
-
GRADING
13. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Build-
ing Code, Chapter 70.
14. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All
property lines shall be at the top of construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
SEHER
15. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health nepartment and California Regional Hater Quality Control
Board for sewage disposal.
16. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing sewer service from Elsinore
Valley ~1unicipal Hater District.
HATER
17. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing water service from serving
water district.
18.
Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
-
19. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
FEES
20. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fund fees per Ordinance 572.
21. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal \iJater District schedule.
22.
Pay-a~~-5€~ee~-fee5~
DELETED.
23. Pay traffic mitigation signalization fees in the amount of $3,000.00.
24. Pay street sweeping maintenance mitigation fee in the amount of $500.00.
4.. Commercial Project 84-9 - Mike Grinel - Staff presented proposal to expand an
existing retail/commercial center, located adjacent to northwest corner of
San Jacinto River Road and Casino Drive.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had a copy of the
conditions and if he had any questions.
Mr. Grinel stated he had a copy of the conditions and had many questions. Mr.
Grinel then gave background report on proposed project; and then stated that
for several months he has tried to get several questions answered. Finally,
got an appointment on May 29 with Mr. Corcoran, Mr. Trevino and Mr. Culp and
submitted in writting a memo asking for answers to his questions which he
never received. I spent considerable time with staff yesterday, and generally
speaking.~rought it again to their attention that I had not received an answer
in the previous five weeks that covers some of these conditions.
-
The items discussed in the memo that were not answered, was when we first got
the approval for the 5,000 foot building, the fees were based on 84,000 square
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Page 15
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-9 - MIKE GRINEL CONTINUED
-
feet of land. It was suggested a proper method would be to phase, using only
the square footage of the project to be constructed. Since that 84,000
square feet was used with what we did in the Lot Line Adjustment, and what we
purchased from Cal Trans that piece has grown to 111,000 feet; so when you
go in for fees, we say fine the next project is 38,000 feet and we paid on
84,000 feet which should be 111,000 feet, it starts to get confusing. Some-
one was going to consider and let me know whether we could use the actual
footage for whatever phase we are going into, which would be a means of
being able to figure out the fees.
Commissioner Saathoff asked Mr. Grinel if he was saying that the fees on the
square footage of land had been collected. Mr. Grinel stated they were
collected on 84,000 square feet, they did not allow for the easement usage
and that should be adjusted.
Mr. Grinel stated they had discussed the following items: Capital fund for
sewage (since it was moved over to the Water District, he has been trying to
find out where the stub-out is going to be, which is one of the conditions,
but I can't comply until I find out where it is going to be or if a stub-out
is going to be available, the depth of it and also what the fees are going
to be); discussed signalization of Railroad Canyon Road and Casino Drive
tto have a price put on it that is three times the cost of the signal is
out of line); discussed police and fire mitigation fees; and the possibility
of using soils and geology report that we had to do for the first develop-
ment instead of having to go back through and supply all of these again
since it is just the adjoining property and a simple extension.
-
Discussion was held on the memo that Mr. Grinel referenced pertaining to
fees and continuing the project to the next meeting and having the memo
included in the packet.
~10tion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Commercial Project 84-9 to the
meeting of August 7, 1984 with applicant's memo of May 29 and any pertinent
information included in packet, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
5.
Residential Project 84-7 - John Vosilla c/o Diana L. Mastran~elo - Staff
presented proposal to construct a residential duplex on 0.10_ acres, located
easterly of the intersection of Lowell Street and Graham Avenue.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had a copy of the
conditions and if there were any questions. Mrs. Vosilla stated she had
a question on condition number 10, pertaining to the street light on Graham.
Chairman asked staff to clarify condition number 10. City Engineer stated
that they were just asking for the relocation of the existing pole on the
northeast corner of Graham and Lowell to accommodate future street improvements.
A brief discussion was held on the General Plan Use designation of Mixed-Use
District.
-
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Residential Project 84-7 with
staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Appro ved 5- 0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Meet all County Fire Department requirements.
2. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
3. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
;
4. Meet all County Health Department requirements.
5. Applicant shall meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17, 1984
Page 16
RESI~ENTIAL PROJECT 84-7 - JOHN VOSILLA C/O DIANA L. MASTRANGELO CONTINUED
ENGINEERING DEPARTr1ENT CON:.lITIONS:
6. An existing 80 foot right-of-way exists on Graham Avenue. General
Plan Amendment 84-1 (approved by City Council July 12, 1984) changed
the major classification of 100 foot right-of-way and 76 foot curb-
to-curb to Modified Secondary of 80 feet of right-of-way and 64 feet
curb-to-curb to fit existing developed projects along Graham. No
additional dedication required.
a) An existing 60 feet of right-of-way exists on Lowell
Street. No additional dedication will be required
on Lowell Street property frontage.
7. Install curb and gutter 32 feet from street centerline on Graham
Avenue. There is an existing sidewalk along the property frontage
that will require removal and replacement due to existing condition.
Plot Plan submitted reflects no ingress/egress via Graham Avenue.
a} Install curb and gutter to match existing curb and
gutter locations northerly of project location on
Lowell Street. Plot Plan shows one 20 foot wide
driveway approach on Lowell Street.
8. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from centerline to curbline
on Graham Avenue (Traffic Index = 8.0), and Lowell Street (Traffic
Index = 6.5). There is existing paving on both Graham Av~nue and
Lowell Street. Tests must show that the existing paving is to City
standards and will support the traffic load represented by the traffic
index.
-
9. Provide City Engineer with grading plan, Certificate of Survey, and
soils report which includes soil test for paveMent design.
-
10. Install street lights as approved by the City Engineer. There is an
existing light standard and wooden pole existing on the northeast
corner of Graham and Lowell Street. This light will have to be re-
located due to the future street improvements. Cooperate with the
City of Lake Elsinore in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
11. Plans and specifications for public improvements to be prepared by a
Civil Engineer to include striping and signing as approved by the City
Engineer.
12. There is an existing fire hydrant on Graham Avenue that may have to be
relocated due to future curbline improvements. Provide written assurance
that the County Fire Department requirements for fire protection (to
include hydrant locations) have been met.
13. Pay Capital Improvement fees, as fa 11 ows :
Street $ .03 per square foo t 0 f lot area.
Park $ .01 per square foot of lot area.
Storm Drains $ .02 per square foot of lot area.
Water $ 500.00 per living unit.
14. Dedicate subsurface water rights to City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee.
-
15. Provide will serve letter for sewer availability and pay all Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District sewer service fees and construct sewer
cleanout at property line.
CITY PLANNER/CITY ENGINEER REPORT
City Engineer Culp stated that a number of weeks ago, the Commission requested he
contact the owner of the parcel on the corner of Scrivener and Graham. I.found
out that the owner was Krouse Builders. I sent a letter to Mr. Krouse saYlng please
construct the sidewalks. It was the particular parcel that was graded, he took up
-
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17,1984
Pa ge 17
CITY PLANNER/CITY ENGINEER REPORT CONTINUEO
the sidewalks. The Commission requested that the sidewalks be re-insta11ed. Mr.
Krouse informed me at that time, that in two weeks he would be submitting plans
to the Planning Department, that he has his funding and he is going to go. Two
weeks have passed and I haven't seen anything, I asked Planning and nothing has
been submitted. I submitted to Mr. Krouse a second notice to re-insta11 the
sidewalk and a first notice to abate the weeds as well as the small saplings
that are growing up on the lots.
City Planner Corcoran stated that he wanted to formally notify the Commission
that he will be meeting with the consultant all day Friday (July 20th) to work
on the Zoning Ordinance. We have also started Code Enforcement on Housing Abate-
ment proceedings. We have initiated ten letters, at various stages, to go ahead
with the Housing Abatement, and I have established that as a top priority within
the department, and moved signs to the back burner at this point so we can
concentrate primarily on dilapidated structures and burnt out structures. Com-
missioner Mellinger asked which Code staff was using? City Planner Corcoran
stated that we have a couple of ordinances, the Municipal Code and the Uniform
Building Code. Commissioner Saathoff asked what about an Appeals Board? City
Planner Corcoran stated that the City Council will act as the Appeals Soard.
Some of the structures have already been placed through the appeals process, and
they were given a certain period of time to rehabilitate the structure or take it
down. Chairman Dominguez asked about abandoned vehicles. City Planner Corcoran
stated that he has a notice of preparation to bid for abatement of abandoned
vehicles on the consent calendar of the next City Council Agenda, July 24th.
City Planner Corcoran stated that he would also be bring forth a lakeshore Over-
lay plan that will be coming up shortly. To keep you informed, on the Council
Agenda,I have on the consent calendar a letter to property owners along lakeshore
Drive from Chaney Street down to approximately Slavick's property, just viewing
their interest on the possibility of going for a short term lease to clean up the
lakeshore property. The City would pick up the expenses of property taxes and
weed abatement, maintaining that property.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Mellinger - Since you are working on the Zoning Ordinance, are you
considering large family day care centers, since it is in our current ordinance
now? City Planner Corcoran stated that we have a provision for day care centers
and \lie would like to maintain it on a Conditional Use Permit basis. Commissioner
Mellinger asked if he was aware of the limitations on a Use Permit, stating that
under State law it can't be just like a Conditional Use Permit, you can't have a
hearing until a decision is made unless the hearing is requested by an affected
person. The State has inacted this law, for day care centers up to 12 children,
to make sure that Cities and Counties can't prevent them, and you have three
options: make it a permitted use; make it a non discretionary permit; or make it a
discretionary permit in front of a Zoning Administrator as opposed to a Commission
or Council, if you have one. Basically, you have to notify everyone within 100
feet of the applicant, you can not have a hearing unless someone requests it (some-
one within that 100 feet) or the applicant requests it, so it is not really a
Conditional Use it is kind of a Special use permit. City Planner Corcoran stated
according to State law the Planning Commission acts as the Zoning Administrator.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that this was fine, but it is a little different
than a Conditional Use Permit and it is going to have to be a special type permit.
The problem with a Conditional Use Permit, I have already received notification
from the State of California, that they are going to go after Cities that require
an actual Conditional Use Permit. City Planner Corcoran stated that the Planning
Commission will have the opportunity to review the entire Zoning Ordinance.
On Conditional Exception Permits (variance). I would like to see those sections
especially commercial and industrial where it addresses uses similar to and so on,
and those go under a Conditional Use Permit process, where we can address things
like the dance hall, because technically the way we are doing Conditional Exceptions
Permits it is illegal, and since we are re-doing the Zoning Ordinance we might as
well, because use variances are illegal. The State law says that variances cannot
apply to uses, it can only apply to physical (topography, special circumstances),
and the way you get around that is to take uses that normally, expressly, in the code
and just require a Conditional Use Permit for them, because that section of State
Minutes of Planning Commission
July 17,1984
Page 18
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
Law does not apply and it states that it does not apply to Conditional Use Permits.
Then the Conditional Exception Permits would be for items that have to do with
setbacks, height and so on. City Planner Corcoran stated that they have eliminated
Conditional Exceptions Permits and put in Variances. Commissioner Mellinger then
asked as far as uses go how are we going to to that? City Planner Corcoran stated
that we are still maintaining Conditional Use Permits. City Planner Corcoran then
stated that he would prefer to wait until we have the completed package and then
discuss this.
-
Commissioner Mellinger stated that he still has a concern about Negative Declarations,
sees issuance of Negative Declaration, do we have a public review period and a public
notice for this, and are we doing this? City Planner Corcoran answered in the nega-
tive. Commissioner Mellinger stated that we are suppost to be doing this. We are
not suppost to consider any action until we see the Negative Declaration. It is
just a technical thing, because we have the initial study already and we know what
is going to be on the Negative Declaration, but you are suppost to have a public
notice in the newspaper and then a certain amount of time for them to look at that.
City Planner Corcoran stated that we include in our public notice what the environ-
mental assessment generated by staff is; so that in a sense can act as a public
review process. Commissioner Mellinger stated that the public comment period is
what he is concerned about; public comment period is generally 30-45 days -- you
could do it concurrently.
Commissioner Barnhart - Would like to report that between the City, Chamber of
Commerce, Parks and Recreation and the Downtown Business Association we are having
the Olympic Torch run through here next Monday, and all signs are go, we have gotten
beautiful cooperation. On the same day, prior to the runner arriving here, we will
have a ribbon cutting, and we will be starting to work on our Lakepoint Community
Park, which will be another community effort.
Commissioner Washburn - I think it might be prudent on our part after we get Title
17, that the City Planner is going to provide via the consultant, that at some point
we sit down in a joint study session with Council to go over this, so that they
thoroughly understand it as well as we do, and we can plug up holes at that time,
rather than bouncing it back and forth.
-
I have a question for City Planner Corcoran. On the Housing Abatement Program was
that also including zoning abatement, where we have overcrowding conditions in
garages, and if not how are we going to handle that? City Planner Corcoran stated
that when we find an overcrowding we pursue that directly, that doesn't go with the
Housing Abatement. Housing Abatement, due to the long notification periods and etc.,
we are trying to act on a time frame. On the overcrowding we react immediately once
we find the situation. Commissioner Washburn stated that he would report again the
people on Lookout Street still have a family, chickens and young kids living in the
garage, and will provide the address later.
Asked the City Engineer what is the status on the re-surfacing of Main Street. City
Engineer Culp stated that the latest is that Kraftco International contacted the
City, in talking to other agencies that are interested in the same product, the other
agencies have found out that there has been a problem in Lake Elsinore, and apparently
through calls or some form of communications we are giving Kraftco a bad name, so
Kraftco because of the product, got a hold of us and said that what ever it takes
get Main Street fixed. We are going to give you $10,000.00 to pay for the asphalt to
cover the mess. City Engineer Culp stated he then asked for the particulars on how
they wanted to be invoiced. We have invoiced them and are now waiting for the check.
Commissioner Washburn then asked if we are still planning to do anything with the
bricks or has than gone by the wayside? Chairman Dominguez stated that they were
wa iting fo r the overl ay.
-
Chairman Dominguez - None
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
mNUTES OF
HELD ON THE
mNIJTE ACTION
LAKE ELS INORE DES I GrI REVIE\~ BOARD
17TH.
1984
OF
DAY
JULY
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of July 3, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
-
BUSINESS ITE~~S
1. Single-Family Residences - 218 and 220 Townsend Avenue - Pat Browning - Staff
presented proposal to construct two (2) single-family residences at the above
mentioned addresses. Staff stated proposal meets all Planning Division re-
quirements.
Mr. Pat Browning, applicant, stated that he did not have any questions on the
conditions, but one correction that should be noted is that both houses will
have tile roofing.
Commissioner Washburn asked if it was at staff's discretion where the fire-
place was located? Staff answered in the negative.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residences at 218
and 220 Townsend Avenue with staff recommendations and correction of roof
material from composition to tile, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
l.
-
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets.
Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
Applicant shall plant street trees outside of public right-of-way,
to be approved by Planning Division.
Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart.
All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation to be
approved by Planning Division.
7. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
2. Residential Project 84-5 - Oak Springs Enterprises -
-
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused.
Staff presented proposal to construct two (2) eight-plex apartment buildings
on .75~ acres, located 150 feet east of Chestnut Street on Peck, between Graham
Avenue and Chestnut Street.
Mr. Pat Browning, representing Oak Springs, stated basically they agree with
all of the conditions, and have re-designed the landscape and site plan trying
to incorporate all the suggested ideas. But in going over tne conditions in
a little more detail, noted that item 5 requires a six-inch high concrete curb
to separate the planting areas from the paved areas. I have discussed this
with staff and want to propose in lieu of the six-inch curb that along the
entry diveway, the center driveway. that we increase the planter and the land-
scape area on both sides to six fe'et wide in lieu of the three foot wide that
we have on the plans now, which would give us twice the plant/landscape area
on either side of the driveway, and we will be installing wheel stops (concrete
stops) at the parking area so there won't be any interference with the cars
there. At the end of the driveway where it curves, at the back side, we just
go ahead an extend the concrete right out to the asphalt and not landscape
Minutes of Design Review Board
July 17,1984
Page 2
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-5 - OAK SPRINGS ENTERPRISES CONTINUED
that (approximately 10 feet) that way we won't have any visibility problems
with people circulating and parking in the back side, and that should
alleviate any planting adjacent to the asphalt.
Commissioner Saathoff asked Mr. Browning if they were doing this in lieu of
item 5 and asking that condition number 5 be deleted. Mr. Browning stated
that was right, just delete the six-inch concrete curb, we will go with
curb stops everywhere required and obviously put in a redwood header, and
increase the planter area.
....,
Chairman asked what staff thought about this? Staff stated that they were
in complete agreement, and recommended that condition number 5 be deleted
and re-worded to say that the applicant is to provide curb stops, redwood
headers and increase planter area.
Motion by Commi ss ioner Mell i nger to approve Res i denti al Project 84-5 with
staff recommendations, deleting condition number 5 and adding a new condi-
tion number 5 which will read: "Applicant shall install curb stops, red-
wood headers and increase landscaping, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All planting and landscaping areas shall have permanent and automatic
sprinkler systems.
2. Grading plan to be approved by Engineering Department.
3. Applicant is to provide street trees at twenty-foot (20') intervals
along frontage of Peck Street.
4. Plan shall provide a minimum three-foot (3') wide planter and a
minimum four-foot (4') wide sidewalk adjacent to the front property
line and to the majority of the central driveway approach (75 feet).
Trees are to be approved by Planning Division.
....
5. A++-13+aRHR~-af'eaS-SAan-ee-se13af'a:Ee8-ff'elll-13aYe8-af'eaS-w~tA-a-s4K--
~R€A-{~ll~-h4~h-€eR€f'e:Ee-€~pe~ DELETED.
5. APPLICANT SHALL INSTALL CURB STOPS, REDWOOD HEADERS AND INCREASE
LANDSCAPING. (New condition number 5).
6. Applicant shall provide single entry wooden gates at both sides (east
and west) of apartment complex that will enter into landscaped yards
from bui 1 di ngs .
7. Appl icant shall provide concrete wheel stops for all parking spaces
located on-site.
8. All items depicted on the landscaping plan shall be provided for as
indicated.
9. Applicant shall post a $3,000.00 performance bond to insure implementa-
tion of the landscaping plan.
10. All roof mounted equipment, trash enclosures, storage and ground support
equipment shall be effectively screened from public view and subject to
approval from Planning Division.
-
Cororotss..toner W.as.hhurn returned to th_e. tahl e.
3.
Commercial Project 84-8 - Art Nel son - Sta ff presented proposal to construct
a 4,800 square foot commercial offfce buil di ng on approximately .43! acres,
located 160 feet southerly of Lakeshore Drive on the westerly side of Fraser
Drive.
Mr. Art Nelson requested that condition number 4 be changed by adding the
Minutes of Design Review Board
July 17, 1984
Page 3
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-8 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
-
words "or compl etion of sa i d improvements prior to occupancy permit". Stati ng
it is almost more trouble than it is worth to get a $3,000.00 bond.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 84-8 with staff
recommendations and amending condition number 4 by adding the following
verbiage "or compl eted prior to issuance of occupancy permit", second by Com-
missioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six-
inch (6") high concrete curb.
2. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler
system.
3. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to tb~ develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets, screening subject to
approval of Design Review Board.
4. Applicant shall post a $3,000.00 performance bond to insure implementa-
tion of the landscaping plan OR COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY
PE RMIT .
5. Applicant to pave all driveways and parking areas.
6. Applicant shall utilize tile roofing within proposed elevation designs.
-
7. Applicant to provide screened trash enclosures.
4. Commercial Project 84-9 - Mike Grinel - Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to
continue to August 7, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
5. Residential Project 84-7 - John Vosilla c/o Diana L. Mastrangelo - Staff pre-
sented proposal to construct a residential duplex on O.lOt acres, located
easterly of the intersection of Lowell Street and Graham Avenue.
Commissioner Washburn asked staff if they included in their conditions their
concerns about the extra landscaping to make it less bland? Staff answered
in the affirmative.
Mrs. Vosilla asked if they could move the building to 15 feet within Graham
Avenue (on the plan it shows 21 feet) due to rear yard setbacks. Staff stated
that the applicant has a problem with rear yard setbacks with the covered
garage, so we wanted to move them up front a little bit more to make room for
the back spaces. Commissioner Saathoff asked if this was in line with the
homes (the setbacks) along Graham? Mrs. Vosilla answered in the negative.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he would agree with the setback because of
the location. Commissioner Saathoff asked about the setback requirements the
appl icant has, is this for an R-2? Staff stated that it was for R-2. Com-
missioner Saathoff asked what was the setback for the homes along Graham? Staff
stated that they are approximately 10-20 feet.
Mrs. Vosilla also questioned condition number 5. Discussion was held on adding
verbiage "or completed prior to issuance of occupancy permit".
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Residential Project 84-7 with staff
recommendations amendi ng condi tion number 5 addi ng the fo 11 owi ng verbiage "or
compl eted prior to issuance of occupancy permit", second by Commissioner Barn-
hart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
Minutes of Design Review Board
J u 1 Y 1 7, 1 984
Page 4
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-7 - JOHN VOSILLA C/O DIANA L. MASTRANGELO CONTINUED
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets, and subject to approval
from the Planning Division.
2. Site plan and building elevations shall be as depicted on plans.
Any proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review
Board.
3. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler
sys tems .
--
4. All areas not designated for building, parking, patios and walkways
shall be landscaped.
5. Applicant shall post a $3,000.00 Performance Bond to ensure implementa-
tion of the landscaping plan OR COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY
PER~1IT .
6. Landscaping/irrigation plans shall be approved by the Planning Division.
7. Applicant shall provide low-lying shrubbery/landscaping along south
elevation of duplex. Also, two (2) trees within the south side yard
shall be relocated closer to duplex structure so that screening will
be provided for this south elevation.
8. Trash area to be enclosed and screened from public view and subject to
approval by the Planning Division.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 10:30 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
:i.~ -
Fred DOmlng~~
Chairman '
Re..s.p.e.ctfull~S mitted,
~) ~
~k .~Q~
Linda Grindstaff ~
Planning Commission
Secretary
-
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
7TH.
DAY
OF
AUGUST
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Saathoff.
.....
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Associate Planner Fields and Assistant Planner Coleman.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of July 17,1984, as submitted
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Tentative Tract Map 19344 - Lakeside Estates, Ltd. c/o Ken Buchanan - Staff
requested this item be continued to September 4, 1984, due to discussions
regarding time frames of phasing for park improvements.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:32 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 19344. Receiving no reply, Chairman
asked for those opposed. Receiving no reply, Chairman asked for a motion to
continue Tentative Tract Map 19344.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Tentative Tract Map 19344 to the
meeting of September 4, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
-- Approved 5-0
2. Conditional Use Permit 84-7 - Rick and Krista Aguado - Staff presented proposal
for a Conditional Use Permit to utilize eleven ell) acres in the R-l (Single-
Family Residence) and R (Recreational) Districts for the purpose of a race
track for recreational vehicles, located on the westerly side of ~ission Trail,
approximately 1 ,570 feet north of the intersection of Mission Trail and Co~ydon '
Road.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-7.
Mr. Rick Aguado stated that he had reviewed the conditions, and has met with
the City Planner and sees no problems in meeting the conditions. The concern,
after speaking with the residents in the area, is that of dust and noise, and
believes that the conditions that have been imposed can control both concerns
of dust and noise. Also, some of the residents that were spoken to have given
their names and phone numbers in a letter and they too feel that by meeting
the conditions the concerns on dust and noise can be maintained.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
Mr. Keith Hayworth stated that he opposed this site because of the noise factor,
dust problems, increase of traffic, and the water fowl population in that area
is quite heavy and thinks this will be a disturbance to them.
Ms. Mary Cheek stated concern about health hazards, dust and noise problems in
the area.
Mr. Paul L. Baccus stated that he had three questions he would like to ask.
One, an environmental report by a qualified biologist over this project; two,
any provisions for fuel, being we are at elevation 1265 this could be a direct
pollution factor; and three, sewage; will there be sewer lines or chemical
sanitary facilities? If anyone could give me answers to these questions I
would appreciate it. Chairman stated that these answers would be provided later.
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-7 - RICK AND KRISTA AGUADO CONTINUED
Mr. Donald Burnell stated that he strongly objects to a race track being out
in the valley, for one thing the valley is getting noisier and noisier, and
as the freeway builds it is going to get noisier and noisier, but in review-
ing the Environmental Impact Report, noticed where it says noise; will the
proposal result in increases in existing noise levels, it says yes; and
exposure of people to severe noise levels, it says yes. This Environmental
Impact Report has alot of negatives in it and it should be given alot of
serious thought before allowing a race track out there.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
reply, Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
The Secretary informed the Chairman of a letter received tonight, as referenced
earlier by Mr. Aguado, with thirteen (13) names stating support for the Condi-
tional Use Permit. Commissioner Washburn asked that the letter be read for the
record, and the Secretary so complied.
Chairman stated that for verification this is not a race track, it is a race
course.
Commissioner Saathoff asked if the property owner, believes the property owner
is Mr. Haskell, is aware of the conditions imposed by the Engineering Depart-
ment, or is the applicant going to put in these improvements? Mr. Aguado
stated that Mr. Haskell was aware of the conditions. Also, Commissioner Saathoff
stated that he has several objections to the project; one, still very much
opposed against any temporary buildings; secondly, feels that an inch or so of
D.G. surface on the race course will not eliminate the dust problem; feels that
the burden of monitoring the watering procedure that would be placed on the City
would be very difficult, and if the proposal is approved by the Commission,
would recommend that some sort of hard surface be placed on the course itself.
At this time, they are going to use chemical sanitary facilities, in condition
number 28 it states "Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the County
Healtn Department." Obviously, they are not going to be able to provide sewer
service, at this particular time, so I am questioning the validity of this; and
the second sentence "Provide letter of agreement to participate in the regional
sewage ,collection, treatment and disposal system" if any when it is completed
out there, that obviously would be important.
-
Commissioner Mellinger stated that on the Environmental Assessment there is no
impact on wildlife mentioned, wonders if there are actual concerns about that.
Staff stated that he felt confident enough in the Environmental Assessment
Committee with their background in biological concerns that at this point it
would not really endanger any water fowl or species for that portion of the pro-
perty they wi 11 uti 1 i ze. Regardi ng the sanitary sewer service (porta potti es)
may in fact be approved by the County Health Department for this type of use,
and when Engineering included to agree to participate equitably in the regional
sewage collection, that is to look to the future for participation in sewerage.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if it was possible to build a permanent structure
on this site? Staff stated that due to the elevation he would recommend against
it until the lake stabilization would occur. The basic concerns voiced by
opposition thus far have concerned noise and dust, there may be a question as
to whetner D.G. will be effective or not. Staff stated that originally they
had looked at oiling the track, putting some type of oil base down, but due to
the elevation decided against that due to oil seeping into the ground; we have
worked with the applicant in trying to alleviate the problems with dust and
noise, tne mufflers that will be placed on the vehicles will prove to be adequate
and will not generate and additional noise, it would probably be less than the
traffic on Mission Trail. Commissioner Mellinger stated that he would like to
note tnat the operation is limited to eight (8) four-wheel vehicles, but maybe
should add that no other vehicles shall be operated on this site. Commissioner
Mellinger asked if anyone had specific evidence that there would be some water
fowl or specific species that would be effected by this? Mr. Paul Baccus stated
that basically any type of fuel poll ution is detrimental to water fowl and plant
life. Commissioner Mellinger asked for specific species. Mr. Baccus stated
almost all of the shore wading birds and in-out species. Mr. Baccus stated that
he could supply a list of species at a later date.
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Pa ge 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-7 - RICK AND KRISTA AGUADO CONTINUED
Mr. Hayworth asked this his concern on traffic be answered. Staff stated that
they believe they have adequately controlled traffic on the plot plan pro-
viding for parking and accessibility. Commissioner Saathoff stated that any
development is going to increase traffic. The main concern is ingress/egress
so that it won't bottleneck the existing road. Commissioner Mellinger stated
that there were alot of conditions which would mitigate most traffic problems.
-
Commissioner Barnhart stated that she did not agree with Commissioner Saathoff
on permanent buildings on this elevation, it is below 1270 and would not want
to see anything permanent; don1t believe the sewer is going in for a while and
the temporary facility and chemical sanitary facilities are fine, and would
like to state that this is not a race track it is a race course for controlled
vehicles and believes it is a needed use in this area.
Commissioner Washburn asked that staff, on the plot plan submitted, to point
out where the parking facilities would be. Staff so complied. Commissioner
Washburn stated that he has mixed emotions, however, requested use is in con-
formance with the General Plan and Zoning. I think there are honest concerns
with the people opposing with recreational dust control; traffic control and
there are alot of conditions that would help mitigate or actually stop these
problems from occuring. We are always going to have the attraction for re-
creational facilities; and there is compatibility with surrounding recreational
uses. Commissioner Washburn stated that his concern is the control of the
types of uses that go in there, and how they are maintained, and do they serve
a function of providing a recreational service to the community. Commissioner
Washburn also recommended that a time limit be added.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-7 with staff
recommendations, and adding condition number 39, which will read: IIConditional
Use Permit shall be valid for three (3) years with a one (1) year (annual) review,
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-1 Commissioner Saathoff opposed
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
-
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
1. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
2. A 5 foot wide landscaping planter shall be placed along the frontage
of Mission Trail.
A 6 inch concrete curb shall be separate curb from asphalt paving.
Pave entire parking area to City Engineer's requirements.
All items depicted on site plan shall be provided for as indicated.
All parking spaces shall be outlined appropriately.
Written approval and clearance from County Health Department.
All signs must be under permit and approved by Planning Division.
All landscaping areas shall be serviced with automatic sprinkler system
and approved by Planning Division.
Applicant shall present proof of insurance coverage of an acceptable
amount for injury, accidents, and death.
Applicant shall present landscaping plan and irrigation plan to be
approved by Planning Division.
Mobile facility must be fully skirted.
Applicant shall post a $3,000.00 Performance Bond to insure landscaping
plan will be implemented.
All equipment shall be equipped and maintained with mufflers and governors.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 7, 1984
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-7 - RICK AND KRISTA AGUADO CONTINUED
15. Applicant shall provide for the watering of race course as a dust
control measure. This should be conducted as needed in addition to
placing a one (l) inch D.G. surface on the race course.
16. -No alcoholic beverages on the site.
17. No hazardous substances or materials shall be stored on site.
18. Maximum number of four-wheel vehicles shall be limited to eight (8). ...
19. Opera to rs wi 11 close facil ity at dus k.
20. Trash enclosures to be provided as approved by Planning Division.
21. Minimum age of participants shall be fourteen (14).
22. Safety equipment must be worn at all times while operating vehicles
(i .e., straps and eye protection).
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
23. Dedicate 20-feet right-of-way for Mission Trail. There is an existing
3D-foot one-half street right-of-way. General Plan designation is
major highway 100-foot right-of-way and 76-feet curb-to-curb.
24. Construct curb and gutter 38-feet from street centerline, and paving
to City standards (Traffic Index = 8.0). There is existing paving
along Mission Trail. Paving must be to street centerline unless tests
show existing paving is to City standards (as a condition of building
permi ts) .
25. Install 8-foot commercial sidewalk adjacent to curbline constructed
to City standards (as a condition of permits issued by Building Depart-
ment).
26. Install street lightCs) to City standards as approved by the City
Engineer (as condition of permits issued by Building Department).
27. Cooperate with the City in the formation of a Lighting and Landscaping
District.
-
28. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the County Health Depart-
ment. Provide letter of agreement to participate equitably in the
regional sewage collection, treatment and disposal system (as condition
of permits issued by Building Department).
29. Provide letter of water availability from serving agency, as a condition
of permit issued by Building Department.
30. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
31 . Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements have
been complied with for fire protection to include fire hydrant locations,
as a condition of permits issued by Building Department.
32.
Provide traffic signs and markings, and Class II bike lane along Mission
Trail, as a condition of permits issued by Building Department.
33. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared by
applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by the City Engineer.
-
34. Applicant to record notice of lOO-year flood hazard and waiver of claims
against the City. (Same condition required by Lot Line Adjustment 84-3,
Apri 1 1 3, 1 984) .
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-7 - RICK AND KRISTA AGUADO CONTINUED
-
35. Provide City Engineer with grading plan, Certificate of Survey, and
Soils Report to include street pavement design, as a condition of
permits issued by Building Department.
36. -Pay Capital Improvement fees as follows, as a condition of permits
issued by Building Department.
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
$ .01 per square foot of lot area.
Per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
Fee Schedul e . Provi de Ci ty wi th proo f 0 f
payment.
37. Pay Public Safety fees as follows, as a condition of permits issued
by Building Department.
Street
Storm Drain
Park
Sewer
Po 1 ice
Fire
$
$
.15 per square foot of building area.
.15 per square foot of building area.
38. Pay equitable share of Traffic Mitigation fee for Mission Trail and
Corydon Road traffic signal in the amount of $5,000.00, as a condition
of permits issued by Building Department.
39. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE VALID FOR THREE (3} YEARS WITH A ONE
(1) YEAR (ANNUAL) REVIEW.
3. Conditional Use Permit 84-8 - Richard H. Wessel ink - Staff presented proposal
- for a Conditional Use Permit which would allow the rental or leasing of marine
related sports equipment (boats, jet skis, windsurfing boards and water skis,
at the lake's edge), located 660! feet northeasterly of the intersection of
Riverside Drive and Lincoln Street.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:03 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-8.
Mr. Richard Wessel ink stated that he would like to address some of the items
that were submitted by staff in the Planning Department report. Chairman
informed the applicant that any questions he might have regarding staff's
report to the Commission on his application will be addressed at the close of
the public hearing.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit
84-8.
Mr. Everett Manfredi stated that the applicant is proposing a much needed
recreational facility on the lake perimeter.
Mr. Raymond Kempe stated that he was in favor of this project.
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor. Receiving
no reply, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
-
Mr. Paul L. Baccus stated that he was not opposed to the project, would just
like certain areas 'handled; one, fueling facilities; would like the Commission
to take into consideration our shoreline how much we are using and how much we
are giving away for our "recreational facil ities"; no glass containers at these
parks; fueling of boats especially rental boats done at a dock out of a jerrican
there is quite a bit of pollution. Basically, I am in favor of the project
with certain conditions towards our environment.
Mr. l3accusasked if there were going to be glass containers sold at this site?
Chairman informed Mr. Baccus that this was unknown at this time. Mr. Baccus
then asked about fueling, if there is a specific spot for-fuel, to change 6il?
Staff stated that this Conditional Use Permit for rental of equipment, floating
docks or floating gas fuel tanks were not mentioned as part of the application.
Usually, what happens is the owner will service the jet skis in the morning
before they go out.
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 6
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-8 - RICHARD H. WESSELINK CONTINUED
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
reply, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:09 p.m.
Commissioner Barnhart asked that Mr. Wessel ink be called back to the podium.
Mr. Wessel ink stated that to address some of the statements concerning the
boats and etc. in the water, the boats will be stored on land, but half of
them are windsurfers and the other half, they are not all row boats there are
some small horsepower boats for fishing purposes, and in addition to that
there wi)l be floating docks, but there will be no servicing; there is no
gas dock; there is no gas or oil containers. Mr. Wessel ink stated that he
has already taken dirt out of the flood plain along the beach and hauled it
800 feet above 1270 feet in compliance with his grading plan to replace it
with D.G. and ultimately will do the same thing with some sand along the
beach. I am going to see that there is no oil pollution in my dock area.
To address the Planning Department Report to the Planning Commission. Mr.
Wessel ink stated that he found all of the Planning Division conditions
reasonable and intends to adhere to all of them; has submitted to the Chair-
man a letter from Elsinore Water District stating that they will and are
going to continue to service the site. I have put fire protection down into
the dock area, running six-inch lines down into there, had this approved by the
Fire Marshall. We have contacted the Park District and there is a 1 etter from
the Park District stating that tickets must be sold for launching and they
approve of the project as it is. The docks were on the property and when the
flood came they were washed up with the Park's docks. When we were ready to
put docks in, rehabing the whole area, I went to see Mr. Trevino, the City
Manager at that time, I reviewed the docks with him and stated that I want to
take these docks out and put new docks in, these will be anchored over my own
property, will a Conditional Use Permit be required? I was informed that it
would not be required because it was a replacement type thing. In the body of
the report there is some mention that the docks will displace some water, the
docks weigh 850 pounds a piece, there are five docks for a total of one-hundred
feet, and they do displace approximately two and one-half cubic yards. I am
perfectly willing when it comes to that point, to dig two and one-half cubic
yards of dirt out of the flood plain area at the lake's edge and take it up to
1270 feet. Mr. Wessel ink stated that the Engineering Department conditions
13 through 20 are reasonable, but in this instance there is no new construction
involved, I do have 300 foot of frontage before the motel units start and we
do propose to develop that into a quality two-story motel unit in the future.
Regarding the dedication of street right-of-way, that has already been dedicated
to the City. Mr. Wessel ink requested that conditions 13 through 20 be deferred
until such time they improve the front of the property. On condition number 21
there is no grading involved; condition number 23 has already been addressed;
condition number 24, will give this notice; condition number 25, there will be
no on-site sewer, I will be putting in a lift station to qather all the septic
tanks that are on the property and channel them into a lift station, and take
them off the property; condition number 26, the cleanout installed behind the
sidewalk and the anti check valves are already in, with the system approved by
the Water District, the City has made the inspection on that; condition number
28, dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee. That is fine
at the time we do the construction, but we do have geothermal wells and we intend
to use those geothermal wells in a spa area, the wells are 250 feet deep and 90
degree water with high mineral content obviously, I don't want to give that to
the City or its assignee.
Commissioner Barnhart asked why the grading and drainage were required? City
Engineer stated that as the lake level recedes it will be necessary for the
applicant to extend his dock as well as access roads.
Commissioner Washburn asked if the applicant had already pulled a permit and
started rehabing? Staff answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Washburn
stated that the application indicates present use is a 27 unit motel and camp-
ground facflity, and his feeling is of quality of what is being proposed, the
City should protect that quality. Commissioner Washburn then stated that
should a regatta or special event be held, the applicant should notify the
Planning Department or Code Enforcement that he will be having an event and
specify the time and dates, and have them come out and inspect once or twice
to ensure that he is not fouling the area and providing more of a nuisance than
-
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 7
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-8 - RICHARD H. WESSELINK CONTINUED
-
a recreational facility. Commissioner Washburn stated that the applicant's
concern on the mineral water rights, does not think there would be a problem
with this, because it is something that would be a service or part of the
business, so no problem with including except for mineral usage in that
condition. Also, believes that some of the conditions could be deferred
until the applicant does major construction.
Commissioner Saathoff addressed the fact that there would be some displacement
of water regarding the docks, and the applicant is willing to remove a certain
amount of cubic footage, is this going to be a requirement? City Engineer
stated that if there is a displacement by that particular amount of cubic
yardage. Commissioner Saathoff stated that he agreed that conditions 13 through
20 could be deferred, but would like to add a couple of conditions: One, boat
storage would be on land; question of applicant regarding fueling of boats in
the water, wondering if applicant could suggest a means of having the fueling
restricted someplace? Mr. Wessel ink stated thay they will control their rental
boats, but will have docks and slips where boats can be tied that are not their
boats. Commissioner Washburn recommended signage be there asking the users
to have boats filled prior to launching. Commissioner Mellinger recommended a
sign stating "No fueling on the docks". Mr. Wesselink stated that he would
have a sign stating "No fueling on the docks". Commissioner Saathoff stated
he would like to add three conditions: 1) No gas dock constructed; 2) No
crafts stored in the lake, and; 3) Signage be posted requesting fueling not be
done at the dock area. Commissioner Saathoff questioned condition number 9
stating there was not a time limit mentioned, it is normally three years with
an annual review. Commissioner Washburn recommended that if the applicant
were to hold a regatta or large special event that he indicate to Planning
and Code Enforcement of such occurrence and notify governmental agencies within
30 days, added as a condition. Chairman stated that they have to get permission
from the State Park when they want to use the lake for special events.
-
Chairman stated that on condition number 15, he would like to see curb and gutter
on Riverside Drive, as much as we can on new projects or projects that are being
rehabed. Discussion continued on whether or not this condition should be deferred
until such time they start doing the alignment, paving and construction on all
sides of the property; defer and City request when they feel it is appropriate.
Staff recommended a deferral agreement for this condition.
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-8 with staff
recommendations with the following changes in the Planning Division conditions:
add condition number 13, which will read: "No gas dock to be constructed; add
condition number 14, which will read: "Signage to be placed on docks, not allow-
ing fueling at the dock area; add condition number 15, which will read: "All of
the applicant's power boats are to be stored on land; amend condition number 9,
by adding the following verbiage: "That this is a three (3) year Use Permit
subject to annual reviews; engineering conditions 13, 17, 18, 19 and 20 to be
deferred until major construction; engineering conditions 14, 15 and 16 deferment
agreement to be signed by the applicant and the City, these conditions can be
exercised at the discretion of City, when other development in'that area occurs;
condition number 23, amended to read: "Applicant will remove the required cubic ,
footage equal to the amount of water that the docks will displace at the discretion
of the City Engineer; condition number 28, amended by adding the following verbiage:
IIExcept the thermal wellsdexisting on the property",second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
2. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
3. Meet County Health Department requirements.
4. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
5. Proof of insurance coverage.
6. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 7, 1 984
Page 8
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-8 - RICHARD H. WESSELINK CONTINUED.
7. Provide screened trash enclosure.
8. All signs shall be under permit, and subject to Planning Division review.
9. -Conditional Use Permit 84-8, THAT THIS IS A THREE C3) YEAR USE PERMIT
SURJECT TO ANNUAL REVIEWS.
10. Rental and leasing operation shall occur during State Park operating
ho urs .
-
11. Written clearance and approval from State Park.
12. Any increase in the amount of jet skis used in the rental operation,
if more than 10, shall receive approval from the Director of Community
Development.
13. NO GAS DOCK TO BE CONSTRUCTED.
14. SIGNAGE TO BE PLACED ON DOCKS, NOT ALLOWING FUELING AT THE DOCK AREA.
15. ALL OF THE APPLICANT'S POWER BOATS ARE TO BE STORED ON LAND.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
16. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572. TO BE DEFERRED UNTIL MAJOR CON-
STRUCTION .
17. Dedication of street-right-of-way for one-half of a 100-foot wide street
in conformance with a major traffic corridor classification in the General
Plan has been done. Applicant must install street improvements on River-
side Drive to provide one-hal f of a 76-foot wide roadway in conformance
with the General Plan.
-
Install curb and gutter 38-feet from centerline, an 8-foot wide sidewalk,
and paving to centerline. Paving exists for one travel lane southeast-
erly of the centerline. Tests must show that existing paving is to City
and/or Cal Trans standards and will support traffic wheel loads re-
presented by the City Engineer's traffic index of 8.0. DEFERMENT AGREE-
MENT TO BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE CITY, THESE CONDITIONS CAN BE
EXERCISED AT THE DISCRETION OF CITY, WHEN OTHER DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA
OCCURS.
18. Construct curb, gutter and paving on Riverside Drive to the specifications
of the City Engineer and/or Ca1 Trans. A permit must be obtained from
Cal-Trans. DEFERMENT AGREEMENT TO BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE CITY,
THESE CONDITIONS CAN BE EXERCISED AT THE DISCRETION OF CITY, WHEN OTHER
DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA OCCURS.
19. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street, grading,
utility and drainage improvement plans are required. If improvements are
deferred plans must be completed and approved to ensure that drainage
issues are resolved. DEFERMENT AGREEMENT TO BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT
AND THE CITY, THESE CONDITIONS CAN BE EXERCISED AT THE DISCRETION OF CITY,
WHEN OTHER DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA OCCURS.
20.
Pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for future traffic signalization in the
amount of $4,000.00. TO BE DEFERRED UNTIL MAJOR CONSTRUCTION.
-
21. Pay Street Sweeping Maintenance Mitigation fee in the amount of $500.00.
TO BE DEFERRED UNTIL MAJOR CONSTRUCTION.
22. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and specifications. TO BE
DEFERRED UNTIL MAJOR CONSTRUCTION.
23. (al Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
(b) Cooperate with the City in forming a street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 9
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-8 - RICHARD H. WESSELINK CONTINUED
TO BE DEFERRED UNTIL MAJOR CONSTRUCTION.
-
24. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636, the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, Ordinance 711, and Ordinance 503. Provide final
-grade certification. All excavated material on-site must be dis-
posed of off of the site.
25. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer, including street trees.
26. City Ordinance 603 states in section 2.3-1(3): IIReviewall develop-
ment permits to determine whether the proposed development adversely
affects the flood-carrying capacity of the area of special flood
hazard. For purposes of this ordinance, lIadversely affectsll means
that the cumulative effect of the proposed development when combined
with all other existing and anticipated development will not increase
the water surface elevation of the base flood more than one foot at
any point in the City of Lake Elsinore Flood Plain.1I
The proposed floating docks and access to the docks will displace water.
City Ordinance No. 711 states in section four: IINo person, firm. or
corporation shall construct any new non-residential structure within
the City of Lake Elsinore with the foundation or basement lower than
the elevation of 1270' mean sea level within the perimeter streets of
Lake Elsinore consisting of Grand Avenue, Riverside Drive, Lakeshore
Drive, Mission Trail and Corydon Road, except as specifically permitted
by the City Council on a case-by-case review.1I Some of the existing
motel units are below elevation 1270'.
-
Planning Commission and City Council must interpret the proposals shown
on this with consideration of these ordinance requirements and make
appropriate findings. Applicant shall obtain City and State permit
prior to any grading or earth moving to install the floating docks.
APPLICANT WILL REMOVE THE REQUIRED CUBIC FOOTAGE EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT OF
WATER THAT THE DOCKS WILL DISPLACE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY ENGINEER.
27. Record notice of 100-year flood hazard and waiver of liability claims
against the City.
28. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department, and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal.
29. Install cleanout behind the sidewalk on all sewer laterals as required
by the City and/or Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Install
check valve on riser which will still allow use of cleanout for sewer
lateral maintenance.
-
30. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing water service from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
31. Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee, EXCEPT THE
THERMAL WELLS EXISTING ON THE PROPERTY.
32. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
33. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
34. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
4. The Great Coastal Oil Company Lease Area - Jack Higgins - The City Engineer
stated the reason this item is back before the Commission is that when the
Commission reviewed this on July 3rd, it was heard as'a business item and should
have been a public hearing. City Engineer gave a brief outline of the suggested
General Plan for traffic circulation in the proposed development in the Great
Coastal Oil Lease Area, and recommended approval in concept of the map of
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 10
THE GREAT COASTAL OIL COMPANY lEASE AREA - JACK HIGGINS CONTINUED
suggested General Plan for traffic circulation in and around the proposed
Jack Higgins' project.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:38 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak -i n favor.
Mr. John R. Eagen, representing Ms. Peggy Roberts Eagen property owner in
the area, stating Ms. Eagen believes if this is approved she will at least
have access to her property.
-
Mr. Jack Higgins stated that this proposed plan was not understood by everyone,
what they are trying to do is to have a plan that doesn't block anyone's access
to their property.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked for those opposed.
Mr. Doug Roberts stated he was not opposed to the people having access to their
property, does oppose the concept of showing tentative streets in areas that
are of no adjoining boundaries; stating that Turnbull (a paper street) would
give access also a couple of other streets would give access without doing all
of this other street layout upon top of the hill.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
reply, Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:47 p.m.
Commissioner Mellinger asked staff to address Mr. Roberts' concerns. City
Engineer stated that the map that was submitted does indicate quite a few
additional roadways, possible alignment of roadways that really will not affect
Mr. Higgins' property. What we wanted to do was take a close look at Mr.
Higgins' proposed alignment just to see if they would effect his immediate
neighbors and not provide any access to those adjoining properties. What we
wanted to find out is whether Mr. Higgins' alignment would hinder or help
in providing future access.
-
Commissioner Washburn asked the City Engineer to give a brief background on the
assessment district. City Engineer so complied.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve in concept the suggested General Plan
for traffic circulation in the area of Higgins' proposed development in the
Great Coastal Oil Company lease Area with staff recommendation, second by Com-
missioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
5. lakeshore Overlay Ordinance -
Commissioner Saathoff asked to be excused, due to possible conflict of interest.
Staff presented report on the lakeshore Overlay Ordinance for property from
Iowa Street southeasterly to Main Street, stating the intent of this Ordinance
is to define uses and activities which would be compatible with the important
aesthetic and recreational lakeshore resources. Staff read for the audience's
benefit the following sections of the ordinance: Permitted uses; Conditional
Uses; Prohibited Uses; Development Standards; Parking; Materials to be Submitted;
Non-conforming Uses; and Administrative Appeal.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:56 p.m., asking if anyone wished to speak~
i n fa vo r .
Mr. Bill Saathoff stated he was in favor of establishing land uses and develop-
ment standards along the entire lake perimeter and hopes this is only the
beginning. Also, has a few suggestions in reference to the Ordinance. Chairman
stated that Mr. Saathoff would be heard later.
Mr. A.A. Attridge stated that he feels the Ordinance before the Commission is a
very goo d 0 rdi na nce.
Mr. Pat Callahan stated that he feels this is an ordinance that they can live
with.
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 11
LAKESHORE OVERLAY ORDINANCE CONTINUED
Mr. Richard Kempe stated that he was in favor of anything that will clean up
that whole area, however, has a couple of questions. For example, the City
owns isolated lots in the area,one interpretation would mean that the City
could go into private business and develop those lots. This is just one of
the questions I would like to have answered.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no reply,
he asked for those opposed.
Ms. Oma Slavick stated she did not know if she was in favor or not; they are
talking about setbacks, different restrictions doesn't know what it means if
it woul d be for the betterment of the property or detrimental; woul d 1 i ke
further study or have her 41 acres eliminated.
Mr. Ken Weiss stated he did not know if he was against it or not; asked for
clarification on elevation 1240. Chairman stated an answer will be provided
1 a ter.
-
Mr. Paul Baccus stated the title states to enhance and preserve the natural
resources, but finds no Environmental Report that even deals with how many
people the ground will support before we start destroying. Mr. Baccus then
stated concern on how much deveopment will be permitted; State property line
being 1228 not 1240, this should be corrected; permitted uses, pertaining to
public owned parks; overnight camping limited to public facilities, what
about day uses; conditional uses pertaining to rodeo grounds-carnivals stating
the area will not support this kind of activity; prohibited uses - down grad-
ing of property; new residential dwellings; development standards, all uses
maintaing a 30 foot setback from lakeshore Drive; stumps and dead trees stating
these are habitats for fish, and; a time limit on this Ordinance, stating we
have a Lake Management Plan coming up, say one year after lake management is
established. I would encourage the Commission to make a recommendation to
City Council about trespassing.
Mr. Al Hertz stated that he has conceptual approval from the Commission for a
marina, restaurant and gas facility in the area, not opposed or for, and they
are doing an extensive Environmental Impact Report to present to the Commission
and some of the changes can affect the future of their project. Would like
some time with the City and Commission to go over this in a little more detail.
Mr. Lloyd Nichols stated he was strictly against the ordinance regarding over-
night camping on his property. Purchased the property for that purpose.
Mr. Freddie Stokes commented on the section referring to existing occupied
single-family residences and existing businesses, stating that he intends to
bring his building back up to code or to sell it. Also, stated concern on
the no overnight camping.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
reply, Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:25 p.m.
Chairman asked staff to address the questions brought up by the various persons
earl ier.
-
Mr. Saathoff asked to make his suggestions; stating under Permitted Uses A,B,C,
D, E, and H could be interpreted that a land owner of undeveloped property
would be allowed to use their property in the manner prescribed, and is this
in fact the intent, if not it should be a little more clear, or are these
conditions that are stated as permitted uses are they interpreted as business
uses and would a business license be required, feels there should be more
clarification there. What about the possibility of including a motel as a
permitted use. Under Conditional Uses: felt that A and I could be related to
the permitted uses of boating marinas, and would suggest that these two items
be allowed uses if they are in conjunction with boating marinas; item G rodeo
grounds should be deleted; Development standards item D, it would be my suggestion
that an architectural theme be established as part of this ordinance. Would
like to direct a question to staff on Non-conforming Uses, items C, D, E and G
is there any length of time for people to conform.
Staff stated as part of the comprising procedure between the committees that
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 12
LAKESHORE OVERLAY ORDINANCE CONTINUED
section had been deleted. Mr. Saathoff asked if they are non-conforming
shouldn't there be a time element. Staff stated if the Commission so desired.
Chairman asked staff to answer Ms. Slavick's concern on the setback. Ms.
SlaviGk submitted a letter of objection to the ordinance. Staff stated the
setback is basically from the street property line to an existing building
or proposed building, that is referred to as a setback; from the front yard
it would be 30 feet from Lakeshore Drive (from the right-of-way line), on
the side yard it would be 5 feet, and the rear yard setback would be establish-
ed by City Council on a case-by-case basis.
Staff stated to answer Mr. Weiss' question, the 1240 is the Mean Sea Level.
Discussion was held on changing the elevation 1240 MSL to State Park boundary
under Lake Shore Area defined; Permitted Uses pertaining to publicly or
privately owned parks, overnight camping; Conditional Uses pertaining to rodeo
grounds-carnivals; Non-conforming Uses; Development Standards pertaining to
fences and height of structures; time element; dead trees; lake management plan,
and continuing this item, returning it to staff for further study due to the
concerns brought up tonight.
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve the Lakehsore Overlay Ordinance
with the following changes:
Section 17.65.020 - Lake Shoreline Area Defined - Add the following
verbiage "Southwesterly to the State Park ownershi p boundary or 1240",
whichever it takes.
Section 17.65.030 - Permitted Uses:
A. Floats and dolphins for private pleasure craft;
G. Boating marinas and fishing, be incorporated.
A. Boat sales, boat rental, marine sales from Section 17.65.040; _
I. Jet ski rental and sales, from Section 17.65.040, be incorporated
into Section 17.65.030.
J. Amended to read: Overnight camping limited to public
facilities per City Ordinance and registered private
owners with the City. Camping by non-owners limited
hours to 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Section 17.65.040 Conditional Uses:
G. Rodeo grounds - carnivals. Deleted.
K. Add the word "motel II .
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Saathoff excused.
B US I NESS ITEMS
1.
Commercial Project 84-9 - Mike Grinel - Staff presented proposal to expand an
existing retail/commercial center, located adjacent to the northwest corner
of San Jacinto River Road and Casino Drive. Staff also stated attached to
this report is the letter requested by the Commission with the concerns of the
applicant and a letter addressing those concerns.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that he had the opportunity to discuss several of
these items with the applicant and asked to expound on the letter submitted by
the applicant and the response to said letter.
Mr. Grinel questioned conditions 12, 13, 16,18 and 21.
Discussion was held on the conditions in question and deferring condition number
17, and any reports originally submitted and on file be utilized, condition
number 11 .
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 13
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-9 - MIKE GRINEL CONTINUED
.....
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 84-9 with staff
recommendations with condition number 17, to be deferred until the traffic
signalization is put in; amending condition number 19, by adding the following
verbiage "any reports such as soils and geology that the applicant has on
file from previous development, that is acceptable to the Engineering Depart-
ment be utilized; deleting sewer conditions (condition number 22 and 23),
second by Commissioner Washburn.
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Relocate handicapped parking space closer to sidewalk and entrance and
shall have the following dimensions (141 x 181), with ground and curb
markings to indicate handicapped space.
2. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
3. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
4. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
5. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided for as indicated, any
changes will required resubmittal to the Planning Division.
6. Provide screened trash enclosure (double trash bins).
7. Meet County Health Department requirements.
8. All lighting to be directed on-site.
-- ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
9. Comply with all requirements of the City street improvement Ordinance
No. 572.
10. Dedicate street right-of-way along Casino Drive frontage of this develop-
ment to provide a 40 foot wide one-half street in conformance w~th the
General Plan circulation element.
11. Dedicate street right-of-way along San Jacinto River Road to provide for
a width of sidewalk equal to what exists across the frontage of the
property to the south.
12. Construct paving, curb and gutter and sidewalk along the Casino Drive
frontage of this development. Paving to be to City standards from
centerline to concrete gutter. Tests must be provided to show that
existing paving is to City standards and will support the traffic load
represented by the City Engineer's traffic index.
13. Sidewalk shall be 8 feet wide along Casino Drive. Improvement may be
deferred subject to constructing an adequate temporary driveway connection
approved by the City Engineer.
14. Along the San Jacinto River Road frontage, construct sidewalk of the
width which exists along the frontage of the property to the south.
The width may be transitioned to 8 feet if approved by the City Engineer
during plan check. Extend sidewalk around and to the center of the
cul-de-sac.
15. Curb, gutter and paving exists on San Jacinto River Road.
16. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
gradi,ng, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
17. Pay traffic safety mitigation fee for future traffic signalization in
the amount of $7,532.72. TO BE DEFERRED UNTIL THE TRAFFIC SIGNALIZATION
IS PUT IN. .
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Pa ge 14
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-9 - MIKE GRINEL CONTINUED
18. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and specifications.
a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the
City Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and
Landscaping Maintenance District.
19. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommenda-
tions. Provide final soils report showing compliance with preliminary
report and finish grade certification. ANY REPORTS SUCH AS SOILS AND
GEOLOGY THAT THE APPLICANT HAS ON FILE FROM PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT, THAT
IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT BE UTILIZED.
-
20. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
21. Provide grading and drainage plan prepared by a Civil Engineer.
22. b8ffi~+y-w4tR-tRe-Fe~~4FeffieRts-8f-~ls4R8Fe-Val+ey-M~R4€4~a+-WateF-Q4stF4€t,
b8~Rty-~ea+tA-Qe~aFtffieRt;-aRe-bal~f8FR~a-Re~~8Ral-WateF-Q~al~tY-b8RtF8+
g8aFe-f8F-8R-s~te-sewa~e-e~S~8sa+~ DELETED.
23. Qes~~R-8R-s4te-sewa~e-€8l+e€t48R-aRe-e~s~8sal-systeffi-S8-tRat-f~t~Fe-
€8RRe€t48R-€aR-ee-ffiaee-t8-tAe-Fe~~eRal-sewa~e-syste~~--~Rstall-€leaR-
8~ts-BeA4Re-tAe-s~eewa+k-eR-a++-seweF-+ateFa+s-as-Fe~~~Fee-By-tRe-b4ty-
aRe~8F-g+5~R8Fe-Va++eY-~~R~€~~a+-WateF-Q~5tF4€t~ DELETED.
24. Provide a will-serve letter guaranteeing water service from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
25. Dedicate underground water rights and future water well site to the
City or its assignee.
-
26. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
27. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
28. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley MuniCipal Water District schedule.
2. Lot Line Adjustment 84-5 - Charles H. Doner c/o Butterfield Surveys, Inc.
Staff requested that this item be continued to the meeting of August 21, 1984,
due to questions on legal descriptions submitted.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Lot Line Adjustment 84-5 to the
meeting of August 21, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
3. Single-Family Residence - 16518 Smith Avenue - Danny Ce1eketic - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family dwelling at 16518 Smith Avenue. Staff
stated project as submitted meets Planning Division regulations and requirements.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Applicant was not present.
Chairman asked the Secretary if he had received a copy of the conditions? The
Secretary answered in the affirmative.
-
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 16518
Smith Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated on the
site plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission.
2. Applicant shall relocate residential structure on-site to meet require-
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 7, 1 984
Page 15
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16518 SMITH AVENUE - DANNY CELEKETIC CONTINUED
-
ment for a structure located within the R-1 (Single-Family Residential)
Zoni ng Di s tri ct.
3. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
5. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning waste water
disposal.
6. Applicant shall submit plans to the Planning Division and/or Engineering
Department outlining specific erosion control measures to be initiated
to mitigate any potential removal or disruption of top soil by manmade
or natural occurrences.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
8. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from centerline to lip of
gutter on both Smith and Bailey Avenues.
9. Construct curb, gutter, sidewalk and paving to the specifications of
the City Engineer.
10. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
- 11 . Pub1 i c improvements to conform wi th City Code requi rements and the
City approved County standard drawings and specifications.
12. Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
13. Cooperate with the City in forming a street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
14. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70; and must include slope landscaping and sprinkler
systems, if applicable.
15. Provide City Engineer with grading plan, Certificate of Survey, compaction
report, and grade certification for approval by the City Engineer.
16. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department, and California Regional Water Quality Control
for on-site sewage disposal.
17. Provide a will-serve letter guaranteeing water service from Elsinore
Water District.
18. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass i gnees .
-
19. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
20. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule,
if applicable.
21. Pay all school fees.
22. Pay all plan check fees. Staff recommends that condition number 2, 3,
4, 5, and 6 be deferred by standard agreement to be recorded against
the property.
4. Single-Family Residence - 301 Country Club Boulevard - D.W. Mitchell - Staff
presented proposal to construct a single-family dwelling at 301 Country Club
Boulevard. Staff stated that proposal as submitted meets all Planning Division
requi rements .
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 16
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 301 COUNTRY CLUB BOULEVARD - D.W. MITCHELL CONTINUED
Mr. Mitchell questioned condition number 13, pertaining to street lighting.
Discussion was held on condition number 13, pertaining to street lighting.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 301
Country Club Boulevard with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner
Mell i nger.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated on the
site plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission.
2. Applicant shall meet all setbacks.
3. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
5. Applicant shall submit plans to the Planning Division and/or Engineering
Department outlining specific erosion and slope failure control measures
to be initiated to mitigate any potential removal or disruption of top
soil by man-made or natural occurrences.
6. Applicant shall build retaining walls on=site according to the site
plan.
7. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater disposal.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
8. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
-
9. a) Dedicate five feet (51) of right-of-way on Country Club Boulevard.
There is an existing 20 foot one-half street right-af-way along
Country Club Boulevard.
b) Dedicate standard corner cutback for right-of-way at Lakeshore
Drive and Country Club Boulevard if deemed necessary through
review of design plans by City Engineer.
10. Construct curb, gutter, sidewalk and paving to the specifications of
the City Engineer to match existing curb, gutter, sidewalk and paving
of adjacent property.
11. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include street signing and striping. As built street,
plans are required.
12. Pub1 ic improvements to conform with City Code requirements and the City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and specifications.
13. Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City Engineer to
include any relocations, if needed.
14. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
-
15. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, to include slope landscaping and automatic sprinkler
systems.
16. Provide City Engineer with grading plans, Certificate of Survey,
compaction report, and grade certification for approval by the City
Engineer.
17. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and the California Regional Water Quality
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 17
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 301 COUNTRY CLUB BOULEVARD - D.W. MITCHELL CONTINUED
-
Control Board for on-site sewage disposal.
18. Connection to existing City facility in Country Club Boulevard is
required.
19. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or
its assignees.
20. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
21. Pay proportionate share of front footage charges on water distribution
line in Country Club Boulevard.
22. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
23. Pay all Sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
24. Pay all School fees.
25. Pay all Plan Check fees.
26. Pay all water connection fees.
5. Residential Project 84-6 (~uplex) - William Atkinson - Staff presented proposal
for the construction of two (2) two-story dupl exes on an 8,250 square foot lot,
located 100 feet easterly of the interseciton of Pottery Street and Poe Street.
- City Engineer stated that there was an error in condition number 9.b., in re-
questing this condition be deferred, stating that the after a field investiga-
tion it would be a logical extension of the improvements, therefore request
that condition 9.b. not be deferred.
Mr. Atkinson stated that the improvements were already in, and then questioned
the installation of street lighting, noted that it states if needed so no problem.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Residential Project 84-6 with staff
recommendations, deleting condition 9.b. second paragraph, second by Commissioner
Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on the site plan shall be provided as indicated.
2. Pay all Public Safety fees.
3. Applicant to provide screened trash enclosure, to be approved by
Planning Division.
-
4. Provide wheel stops for open parking spaces.
5. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
6. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
8. Dedicate additional 2.5 feet of right-of-way along total property
fron~age adjacent to public alley.
9. (a) Construct standard driveway approach and sidewalk to match
existing sidewalk along Pottery Street. Existing sidewalk
is in poor condition and needs to be replaced along the
total property frontage.
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 18
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-6 - WILLIAM ATKINSON CONTINUED
(b) Construct curb, ribbon gutter in alley and paving to the
specifications of the City Engineer along total property
frontage for the public alley.
~ ta .f.f- Fe e91f1lf1eREls- tAa t-e9 R El4 t4 9 R- RHIfIBel'1- g~ B~ -ee- Ele.fen>eEl-
eY-5taRElaI'1El-+4eR-a~l'1eelfleRt-at-tA45-t4If1e~ DELETED.
10. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer to include street striping and signing. As built plans
are required.
-
Staff recommends that condition number 10 be deferred for these
improvements along the public alley by standard lien agreement.
Changes and modifications can be made by revisions to the
approved plans for Pottery Street.
11. Public improvements to conform to City Code requirements and the City
approved Riverside County Standard drawings and specifications.
12. Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
13. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
14. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
15. Provide City Engineer with grading plan, Certificate of Survey, compaction
report, and grade certification for approval by the City Engineer.
16. Provide will serve letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
guaranteeing sewer availability.
-
17. Connection to existing City facility in Pottery Street is required.
18. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
19. Pay depreciated proportionate share of front footage charges on water
distribution line in Pottery Street.
20. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
21. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule,
22. Pay all school fees.
23. Pay all plan check fees.
24. Pay all water connection fees.
6.
Urban Design Study and "Resol ution of Partnership" - Staff gave a brief back-
ground report stati ng the underlyi ng intent of thi s study is to combi ne
attributes of the old central business district of Lake Elsinore, with detailed
program to explore design opportunities and develop prototypical designs rang-
ing from comprehensive land use planning, streetscape design, flood-way design,
and urban design guidelines; also, the "Resolution of Partnership" which is
an agreement to revitalize and restore the Lake Elsinore Downtown area ,was
briefly covered.
-
Discussion was held on whether or not there was already an ordinance for this.
Commissioner Washburn asked for a vote of confidence from the Commission.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn with vote of confidence to adopt the Urban Design
Study as provided for the Downtown Lake Elsinore via Cal Poly, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 7, 1984
Page 19
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
-
Community Development Director Corcoran stated that each Commissioner has received
a copy of the Planning Commissioner's Handbook; this mannual is extremely helpful
and will provide alot of needed information and direction.
Community gevelopment Director Corcoran presented to each Commissioner a Draft copy
of Title 17, and would like to schedule a study session between staff and the Com-
mission. The Commission designated Thursday, September 6, 1984 at 6:00 p.m. for
the study session.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - On the Lakeshore Overlay, In favor of having some land uses
and building criteria established for the lake perimeter, but I feel we should go
on and not just stop and I would like the Commission to consider making a recommenda-
tion to the City Council that perhaps a time table be established. Staff stated
that it was his indication that we would like to continue around the lake property
that is under City jurisdiction.
Commissioner Mellinger - None
Commissioner Washburn - None
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Chairman Dominguez - In front of Thermal Electronics, on Minthorn, right across the
street the City bought the lot from Bernnie Shane lets clean that up. City Engineer
stated that was targeted as one of the next areas for weed abatement.
Commissioner Barnhart stated that she does have one question of staff. How come
the trees that we haul ed up from Amfac Nursery to be put on Lakepoint Community Park
are now planted in Main Street Park? Chairman stated that they are working on a
plan on where certain things are going to go.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
7TH.
DAY
OF
AUGUST
1984
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of July 17, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1 . Commercial Project 84-9 - Mike Grinel - Staff presented proposal to expand an
existing retail/commercial center, located adjacent to the northwest corner
of San Jacinto River Road and Casino Drive.
-
Discussion was held on condition number 7 being amended by adding the follow-
ing verbiage 1I0r landscaping to be completed prior to issuance of occupancy
permitll.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 84-9 with staff
recommendations amending condition number 7 by adding the following verbiage
lIor landscaping to be completed prior to issuance of occupancy permitll, second
by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall conform to the existing design theme.
2. Provide all landscape areas with permanent and automatic sprinkler
systems.
3. All signs to be approved by Planning Division.
4.
Northerly boundary of the new parking area shall be requried to place
concrete wheel stops within each parking space. No landscaping is re-
quired at this time. Landscaping shall be provided for at the third
phase of development.
5. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened.
-
6. All items indicated on site/landscaping plan shall be provided for as
submitted, and any changes will require resubmittal to the Design Re-
view Board.
7. Applicant to post a $3,000.00 Performance Bond to insure landscaping
plan will be implemented OR LANDSCAPING TO BE COHPLETED PRIOR TO
ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY PERMIT.
2. Single-Family Residence - 16518 Smith Avenue - Danny Celeketic - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family dwelling at 16518 Smith Avenue. Staff
stated proposed project, as submitted meets Planning Division requirements.
Chairman asked if the applicant had any questions. Chairman was informed that
the applicant was not present.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence at 16518
Smith Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0 _
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from ;neighborhing property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, and
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
Minutes of nesign Review Board
August 7, 1984
Page 2
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16518 SMITH AVENUE - DANNY CELEKETIC CONTINUED
4. Applicant shall plant street trees at 30 foot intervals outside of
public right-of-way, to be approved by Planning Division.
5. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
-
6. Landscaping/irrigation plan shall be implemented and in place, prior
to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
7. Landscaping/irrigation plan shall be approved by Planning Division.
3. Single-Family Residence - 301 Country Club Boulevard - Staff presented pro-
posal to construct a single-family dwelling at 301 Country Club Boulevard.
Staff stated proposed residential concept meets current Planning Division
requirements.
2.
- 3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
A brief discussion was held on conditions number 2 and 8.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 301
County Club Boulevard with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner
Mellinger.
Appro ved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets.
All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler system.
Landscaping/irrigation plan shall be implemented and in place, prior
to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
Applicant shall plant street trees outside of public right-of-way,
to be approved by Planning Division.
Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart along
Country Club Boulevard.
All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation to be
approved by Planning Division.
Applicant shall utilize Mission Clay tile roofing within proposed
elevation design.
Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans unless
modification recommended by Planning Division is approved by Design
Review Board. Any proposed changes will require resubmitta1 to the
Design Review Board.
10. Landscaping/irrigation plans shall be approved by Planning Division.
4. Residential Project 84-6 (Duplex) - William Atkinson - Staff presented proposal
for the construction of two (2) two-story deup1exes on 8,250 square foot lot,
located 100 feet easterly of the intersection of Pottery Street and Poe Street.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he had any questions.
Mr. Atkinson answered in the negative.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Residential Project 84-6 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
1. All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler systems.
2. All items depicted on plot plan, elevations will be constructed as shown.
Minutes of Design Review Board
August 7, 1984
Pa ge 3
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-6 - WILLIAM ATKINSON CONTINUED
3. Yard areas shall be separated from paved areas with a redwood header
and/or 6 inch concrete curb.
4. Provide one street tree on property frontage, to be placed outside
_of the public right-of-way, to be approved by Planning Division.
5. Tree to be at least 15 gallon.
6.
Appliant to complete landscape prior to issuance of Certificate of
Occ upa ncy .
7. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the
development shall be architecturally screened from public view.
-
8. Ground base or roof mounted micro-wave receivers shall not be allowed.
5. Resubmittal of Commercial Addition - Patrica Plaza - Steven Anthony - Staff
presented proposal to construct a two-story building addition in front of
existing commercial structure; also incorporating partial remodeling of this
existing building and design features associated with the frontage of Patrica
Plaza, specifically located at 31361 Riverside Drive.
A lengthy discussion was held on architectural design; parking spaces needed
for this site; type of uses for proposed addition; signage, and; possibility
of a bus stop being located in front of Patrica Plaza.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to deny without prejudice Resubmittal of
Commercial Addition for Patrica Plaza, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Appro ved 5-0
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
11 :40 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
Approved,
~d,
~~~~
Chairman
Re:~ectfullY ~mitted,
~ AL,d~
Linda Gri nds ta ff
Planning Commission
See reta ry
-
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON THE
21ST.
DAY
OF
AUGUST
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:31 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Saathoff.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff; Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
and Commissioner Barnhart. Chairman Dominguez was absent.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Cu1p,
Associate Planner Fields, Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant City Engineer Rubel.
Being as Chairman Dominguez was absent Vice-Chairman Washburn conducted the meeting.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve minutes of August 7, 1984, with the cor-
rection on Page 12, pertaining to the Lakeshore Overlay Ordinance, Section 17.65.030
adding "Boat sales, boat rental, marine sa1es" under Permitted Uses, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1 .
Tentative Tract Map 19358 and Environmental Impact Report - John C. Heers c/o
Castaneda and Associates - Staff requested this item be continued to the meeting
of September 4,1984, due to required information from County Flood Control not
yet received.
.....
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to continue Tentative Tract Map 19358 and
Environmental Impact Report to the meeting of September 4, 1984, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
2.
Planned Unit Development 84-2 - John C. Heers c/o Castaneda and Associates -
Staff requested this item be continued to the meeting of September 4, 1984, due
to specific details on the Overlay (PUD) that needs to be resolved.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Planned Unit Development 84-2 to
the meeting of September 4, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
3. Tentative Tract Map 20313 - Thompson Investment - Staff presented proposal to
subdivide 14~ acres into 70 single-family residential lots, located at the
northeast corner of Grand Avenue and Machado Street.
Vice-Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m., asking if anyone wished
to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 20313.
Mr. Jim Thompson, applicant, stated that generally he was in favor of the recom-
mendations as proposed by staff, but has some that he would like to discuss.
Vice-Chairman stated that after the public hearing portion they would call him
back up to discuss the conditions in question.
Vice-Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
Mr. Mauno Salo stated concern on the following items: Most of the lots are
6,000 square feet, only 17 lots are over 7,000 square feet, and when you start
putting shake roof side by side, it is a fire hazard; the impact on schools;
water pressure in the area; entry on Grand Avenue, suggested entry be off of
Machado Street; maintenance of parkways, and flood control.
Vice-Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition. Receiving
no reply, he closed the public hearing at 7:44 p.m.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 21, 1984
Page 2
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20313 - THOMPSON INVESTMENT CONTINUED
Vice-Chairman stated that the lot size of 6,000 square feet is the mlnlmum lot
size, and then asked staff to address the balance of Mr. Salois concerns.
City Engineer Culp stated that it will be a requirement of the developer to
have a will-serve letter from the water district, and that he knows of no
future plans by the water district to boost the water pressure in the area.
Community Development Director Corcoran stated that regarding the entry to the
tract, that they were trying to restrict the access onto Machado Street as much
as possible, as it is designated as a major highway; regarding the fire hazard,
the developer will have to meet County Fire Department requirements; regarding
the impact on schools, the developer will have to enter into an agreement with
the School Districts to off-set overcrowding, prior to recordation.
Commissioner Saathoff asked that staff address Mr. Salois concern on flood con-
trol. City Engineer Culp stated that the proposal has been conditioned so that
the applicant submit hydrology and hydraulic studies for his proposed facilities,
to be reviewed by Riverside County Flood Control and himself.
Commissioner Saathoff asked that Mr. Thompson be called back to the podium.
-
Mr. Thompson questioned the following conditions: condition number 6, decorative
block wall, stating that he would like some latitude; maybe building partially
block; partially wrought iron; partially wood, maybe pilasters, it would open up
some visual aspects of landscaping to the backs of these lots, that he thinks
from the exterior of the subdivision would make it more attractive. On condition
number 7 (staggering setbacks), with the short streets that we have, except for
maybe one, that the dropping back of houses by two to four feet, is going to be
in-perceptible to the eye; can't believe this is going to contribute anything to
the City, and furthermore, believes this is a disadvantage to the homeowner, re-
quested this condition be deleted. On condition number 21, would like clarifica-
tion. On condition number 40, drainage impact mitigation fee of $350.00 per lot;
at building permit stage, I am asked to pay $.02 a square foot for lot area for
storm drain fees, to me this seems like a duplication.
-
Discussion was held on the above mentioned conditions, condition number 23.g.,
and phasing of project.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Tentative Tract Map 20313 with staff
recommendations, and amending condition number 6, by deleting the word "block"
and clianging the words "Planning Division" to "Design Review Board"; amending
condition number 7, by adding the following verbiage "This condition to be
related to streets "0" and "E" subject to approval by Design Review Board"; amend-
ing condition number 21, by deleting the following verbiage "for, this item shall
be included", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Decl aration.
3. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Applicant shall meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
5. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Elementary and High
School District to off-set overcrowding.
6. Applicant shall provide a six foot (6') decorative reverse frontage
9+8€K wall along Grand Avenue and Machado Street, to be approved by
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
--
7. Stagger front yard setbacks along each street with 1/3 being 20 feet;
1/3 being 22 feet, and 1/3 being 24 feet, for the purpose of alleviat-
ing monotonous placements of structures on lots along right-of-ways.
THIS CONDITION TO BE RELATED TO STREETS "D" AND "E" SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 21, 1984
Page 3
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20313 - THOMPSON INVESTMENT CONTINUED
BY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
-
8. Applicant shall submit landscaping plan for street trees, trees are
to be placed at 30-foot intervals outside of public right-of-way and
be approved by City Engineer.
9. All trees planted along streetscape must be a minimum of eight feet
(8') high.
10. Trailers utilized during the construction phase shall be approved by
the Planning Division.
11. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
12. Meet County Health Department requirements.
13. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
14. Applicant shall submit design elevations and landscaping plan to the
Design Review Board for approval.
15. Participate in City wide entry-signage program.
-
16. All signage must be under permit.
17. Participate in Landscaping and Lighting District.
18. Provide transit facilities as deemed applicable by Chairman of L.E.T.S.
19. Pay applicable Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution 83-87.
20. If applicable, all slopes must be planted with erosion control vegetation
to be approved by Planning Division.
21. Applicant shall bond for sprinkler irrigation system. If the major
improvements for this tract are bonded fef''J-tR~5-HelTl-sRan-Be-~R€+t,HleEl~
22. Applicant shall utilize as many existing Olive Trees on site that is
feasible for inclusion within the proposal's landscaping design.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
23. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
a) Dedicate 14 feet of right-of-way along total property
frontage of Machado Street.
b) Dedicate 10 feet of right-of-way along total property
of Grand Avenue.
cl Dedicate 60 feet of right-of-way for proposed extension
of Washington Street into subdivision.
d) Dedicate 50 feet of right-of-way for proposed IIAII
through IIEII Streets.
e) Dedicate sufficient right-of-way to provide for 60
feet ultimate right-of-way for Ulla Lane.
f) Provide additional pavement widening on Machado Street
along the property frontage designated as future develop-
ment. Provide temporary 8-inch A.C. dike as approved by
the City Engineer.
g} Provide half-street improvements plus ten feet (10') along
Ulla Lane from Machado Street to tie into existing improve-
ments downstream. Construct 8-inch A.C. dike along north
side of Ulla Lane to tie into existing concrete curb and
gutter as approved by the City Engineer, to include adequate
sight distance study for required signing.
h) No lot access from Machado Street nor Grand Avenue due to
future traffic demands.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 21, 1984
Page 4
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20313 - THOMPSON INVESTMENT CONTINUED
24. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping by separate plan. As
built street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are
required.
25. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
26. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
27. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommenda-
tions. Provide final soils report showing compliance with preliminary
report to include compaction results and final grade certifications.
28. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved
by the City Engineer, including street trees.
29. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All
property lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with
the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
30. a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City
Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a street Lighting and Land-
scaping Maintenance District.
31. Comply with the requirements of Riverside County Flood Control report
dated July 25, 1984, and additional or alternative requirements of the
City Engineer and the City Code. The City Engineer shall judge as to
the interpretation and appl ication of flood control recommendations.
32. Submit hydrology and hydraulic studies, necessary master planning and
detailed plans and profiles of the proposed flood control facilities
to Riverside County Flood Control District and to the City Engineer
for review and approval for final map recordation. Provide drainage
acceptance 1 etter(s 1 as determi ned by the City Engi neer for those
run-off flows within "D" Street being directed toward that area
designated as future development.
33. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing sewer and water availability
from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
34. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
35. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
36. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
37. Pay all school fees.
38. Pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for future traffic signalization in
the amount of $225.00 per lot.
39. Pay Street Sweeping Maintenance Mitigation fee in the amount of $50.00
per lot.
40. Pay Drainage Impact Mitigation fee in the amount of $350.00 per lot.
41. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 529 and Subdivision Map Act.
42. Prior to final map recordation, a subdivision agreement shall be entered
into with the developer(s), owner(s), and the City.
43. Final map shall show the following items with a prominent note:
a) All geologic fault lines.
b) 100-year sheet flow flooding.
~
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 21, 1984
Page 5
4. Tentative Tract Map 20296 - The Grayson Companies - Staff presented request
from the applicant for a continuation on Tentative Tract Map 20296 to the
meeting of September 4, 1984.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to continue Tentative Tract Map 20296 to
the meeting of September 4, 1984, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
5. Tentative Parcel Map 20268 - Howard Palmer c/o Butterfield Surveys, Inc. -
Staff presented proposal to subdivide 15.5~ acres into six (6) lots for
commercial use, located easterly of the intersection of Railroad Canyon Road
and Casino Drive.
Vice-Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:15 p.m., asking if anyone wished
to speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 20268.
Mr. Howard Palmer stated that basically he was in agreement with most of the
items, but would like to ask for a continuation on this to September 4th,
would like to have a chance to meet with staff and review some of these items
espeCially the fees. Vice-Chairman asked that Mr. Palmer submit to the
Secretary his written request for the continuance.
Vice-Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response,
he closed the public hearing at 8:16 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to continue Tentative Parcel Map 20268 to the
meeting of September 4, 1984, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
-
BUSINESS nH1S
1. Lot Line Adjustment 84-5 - Charles H. Doner - Staff presented proposal for a
Lot Line Adjustment to create lot sizes that will facilitate commercial develop-
ment along Mission Trail, located northerly of the intersection of Cereal Street
and Corydon Road.
City Engineer Cu1p stated that on condition number 14, the following verbiage
shoul d be added "as a condition of buil di ng permit"; on condition number 22
there is an error, it should read IIPay a Street Sweeping Mitigation fee in the
amount of $200.00 per lot, at the time of Building PerMit issuancell; and would
1 ike to add condition number 23, which will read: IIConditions of approval
deferred to issuance of building permit will be enforced only along the frontage
of the lot, for which a building permit is requested. The traffic signal fee
will be divided among the eight (8) lots at $1,250.00 eachll.
Mr. A1 Pace, of Butterfield Surveys, Inc. representing the applicant, stated
with those amendments and additions they have no objections.
Discussion was held on condition number 18 (traffic mitigation fee), access to
back lots, and providing an easement off of Mission Trail .or Corydon Road.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Lot Line Adjustment 84-5 with staff
recommendations and amending condition number 14, by adding the following verbiage
lias a condition of building permitll; amending condition number 22, to read: II Pay
Street Sweeping Mitigation fee in the amount of $200.00 per lot, at the time of
Building Permit issuancell; adding condition number 23, which will read: IICondi-
tions of approval deferred to issuance of building permit will be enforced only
along the frontage of lot, for which a building permit is requested. The traffic
signal fee will be divided among the eight (8) lots at $1,250.00 eachll; adding
condi tion number 24, whi ch will read: "Easement shou1 d be provi ded for access to
Lot 8 off Mission Trail or Corydon Road, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. City Engineer verification of legal description as accurate.
Minutes of Planning Commission
August 21, 1984
Page 6
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 84-5 - CHARLES H. DONER CONTINUED
2. Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
3. Dedicate 20' of right-of-way for Mission Trail and Corydon Road along
the total frontage of this proposed Lot Line Adjustment. There exists
a 3D' wide one-half street right-of-way and the General Plan classifica-
tion for both Mission Trail and Corydon Road is a major corridor with
100 foot right-of-way width and 76 foot curb-to-curb roadway.
4. Construct curb and gutter 38 feet from centerline, paving to City
Standards, and 8 foot wide sidewalk on Mission Trail and Corydon Road.
Some paving exists and must be replaced to City Standards unless tests
supplied by applicant show that existing paving is to City Standards
and will resist traffic loads represented by the City Engineer's Traffic
Index, (require as a condition of the Building Permit).
-
Construct a one-half street to City Standards on Cereal Street, with
paving, curb, gutter, and 6 foot wide sidewalk. Cereal Street to be
20 foot width from centerline to new curbline. Existing right-of-way
on Cereal Street is 60 feet. Require as a condition of the Building
Permit. Applicant can request that Council defer these and related
off-site improvements on Mission Trail, Corydon Road and Cereal Street
by lien agreement.
5. Construct street lighting as approved by the City Engineer, as a condi-
tion of Building Permit.
6. Cooperate with the City in the formation of a Lighting and Landscaping
District.
7. Provide sanitary sewer service as approved by the City, the County
Health Department, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Agree
to participate equitably in the regional sewage collection, treatment
and disposal system (as a condition of Building Permit).
-
8. Provide letter of water availability from serving agency, as a condition
of Building Permit.
9. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
10. Provide written assurance that County Fire Department requirements have
been complied with for fire protection to include fire hydrant locations,
as.a condition of Building Permit.
11. Provide traffic signs and markings, along Mission Trail and Corydon Road,
as a condition of Building Permit.
12. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared by
applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by the City Engineer, as a condi-
tion of Building Permit.
13. Applicant to record notice of 100 year flood hazard and waiver of claims
against the City.
14. Provide drainage releases, easements and indemnify the City against any
claims for damages due to drainage concentrations, AS A CONDITION OF
BUILDING PERMIT.
-
15. Provide City Engineer with grading plan, Certificate of Survey, and Soils
Report to include street pavement design, as a condition of Building Permit.
16. Pay applicable Capital Improvement fees, as a condition of Building Permit.
17. Pay Public Safety fees, as a condition of Building Permit.
18. Pay equitable share of traffic mitigation fee for Mission Trail and
Corydon Road traffic signal in the amount of $10,000 as a condition of
Minutes of Planning Commission
Augus t 21, 1984
Page 7
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 84-5 - CHARLES H. DONER CONTINUED
-
Bui 1 di ng Permi t.
19. Provide hydraulic and hydrology studies for storm drainage, as a
condition of Building Permit.
20. Provide corrected legal descriptions for approval by the City Engineer.
21. A Record of Survey shall be submitted for approval by the City and for
recordation prior to Building Permit issuance.
22. PAY A STREET SWEEPING MITIGATION FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $200.00 PER LOT,
AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE.
23. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DEFERRED TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE
ENFORCED ONLY ALONG THE FRONTAGE OF LOT, FOR ~IHICH A BUILDING PERMIT IS
REQUESTED. THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL FEE WILL BE DIVIDED AMONG THE EIGHT (8)
LOTS AT $1,250.00 EACH.
24. EASEMENT SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR ACCESS TO LOT 8 OFF MISSION TRAIL OR
CORYDON ROAD.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
-
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Commissioner Mellinger - During the last Council meeting, a point was brought up a
number of times concerni ng the number of tracts and our fees. It is easy to set
fees and hopefully they will be adequate over the long run, but it is difficult to
tell in a growing area such as Lake Elsinore, as to whether they are adequate.
Therefore, I recommend to staff that they start looking into criteria as to when a
tract or commercial development will require a fiscal impact report to make a
complete application. In other words, before an application will be complete or
acceptable a fiscal impact report, which is similar to an environmental impact
report, be required.
Vice-Chairman Washburn stated that at the joint study session that is coming up,
believes an agendized item, that we will be talking about is a fee structure of
the town as a whole, and maybe at that point we can also bring up the physical
impact report.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that once we start getting a few of these in it will
not be necessary to require them each time, because there will be other tracts near-
by, and it will help staff considerably in evaluating the merits of these tracts as
well as us.
Commissioner Saathoff - Asked if on August 28th at 7:30 p.m., if there is a study
session for the Urban Design. Commissioner Saathoff was informed by staff that a
notice was on the bulletin board for the public hearing on August 28th by City
Council.
Commissioner Washburn - None
Chairman Dominguez - Absent
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0 - Commissioner Barnhart absent
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
21ST.
DAY
OF
AUGUST
1984
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve minutes of August 7, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
-
1. Resubmittal of Commercial Addition - Patricia Plaza - Steven Anthony - Staff
presented proposal to construct a two-story building addition in front of
existing commercial structure; also incorporating partial remodeling of this
existing building and design features associated with the frontage of Patricia
Pl aza.
Discussion was held on architectural design; landscaping, and a lengthy dis-
cussion on the number of parking spaces needed, applicant still cannot meet
the number of required parking spaces.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to Deny Resubmittal of Commercial Addition
for Patricia Plaza, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 3-1 Commissioner Barnhart opposed
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:00 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0
() tpproved,
J!)~P1 j{)wMd--
G Washburn
ice Chairman
-
Respe~tfullY sUbttted.,
#q~ ~c7~
Linda Grindstaff ~...
Planning Commission
Secretary
-
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 4th
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
SEPTEMBER
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by City Engineer Loren Culp.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner
Washburn, Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant City Engineer Rubel, Associate Pl anner Fields, Assistant Planner
Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve the minutes of August 21,1984, with
the correction of the word "physical" to "fiscal" on lines 6 and 8 of Commis-
sioner Mellinger's report under Planning Commissioner's Report and Recommenda-
tion on Page 7, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
Tentative Tract Map 1 9344jDraft Environmental Impact Report- lakeside Estates -
Community Development Director Corcoran presentedprbposal to subdivide 75
acres into,310 single-family residential lots and 5 acres for commercial use,
located westerly of the intersection of Union and Corydon Road.
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m. and asked if any-
one wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 19344.
Mr. Lloyd Zola, 1055 North Euclid Avenue, Ontario, representing the applicant,
stated he wanted to discuss some of the Conditions of Approval, starting with
Conditions #25 and #26. '
-
-
#25 and #26: As Mr. Corcoran has said, the Site Plan Map and Tentative Tract
Map wi 11 incl ude a 13 acre park with a si gni fi cant amount of
facilities. He has problems with the conditions because when
the Map was first prepared, the site being in the County, there
was an agreement struck between the developer and the Riverside
County Park District as to how those improvements would be
funded. Basically, that park was going to be financed over,
about 1500 units comprising several different properties under
the same ownership. At that point, the Tract was submitted to
the City and a request to annex was done. Through the process,
the concept for financing this project over numerous tracts has
gotten lost. Basically, what the City is asking for in these
conditions is dedication of 13 acres and a significant number
of improvements - not only a park over 13 acres, but tennis
courts, 4,000 square foot community facility, ballfields, and
so on. Now, when all that is costed out, including land cost,
it comes to around 2 million dollars, or $7800 a unit if financed
specifically over this Tract only. That would compare to $150
per unit the City has in Park Fees and I would like to point out
that the Conditions of Approval even though all the requirements
are here for the dedication of the park, don't waive the Park
Fees either. This doesn't compare to the existing Riverside
County Park District requirements which would be improvement of
a 5 acre park only. That is basically the problem they face.
The developer is not saying he does not want to put the park in;
does not want to not dedicate the 13 acres but would like to
come to an agreement with the City and with the Riverside County
Park District to basically finance this park with Park Fees that
would normally be required not only for this project but for the
other projects in the County that the developer owns. What he
suggests at this point, is prior to recordation of the first
phase, an irrevocable offer of dedication of the 13 acre park
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 2
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES, INC.
and, in addition, a 5-year lease on the 5 acre parcel - at a
dollar a year to the City. That is also the commercial site.
Then prior to the conclusion and occupancy of the final unit in
Phase I, that the 5 acre park be improved, landscaped and
sprinklered; and prior to the 100th unit which would be toward
the second phase, the improvement of two (2) ballparks with the
balance of improvements as agreed to in a pre-annexation devel- ..-
opment agreement on this parcel between the City and developer.
It is very important to the developer that he be able to spread
the cost of the park and the improvements in the park, not only
over these 300 units but over 1500 units. Even at that point
(over 1500 units yet to be built in the County) the cost per
unit is still significantly higher - $1800 a unit - much higher
than what the City is requiring in Park fees. He feels, if the
City compares what is being offered, even spreading across
the 1500 units, with other projects t~e City has gotten, this
is still far and ahead of anything typically offered.
The parcel is still in the County. They have gone through 8 or
9 hearings with the City. In the County, on the first hearing
on the Tract Map, the County regulations would be compliance with
the Riverside County Park District which would be improvement of
a 5 acre park, so it is not a matter of trying to get into the
City to get away with anything. It's just a matter of how it
can best be financed. There was an E.I.R. prepared for the
proj ect. They have gone through a number of different ana ly-
ses, reviewed and agreed on the changes City staff has asked
for on the E.I.R.
#64:
(which requests the perimeter retaining wall be added for added
flood protection along the southwesterly property boundary) ---
Currently proposed is a 6-foot V-ditch along that line and also
he wanted to note that the pads are from 8 to 12 feet above
existing grade. So to put a retaining wall on top of that seems
like a lot of over kill. Requested this condition be deleted.
Has a question for the City. In going through the County Fire
Department letter, Conditions #58 and #64, they are being asked
to pay three (3) different Fire Fees. The Fire Department, in
their letter, requested a $300 per unit fee; Condition #58
refers to Public Safety (Police and Fire) fee per Resolution
No. 83-87 and then Condition #64 requests pro rata share toward
fire fighting facilities serving the southeastern end of the
City - not to exceed $25,000. The obvious question is, are they
paying three (3) fees for the same thing.
#51 :
Chairman Dominguez asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving
no response, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
Mary Reardon, 32578 Corydon Road, asked if there was to be a concrete block
wall along Corydon Road and what kind of a sewer system would the project have.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in opposition and, receiv-
ing no reply, he closed the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.
In response to Mrs. Reardon's questions, City Engineer Culp stated Condition
#51 provides for a perimeter retaining wall around the perimeter for added
flood protection and, as for sewers, he believes they are looking at a mound-
ing system for sewering the site, which will be basically an evaporation/
percolation type facility which will use some of the effluent to irrigate
some of the open space. Ultimately they are extending sewer facilities
(E.V.M.W.D. facility) for sewering the entire site according to the developer's
plan s.
--
Mr. Zola explained the developer's sewerage plans as follows:
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 3
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
-
Basically, what will happen initially, until the project is
hooked up to the regional system, would be an engineered sub-
surface system. It will be similar to a septic system.
Mr. Paul Reardon commented that Wilmington has the same kind
of system there. They have three lakes and on foggy mornings
the ordor is obnoxious.
Ken Buchanan, representing the applicant, explained that the
County requirement by the County Health Department for mounding
and by the Santa Ana Water Quality Control Board, for this size
project, is 2-1/2 acres of a mound system and that there will
be approximately 8 feet between the lines and the highest water
table level. So this particular site will probably be approxi-
mately, this ballfield that we are looking at here, 1 to 2 feet
above the curb. This percolation system is a large septic
system of which many subdivisions and tracts in Florida and
Arizona have utilized throughout the years. This is one that
the Water Quality Control Board and the County Health Department
have approved for this subdivision as an interim measure until
they can tie into the regional treatment facility, which will
be going through their property in approximately June of 1986.
Mary Reardon asked what would they do if it weren't ready in
June, 1986.
-
Mr. Buchanan responded that the mounding system has been known
to operate for 20 to 30 years. They are operating this system
only as an interim and they had to agree to hook into the
regional system.
Commissioner Saathoff requested staff to answer Mr. Zola's
question on Condition #64.
-
Community Development Director Corcoran responded that they were
hoping to upgrade our fire station in that end of the City.
Hopefully, trying to enlarge the fire station that presently
serves that existing site. That is why Condition #64 was placed
on this proposal and has been placed on a number of other large
tracts also to provide some type of fire mitigation in terms of
upgrading equipment and perhaps new construction of an addi-
tional fire station in close proximity to that project.
Discussion ensued at the table regarding the mounding system; Commissioner
Mellinger stated he understands that some cutting would be done (some 59 to
60 feet) and then the mound would be 8 feet over the water table (the stan-
dard required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board); no problem with
it as interim measure but hook-up to sewer should be tied into phasing some-
where; considering fact doing some cut and fill and proximity to lake -
there is good chanqe will reach water table if delay in hook-up is too long.
He asked what the project's timing was on the 8 phases.
Mr. Buchanan replied that if he (Commissioner Mellinger) gave him an answer
as to what the economy is going to do, he'd give him an answer on the phasing.
He then stated they have entered into a written agreement with the Water Dis-
trict and, in the event that they are not able to deliver their regional
facility, they will permit them to proceed to purchase their own site and
construct a permanent facility at the south end of the lake.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if there was a time deadline on the agreement.
Mr. Buchanan answered the time deadline would really be forced by FHA-VA.
FHA-VA will not let them go ahead with financing unless they have a perma-
nent solution to the wastewater problem. The interim solution of a mound
system would not necessarily be satisfactory to FHA-VA
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 4
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 1 9344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - lAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
Commissioner Mellinger asked if they would allow all 310 units to be built
then.
Mr. Buchanan replied, "Yes," on an interim basis. Although they have the
agreement, E.V.M.W.D.'s attorney, Mr. John Brown, pointed out to them legally
they may have to build a permanent facility. ---
Mr. Buchanan was asked if there was a date in his contractual agreement with
E.V.M.W.D. and he replied that,there was not.
Staff stated they had not seen the agreement.
Commi ssioner Mell inger requested Mr. Buchanan give the City Engineer a. :copy
of the agreement for his review and approval and, in conjunction with Com-
missioner Washburn, stated this would be added as an additional condition.
Community Development Director Corcoran reread Condition #13 concerning the
block wall along the project perimeter and stated this wall is the same one
as covered in Condition #51.
Commissioner Mellinger asked how a 6-foot wall above a grade retains anything.
Mr. Buchanan stated the site is raised so that the people can put in pools
in the, event the water should ever raise up to the maximum height again.
They have a V-ditch to take care of sheet flow.
City Engineer Cu1p responded on this question by stating that in a letter
from the Riverside County Flood Control, they called for an interceptor
channel along the T~ct's southerly boundary to be designed to a certain
1 DO-year peak storm flow. He then called on Assistant City Engineer Rubel
to further clarify this condition.
Assistant City Engineer Rubel stated this decorative wall is the retaining
wall and the City Engineer should be able to look at the wall and make sure
the foundation is adequate so when the large flow comes flying down the
V-drain, it is not going to always sheet flow nicely along and then spread
out. Someone may do something in the V-drain causing it to concentrate at
particular points and they want to be sure the houses are protected. There-
fore, the perimeter 6-foot decorative block wall (retaining wall) should
have the proper foundation so it can be an additional protection to the homes.
They are not talking about a separate retaining wall.
-
Commissioner Washburn asked if he was looking at channelization problems as
undercutting the slope. Assistant City Engineer Rubel replied, "Yes," and
stated the foundation of the wall sitting along the butt line should be
adequate so it could also provide some protection in case we do get some
concentration of water from this water shed. The wall will be at the toe
of the slope, not at the top, for added sheet flow protection.
Commissioner Mellinger commented on Riverside County Road Department's
recommendation of knuckling of lakeside and the extension of Palomar. Asked
why it wasn't done.
Mr. Buchanan replied the extension of Palomar goes through property not
owned by the developer. They would have to go off site to keep it lined
up to come through and they have no control over the piece of property
needed to do this and haven't the funds to buy it (4 acres - Mac Jones place).
-
Commissioner Washburn asked staff for clarification on Condition #10 - phasing
- was it phasing of the development, was it timing, which way would it go?
Community Development Director Corcoran responded they were interested in
both. They wanted to see what the actual developments and locations of
each subsequent development were and also the timing involved. Also it deals
with building fees and building permits.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 5
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
-
Commissioner Washburn then commented on Condiiton #13 per Commissioner
Saathoff's problem with block walls - may want to delete "block."
Commissioner Saathoff said he thinks, in this case, Conditions #13 and #51
should be joined into almost a new statement that has to do with the V-ditch,
the decorative wall for flood mitigation purposes and it should all be tied
into Engineering.
Commissioner Washburn stated the V-ditch does not show on the Tract Map but
it shows it in phases and the question might come up that that is the first
thing that goes in. When they pull a grading permit, they are going to
grade the whole thing first. They are not going to grade it in phases,
because with cut and fill requirements it is all going to be cut, filled
and graded at one time.
City Engineer Culp stated that that being the case, they would require the
protection of the interceptor ditch.
Mr. Buchanan informed then they would be doing the cut and fill and total
grading.
Commissioner Washburn stated that might be something that should be included
to make sure it is in place.
-
On Condition #21, Commissioner Washburn said he would 'like the words, "and/or
City Council" added to end of this condition because it may be the City who
is putting in the facilities or working with the developer in putting in the
"facilities and not just the Riverside County Park and Recreation District.
On Condition #25, he asked if they were talking about improvements and
received an affirmative answer from staff.
On Condition #27, asked City Engineer when we require the dedication of
20 addiitonal feet of right-of-way - is that going to meet the requirements
of the total width of road. City Engineer Culp replied that County's road
width is more than ours, but ours is consistent with the General Plan.
On Condition #45, Commissioner Washburn asked if dUlHng Phase I, when Palomar
Street is cut and lowered, how is it going to affect the intersection of
Palomar Street to it? 'What impact is it going to have on the intersection?
The City Engineer replied that as the street would approach the intersection,
it will be on an incline. Actually, the intersection is designed at a 12931
and the contours slope back to a depression of 1283.91. They did have some
concerns with this intersection in their horizontal sight distance as Cory-
don Road approaches Palomar there is quite a steep grade. He would request
that as part of the street improvement plans, when submitted, they give
evidence of adequate horizontal sight distance. The grades will remain
basically the same for Corydon Road.
-
Commissioner Washburn then commented that he agreed with Commissioner Me 11 inger
that applicant should submit letter from E.V.M.W.D. talking about putting in
a plant if the sewer system did not take place in two (2) years so that the
City Council can have a look at it. ~1ight add on to Condition #52, "Provide
Sewer Letter Agreement from E. V .M. W. D."
Regarding the Hillside Ordinance, Commissioner Washburn said normally he is
very much opposed to very strong cut and fill. On this particular site it
is not designated as scenic point on the maps but if it were it would be a
harder road to hoe. The only off-setting compensation to his concern, in
this instance, is some relief in terms of recreational facility with some
type of improvements for the community and that Tract and the flood control.
If it were not for those terms, he would have a hard time cutting that much
materi a 1 .
Commissioner Saathoff then commented that Condition #8 and Condition #42
seem to say the same thing. He would like Condiiton #8 deleted.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Pa ge 6
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
Commissioner Saathoff asked staff if he was correct in stating that the
schedule as shown and listed under Condition #26 is not what the applicant
is asking for in the information sheets the applicant's representative
passed out to the Commissioners, Planning and Engineering Departments earlier
in the day? Staff replied that it is not the same now. What was listed
as Phase III is now 1 isted as "Phase III - Number of Lots - 28 - "Lakeside -
Park"--rough grading started," and ~1'Phase IV - Number of Lots - 28 - "Lake-
side Park"--rough grading completed." Then they just moved all of the 1 isted
Phases down one. What was Phase IV is now Phase V and so on down the line.
Chairman Dominguez asked Mr. Buchanan if Crosby Field would be completed
and then they would go to Lakeside Park.
Mr. Buchanan responded that what he is proposing to do is this:
The proposal is what he submitted on this Map but staff directed him that
all improvements for this subdivision must be put into this subdivision and
be completed by the end of this subdivision in order to bring it to Planning
Council. He had discussion with staff at that point, saying "I cannot afford
to do that - it won't pencil - it won't work because originally it was to be
spread out over 1500 units and that was the agreement I had with the River-
side County Parks District~ Well, now he is within the City and it has
nothing to do with the County Parks District. So what he is faced with is
"a rock and a hard place" as is staff between "a rock and a hard place,"
since staff isn't supposed to be lenient with developers. They are supposed
to "shove them to the wall." So what they are faced with is , "Well, jam it
down his throat and make him do the whole thing in 300 units."
His agreement with the Riverside County Parks District initially was that
this was going to be dedicated to the Lake Elsinore Valley Park and Recrea-
tion District and over a course of six separate projects they would be pay-
ing Park fees through the Board of Supervisors, Riverside County, in order
to improve this park.
-
Chairman Dominguez said to get back to the original question, Crosby Field
would be finished, plus one (1) more ballfield.
Mr. Buchanan said the Little League are loosing three (3) ball fields so
through Phase II he will furnish two (2) of them. It depends upon what the
City thinks it can possibly do because he cannot afford to do all this stuff
up in front. Helll consider improving and putting in one (1) ballfield and
some landscaping if he can do it at the tail end, in the last phase because
that comes out of profit and provided it's tied in to the rest of the County
and Lake Elsinore Valley Park and Recreation District so he can get some
credit for already putting all this money up front, on those other subdi-
visions they plan on doing in the County, of which, ultimately, many may
never be part of the City. Mr. Buchanan said he would not be putting in
any parking because it will eventually be commercial or something else. The
only parking for Crosby Field will be on Corydon or Union.
Commissioner Washburn asked the City Engineer that before the issuance of
occupancy for any of the first phase tenants, wouldn't he have to provide
for the flood control channel - the whole thing or a portion of it? He
also has to provide, obviously, for the sewer mounding system.
The City Engineer replied, "Yes." If the developer is going to mass grade
the site, the City would require that the flood control facilities be
installed. In the event of a major stonn, the grading would be gone - it
would be disasterous. The City would require some means of collection and
transferring those flows off the tract not only for the protection of the
homes in whatever phase but also protection of the tract and the efforts
of t he grading.
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4~ 1984
Page 7
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
Commission Washburn said what he is hearing is that there is going to be
improved flood control on the entire tract prior to the issuance of occupancy
permits for Phase I. He can see that if that is the case, that kind of money
to do the total improvement to relieve the flood control concerns - we're
talking of first phase of development with 67 units - he can see the possi-
bility of allowing only rough grading of Crosby Field. When will some of
the improvements be going in Crosby Field?
Commissioner Saathoff replied applicant wanted to do so after completion of
Phase I and Commissioner Washburn stated they could request prior to Ph~se II.
Also they would require parking.
-
Considerable discussion ensued on Lakeside Park and means for acquiring
fees for park improv;ements - developer~ City, County and Recreation and
Parks entering an agreement; fees against other subdivisions in County area
which mayor may not be developed; deeding Lakeside Park land to City at end
of last phase; the amount of money the City would contribute and waiving
City fees.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Tentative Tract Map 19344 subject
to staff recommendations with the following changes: Delete Condition #8;
Conditions #25 and #26 is to read, "Crosby Field is to be completed with
two (2) ballparks~ and off-street parking provided~ subject to Engineering
and/or Planning Department approval prior to occupancy of Phase II, and that
Lakeside Park completion is to be as provided in Proposal II as submitted by
the developer in their Analysis of the Financial Impact of the Proposed Parks
_ in this said Tract with consideration of variance of fees to be made by the
Cit/Council;" Condition #51 is to have verbiage that would provide for a
V-ditch and/or a retaining wall of a decorative nature as determined by the
City Engineer for added flood protection and maintenance road as stated in
#51 remain with the dedication of easement; Condition #52 add, "Provide
letter from E.V.M.W.D. as to an agreement between the developer and the
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District as to the sewage disposal con-
struction;" Condition #25 add the word "All" to the beginning of said Con-
dit i on; Condit ion #21 add the words "and/or City Council" to the end of the
Condition; and approval of Draft Environmental Impact Report as per staff
recommendations for changes as noted in this report, second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 3-2
Roll Call:
Ayes: Commissioners Saathoff, Washburn and Barnhart
Noes: Commissioner Mellinger and Chairman Dominguez
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
D
1.
ApprovaJ contingent upon certification by City Council of a Focused
Environmental Impact Report.
Approval is contingent upon approval of annexation request by the Local
Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
-
D
N/D 3.
D 4.
N/D 5.
N/D 6.
o 7.
2.
A finding of conformity to the adopted General Plan.
Applicant shall record CC & R's for the Tract prohibiting on-street
storage of boats, motorhomes, trailers, and trucks over one-ton
capacity and roof mounted microwave antennas.
Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
Applicant shall meet all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Elementary and High
School District to off-set overcrowding.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Pa ge 8
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES, _
CONTI NUED
D 8. A~~~~eaRt-sAa~t-S~Bffi~t-+aR~S€a~~R~-~+aR-fe~-5t~eet-t~ees;-t~ees
ap~-te-ge-~ta6ee-~~-~Q-feet-4Ate~~a+s-aA~-Be-a~~peYee-By-S4ty
~R~:j.Ree~. DELETED .
D
D 10.
D 11.
D 12.
D. 13.
D 14.
D 15.
D 16.
D 17.
D 18.
D 19.
N/D 20.
D 2l.
D 22.
o
23.
D
24.
D
25.
D
26.
9. All trees planted along streetscape must be a minimum of eight feet
(8') high.
-
Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division and Engineering Depart-
ment a map showing all eight (8) phases of development.
Trailers utilized during the construction phase shall be approved by
the Planning Division~
-.' -;;.
Applicant will utilize the highest Uniform Building Code values
pertinent to seismic structural design, as per Senior Building Official
and/or ICBO recommendations.
,
Applicant shall submit plans/specifications for six foot (61) decorative
block wall along project perimeter to Planning/Engineering Departments
for review, as per map item number 23. This item is subject to review
and final approval by Design Review Board.
Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
Meet County Health Department requirements.
Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
Applicant shall submit design elevations to the Design Review Board for
approval.
-
Participate in Landscaping and Lighting District.
All slopes must be planted with erosion control vegetation to be
approved by Planning Division.
ALL park improvements shall be installed by the completion of the
277th housing unit.
CROSBY FIELD IS TO BE COMPLETED WITH TWO (2) BALLPARKS, AND OFF-
STREET PARKING PROVIDED, SUBJECT TO ENGINEERING AND/OR PLANNING
DEPARTMENT APPROVAL PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OF PHASE II.
LAKtSIDE PARK COMPLETION IS TO BE AS PROVIDED IN PROPOSAL NUMBER
TVJO AS SUBMITTED BY THE DEVELOPER IN THEIR "ANALYSIS OF THE FINANCIAL
IMPACT OF PROPOSED PARKS FOR TRACT 19344 AS RECOr1v1ENDED BY STAFF"
WITH CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE OF FEES TO BE MADE BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
-
CITY TO DEFER COLLECTION OF
$676,922 IN FEES UNTIL RECOR-
DATION OF FINAL PHASE OF PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT.
DEVELOPER TO DO OFFSITES
$753.389/UNIT
DEVELOPER TO DEDICATE 14
ACRE PARK TO CITY $436,660
1418/UNIT
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Pa ge 9
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
LAKESIDE PARK WILL BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE
AT THE RECORDATION OF THE FINAL PHASE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS (STREETS)
-
N/D 27. Dedicate 20 additional feet of right-of-way along Corydon Road.
N/D 28. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from centerline to lip of
gutter on Corydon Road. Tests must be provided to show that existing
paving is to the City standards and will support the traffic load re-
. presented by the City Engineer's traffic index. Obtain Riverside
~ounty permits as requi red.
..~.?
N/D 29. Construct curb, gutter and paving on all proposed streets to the
specifications of the City Engineer.
N/D 30. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
D
31.
o
32.
-
N/D 33.
N/D 34.
N/D 35.
N/D 36.
N/D 37.
N/D 38.
D 39.
-
GRADING
N/D 40.
N/D 41.
N/D 42.
Consent to sign an agreement to pay traffic safety mitigation fee for
future traffic signalization in the amount of $225.00 per lot.
Consent to sign an agreement to pay street sweeping maintenance mitiga-
tion fee in the amount of $50.00 per lot.
Install six foot (61) sidewalk adjacent to all curbs and gutters, except
eight-foot (8') width along the commercial frontage.
Construct curb, gutter, sidewalk and one-half street paving to 10 feet
past centerline for the extension of Palomar to Corydon. City will assist
developer in acquiring right-of-way by corresponding with the property
owner. Developer must dedicate required right-of-way.
Public inprovements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County standard drawings and specifications.
Centerline of Union Street must align with centerline of existing Union
Street southeast of Corydon Street.
All local streets which are not terminated in cul-de-sacs shall have
60-foot right-of-way with 40-foot wide curb-to-curb roadway. Cul-de-
streets to be 56-foot right-of-way, with a 36-foot curb-to-curb roadway.
Privide Class II or equivalent bike lane on Corydon Road as approved by
the City Engineer.
Provide bus turnout and bus shelter on Corydon Road as approved by the
City Engineer and by Lake Elsinore Transit System.
All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70. Erosion control planting and irrigation must be
improved by the City Engineer.
Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design reco~-
mendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with pre-
liminary and finish grade certification.
Street trees shall be provided; type, size and placement shall be
approved by the City Engineer.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 10
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
N/D 43.
N/D 44.
Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All pro-
perty lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
The northwesterly corner of this proposed Tract 19344 is below elevation
1270; the lowest corner being elevation 1261. Earth fill up to as high
as 1276 is being proposed in this northwest corner of the tract to
provide recreation and public facilities.
City Ordinance 603 stated in Section 2.3-1(3): IIReviewall development
permits to determine whether the proposed development adversely affects
the flood-carrying capacity of the area of special flood hazard. For
purposes of this ordinance, lIadverse affectsll means that the cumulative
effect of the proposed development when combined with all other existing
and anticipated development will not increase the water surface elevation
of base flood more than one foot at any point in the City of Lake Elsinore
Flood Plainll.
-
Paved parking areas and other minor structures associated with recrea-
tion facilities are proposed below elevation 1270. City Ordinance 711
states in section three; .
IINo person, firm or corporation shall construct any new non-residential
structure within the City of Lake Elsinore with the foundation or base-
ment lower than the elevation 6f 1270 feet mean sea level within the
perimeter streets of Lake Elsinore consisting of Grand Avenue, Riverside
Drive, Lakehsore Drive, Mission Trail and Corydon Road, except as speci-
fically permitted by the City Council on a case-by-case reviewll.
Planning Commission and the City Council must interpret the proposals
shown on this Tentative Map with consideration of these ordinance re-
quirements and make appropriate findings.
N/D 45. The hill or rise near the center of this site is proposed to be removed
and involves a maximum cut of 59 to 60 feet~ The Grading Ordinance No.
636 states in Section Two (A):
N/D 46.
N/D 47.
N/D 48.
N/D 49.
"
-
IIThis ordi nance shall provi de for the preservation of the natural scenic
character of the land, consistent with reasonable economic enjoyment of
such pro perty . II
The Planning Commission and City Council must make a finding that this
proposed land development is consistent with the Ordinance requirements
and changing of the topography is necessary, because of the unusual
character of this site and necessary for the property owner to enjoy a
substantial property right.
Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
Comply with the requirements of Riverside County Flood Control report
dated July 2, 1984, and additional or alternative requirements of the
City Engineer and the City Code. The City Engineer shall judge as to
interpretation and application of flood control recommendations.
-
Submit hydrology and hydraulic studies, necessary master planning and
detai"led plans and profiles of the proposed Flood Control facilities to
Riverside County Flood Control District and to the City Engineer for
review and approval prior to Final Map recordation. Provide drainage
easements as required by the City Engineer.
Construct box culvert(s) under Corydon Road and Union Street with inlet
facility to the satisfaction of Riverside County Road Department, River-
side County Flood Control, and the City Engineer.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 11
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19344/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - LAKESIDE ESTATES -
CONTINUED
-
N/D 50. All major drainage facilities in this Tract shall be constructed to
Riverside County Flood Control District standards and agreement
entered into with the District for construction, ownership and
ma intenance.
N/D 51. PROVIDE FOR A V-DITCH AND/OR A RETAINING WALL OF A DECORATIVE NATURE
AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER FOR ADDED FLOOD PROTECTION.
The drainage channel along the southwest boundary of this Tract shall
be provided with a 10-foot top width maintenance road. An irrevo-
cable offer of dedication of an easement shall be given by developer
for this drainage facility. City will not accept the easement, but
will leave underlying ownership and maintenance responsibility with
the individual home owner.
N/D 52. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department, and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal. PROVIDE LETTER FROM E.V.M.W.D. AS
TO AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND THE ELSINORE VALLEY MUNCI-
PAL WATER DISTRICT AS TO THE SEWAGE DISPOSAL CONSTRUCTION.
N/D 53. Design on-site sewage collection and disposal system so that future
connection can be made to the regional sewage system. Install clean-
outs behind the sidewalk on all sewer laterals as required by the
City and/or Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
_ WATER
N/D 54. Provide a will-serve letter guaranteeing water service from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
o 55. Dedicate underground water rights and future water well site to the
City or its assignee.
FEES
N/D 56. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
N/D 57. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedul e.
N/D 58. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
N/D 59. Pay all school fees.
N/D 60. Prior to Final Map recordation, a subdivision agreement shall be entered
into with the developer(s), owner(s), and the City.
N/D 61. Final Map shall show the following items with a prominent note:
- a) All geologic fault lines.
b) lOO-year and 500-year flood plain.
c) Areas subject to flood hazards.
N/D 62. Provide Tract phasing plan for City Engineer's approval. Bond public
improvements for each phase, as approved by the City Engineer.
N/D 63. Record a notice of 100-year flood hazard and waiver of City liability.
o 64. Applicant will contribute pro rata share toward fire fighting facilities
serving the southeastern end of the City. Amount not to exceed $25,000.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 12
2. Tentative Tract Map 19358 and Draft Environmental Impact Report - John C.
Heers c/o Castaneda and Associates - Community Development Director Corcoran
presented proposal to subdivide 40 acres into 197 lots for single-family resi-
dential development located southerly side of Grand Avenue at Bonnie Lea
Drive, approximately 900 feet southeasterly of Ortega Highway (Route 74).
Chairman Dominquez opened the public hearing at 9:07 p.m. and asked if any-
one wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 19358.
Mr. Jack Reeves of Boyle Engineering, representing the applicant, stated
they had originally prepared the project over a year and a half ago and
revised the project to what it is now. They had two major problems with
the project. One was sewers and one was drainage which they weren't aware
of in the beginning. Sewers, to their knowledge is solved. In talking with
'Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, they expect bids to come in next
week on their regional plant with enough capacity to serve their project and
others. Until they can come on 1 ine in about two years, Efsinore Valley
Municipal Water District, in the interim, is going to to expand existing
facilities to provide for added capacity for this project and others. The
applicant has a manhole in front of the project site and can tie into it.
Thei r drainage problem was caused by removal of trees al'ong the natural
flood control channel causing the water to change course and inundated appl i-
cant's property. Through negotiations with Riverside County Flood Control
and City staff, he has prepared a report contained in their Draft Environ-
mental Impact Report to solve the drainage problem in cooperation with the
Riverside County Flood Control District. The study that was done and calcu-
lations were a joint effort by them and Riverside County Flood Control. He
then stated he had brought some renderings of the floor plans, park site, and
colored-up Tentative Map. The Chairman advised him architectural renderings
weren't considered at this time but would be at a later date and then asked
if he had problems with any of the conditions of approval. Mr. Reeves stated
Condition #32 was confusing but he has no problem with any others.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. With no response
forthcoming Chairman Dominguez closed the public heating at 9:16 p.m.
City Engineer Culp informed Mr. Reeves that there was no conflict between
Condition #28 and Condition #32. Condition #28 pertains to curb-to-curb
dimensions as shown on the Map. Condition #32 pertains to street improve-
ments to City Codes and County Standard Drawings and Specifications - like
your street cross sections.
Commissioner Saathoff commented on the 4800 square foot lots - he appreci-
ated the trade-offs of flooding mitigation for one, but thinks the density
transfer from the upper portion to the lower portion is very intense and
probably not a correct ratio. He asked if anyone at the table wished to
discuss this. Commissioner Mellinger asked if the hill was developable.
The report states that it probably would be.
Community Development Director Corcoran said from staff's viewpoint possibly
6 lots could be constructed. Without this section, it would not fit into
the category of Planned Unit Development which would necessitate a different
square foot requirement. He is within the General Plan with a density trans-
fer.
Commissioner Washburn said it would be very worthwhile if we had fiscal
impact studies to see what the trade-offs were in dollars and cents. He
also agrees with Mr. Saathoff. He thinks they are looking at this Tract
as though it were a flat piece of ground and transferring that equivalent
amount over. Now, if that equivalent amount over compensates for the amount
of total flood relief for "X" amount of people all over the area, that's
one thing. He could go that direction. Obviously, they have to know that
because they are looking at 4800 square foot lots. They have 4800 to 5000
square foot lots in Country Club Heights but it is a different situation
because they are older lots. He concurs with Commissioner Saathoff. He
thinks there are too many lots.
-
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 13
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19358/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT-JOHN C. HEERS-CONTINUED
Commissioner Barnhart said that along with what Mr. Washburn said, if they
put a Planned Unit Development in Country Club Heights, they might be able
to build on those lots too. She has no problem with this project as long
as they agree with all the stipulations and conditions.
-
Chairman Dominguez said he was more impressed with the flood control they
have taken care of. Thatls a big plus. It is also one of the City's main
concerns. He is within the General Plan.
Mr. Reeves said they had blow-ups of some of the lots to show the Commission
and directed their attention to the bulletin board. What they were looking
at in conceiving this project was to create a living environment and not a
lot. The houses they will be building will not occupy the majority of the
lot such as a lot of the conventional single-family houses do. As can be
seen, there is quite a bit of greenery. You have a lot of living area there.
They originally started out with larger lots but changed those because dur-
ing the process and staff changing, the requirements changed. They felt the
layout they had of the project and trying to orient the houses in Lake Elsi-
nore to the lake was important enough not to compromise that. They are try-
int to create a product that gives the living environment that they feel is
marketable, livable and, therefore, successful not only for them but the
City.
Commissioner Mellinger asked when we ask for the requirements by County
Fire Department and they write a letter recommending certain things, is
that a requirement. Community Development Director Corcoran responded
that usually they put in a requirement to meet all County Fire Department
requirements.
-
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Tentative Tract Map 19358, sub-
to staff's 56 recommendations, and Draft Focus Environmental Impact Rep0rt
-as per staff recommendation for changes as noted in this report, second by
Commi ssi oner Saathoff.
Approved 3-2
Roll Call:
Ayes:
Noes:
Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Barnhart, Chairman Dominguez
Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Elementary and High
School Districts to off-set overcrowding.
2. Applicant shall submit landscaping plan for street trees, trees are to
be placed at 30-foot intervals and be approved by City Engineer.
3. All trees planted along streetscape must be a minimum of eight feet (81)
hi gh.
4. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division and Engineering Department
a map showing all phases of development, if applicable.
-
5. Trailers utilized during the construction phase shall be approved by the
Planning Division.
6. All building plans shall be reviewed by the City of Lake Elsinore Build-
ing Department and/or International Council of Building Officials (lCBO)
for review and utilization of highest Uniform Building Code values per-
taining to seismic structural design.
7. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
8. Meet County Health Department requirements.
9. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
10. Applicant shall submit design elevation and landscaping plan to the Design
Review Board for approval.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 14
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19358/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - JOHN C. HEERS - CONTINUED
D 11. Participate in City-wide entry-signage program.
N/D 12. All signage must be under permit.
D 13. Provide transit facilities (i.e., covered bus stops) within said project
as deemed applicable by Chairman of Lake Elsinore Transit System.
D
14. Participate in Landscaping and Lighting District.
...-
D 15. All slopes must be planted with erosion control vegetation to be approved
by Planning Division.
D 16. Approval for Tentative Tract Map 19358 is contigent upon approval of
the Planned Unit Development Permit 84-2 and certification of the Focus
Environmental Impact 'Report.
D 17. Submit Design Plans for a reverse frontage decorative block wall along
Grand Avenue frontage to be reviewed by Planning Division and sent to
Design Review Board for review and approval.
D 18. If applicable, adjust front yard setback to provide for 5' meandering
sidewalks along all internal streets.
N/D 19. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
D 20. Applicant will contribute pra-rata share of maintaining fire fighting
facilities to serve the southern end of City. Amount not to exceed
$25,000.00.
D
21. CC & R's for the Tract shall prohibit on-site street storage of boats,
motorhomes, trailers, roof mounted microwave receivers, and trucks
over one-ton capacity. CC & R's and Homeowner's Management Association
rules and regulations shall be submitted to the Planning Division to be
reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The CC & R's shall provide
for the effective establishment, operation, management, use repair and
maintenance of all streets, right-of-ways, graded slopes, common areas
and open space. The CC & R's shall provide that if the property is not
maintained in the condition required by the CC & R's, then the City
after making due demand and giving reasonable notice, may enter the area
and perform at the Homeowner Management Association's expense the neces-
sary maintenance. The property shall be subject to a lien in favor of
the City to secure any such expense not promptly reimbursed.
....
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
N/D
N/D
D
22.
Dedicate street right-of-way along Grand Avenue to provide a 50-foot wide
one-half street. The General Plan classifies Grand Avenue as a major
traffic corridor, with a 100-foot right-of-way and a 76-foot roadway
(curb to curb).
23.
Construct curb and gutter 38 feet from centerline, paving to City Standards,
and 6-foot sidewalk on Grand Avenue. Some paving exists and must be
replaced to City standards unless tests supplied by applicant show that
existing paving is to City standards and will resist traffic loads rep-
resented by the City Engineer's traffic index.
....
24.
A second access onto Grand Avenue must be provided at the extension of
D Street with 56-foot wide right-of-way and 44-foot roadway (curb to curb).
Provide utility easements back of sidewalk if required. Provide a Grand
Avenue centerline profile and calculation for safe vertical sight dis-
tance on Grand Avenue for this proposed additional connection into Grand
Avenue.
N/D
25.
Extension of Quail Knoll Road to the northwest shall match existing right-
of-way and roadway.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Se~te_mbel' ~i J 981 __ _ _ _ _ _ - -. .- --. - - - - -
Pa ge 1 5
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19358/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - JOHN C. HEERS - CONTINUED
N/D 26. Streets K and 0 extend to the tract boundary at the west corner of this
proposed development. The location of these street terminations at the
tract boundary may require adjustment to satisfy developmeht requirements
~ of adjacent owner. This will be resolved during plan checking.
N/D 27. Construct sidewalks adjacent to curb on all streets with the width and
public utility easements as shown on the tentative map.
N/D 28. Construct curb, gutter and paving on all proposed streets to the speci-
fications of the City Engineer. Roadway (curb to curb) width shall be
as shown on the tentative map.
N/D 29. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street, grading
utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
o 30. Consent to sign an agreement to pay traffic safety mitigation fee for
future traffic signalization in the amount of $225.00 per lot.
o 31. Consent to sign an agreement to pay street sweeping maintenance mitiga-
tion fee in the amount of $50.00 per lot.
N/D 32. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City-
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
N/D 33. a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by City Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a street lighting and landscaping
- maintenance district.
D 34. a) Provide Class II or equivalent bike lane on Grand Avenue as approved
by the City Engineer.
b) Provide bus turnout and bus shelter on Grand Avenue as approved by
the City Engineer and the Director of Lake Elsinore Transit System.
GRADING
N/D 35. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
N/D 36. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommendations.
Provide final soils report showing compliance with preliminary report
and finish grade certification.
N/D 37. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer, including street trees.
N/D 38. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All pro-
perty lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
-
N/D 39. Comply with written requirements of Riverside County Flood Control
District, and additional or alternative requirements of the City Engineer
and the City Code. The City Engineer shall judge as to interpretation
and application of flood control recommendations.
N/D 40. Submit hydrology and hydraulic studies, necessary master planning and
detailed plans and profiles of the proposed Flood Control facilities
to Riverside County Flood Control District and to the City Engineer
for review and approval prior to Final t.1ap recordat ion. Provide drainage
easements as required by the City Engineer.
N/O 41. Provision must be made to collect and convey hillside storm water runoff
through the lots southwesterly of Street G. Drains and easements must
be provided as required by the City Engineer. Irrevocable offers of
dedication must be given to the City. The City will not accept the
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 16:
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 19358/DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - JOHN C. HEERS - CONTINUED
easements. The final map must show the drainage easements with a pro-
minent note stating owner or homeowner association responsibility for
maintenance.
N/D 42. The storm drainag~ generated from the water shed area northwesterly of
the open space hill area identified as Lot 199, shall be diverted to the
master-planned Ortega Channel. This Ortega Channel shall be constructed
by this developer to receive this diverted flow. This developer shall
construct this Ortega Channel to and across Ortega Highway, and thence
along the planned alignment, across Grand Avenue to the existing Ortega
channel which presently terminates northeasterly of Grand Avenue between
Macy Street and Ortega Highway. The Ortega Channel shall be constructed
to its master planned size and alignment with provision for receiving
flow from all watershed areas which are tributary. The developer is
expected to obtain right-of-way and financial participation from down-
stream property owners. The developer must complete an agreement with
the Riverside County Flood Control District for constucttion of this
Ortega Channel to their standards for their ownership and maintenance.
The City of Lake Elsinore will consider providing a reimbursement agree-
ment to developer to allow him to recover a portion of the cost of the
Ortega Channel.
-
Obtain necessary approvals and encroachment permits from CalTrans. Pay
fees to Flood Control for reviewing tentative map and final drainage
plans and studies.
N/D 43. Where H Street intersects the northeast tract boundary, a drainage release
must be obtained from the adjacent property owner.
D
44. Consent to sign an agreement to pay a storm drainage impact mitigation
fee of $250.00 per lot to provide drainage facilities from Grand Avenue
to the Lake. Storm drainage runoff from the site discharges southeast-
erly to a low area in Grand Avenue near Butterfield School and there is
presently no drainage outlet from this low area to the Lake.
-
SEWERS
N/D 45. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department, and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for onsite sewage disposal.
N/D 46. Design onsite collection and disposal system so that future connection
can be made to the Regional Sewage system. Install cleanouts behind
the sidewalk on all sewer laterals as required by the City and/or
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
WATER
N/D 47. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing water service from serving
agency.
N/D 48. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee.
N/D 49. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
-
FEES
N/l) 50. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
N/D 51. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
N/D 52. Pay all public safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
N/O 53. Pay a 11 sc hoo 1 fees.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 17
FI NAl MAP
N/D 54. Prior to Final Map recordation, a subdivision agreement shall be entered
into with the developer(s), owner(s), and the City.
_ N/D 55. Final Map shall show the following items with a prominent note:
a) All geologic fault lines;
b) Areas subject to flood hazards.
N/D 56. The CC& R's shall provide that the Homeowner's Association will maintain
all City-owned facilities in the street right-of-way, storm drainage.
park and open space facilities.
3. Planned Unit Development 84-2 - John C. Heers c/o Castaneda and Associates -
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 9:29 p.m. and asked if any-
one wished to speak in favor of Planned Unit Development 84-2.
Mr. Jack Reeves of Boyle Engineering, representing the applicant, spoke in
fa vor.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. With no response
forthcoming Chairman Dominquez closed the public hearing at 9:30 p.m.
-
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Planned Unit Development 84-2,
subject to the same 56 Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map
19358, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-1
Roll Call:
Ayes: Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Barnhart
and Chairman Dominguez
Noes: Commissioner Washburn
4. Tentative Tract Map 20296 - The Grayson Companies - Community Development
Director Corcoran requested this item be continued to the meeting of Septem-
ber 18, 1984, as new design of Map, submitted on August 28, 1984, necessitates
a second review by the Riverside County Fire Department.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Tentative Tract Map 20296 to the
meeting of September 18, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
5. Tentative Parcel Map 20268 - Howard Palmer C/O Butterfie1 d Surveys, Inc. -
Community Development Director Corcoran presented proposal to subdivide
15.5~ acres into six (6) lots for commercial use, located easterly of the
intersection of Railroad Canyon Road and Casino Drive.
-
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 9:35 p.m., asking tf anyone
wished to speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 20268.
Mr. Fred Crowe of Butterfield Surveys, Inc., representing ~1r. Howard Palmer,
stated he spoke with Mr. Palmer early this afternoon and he was in favor of
the conditions as staff has presented them. Mr. Crowe said he would remain
at the meeting if there were any questions they wanted to ask him.
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
response, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:37 p.m.
Commissioner Barnhart expressed concern with Parcell. If they should have
to sell the parcels off before it is developed, how would you get access to
Parcell?
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4 t 1984
Page 18
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20268 - HOWARD PALMER C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. - CONTINUED
Community Development Director Corcoran answered that access will be provided
from Parcel with reciprocal parking and rights-of-entry.
Commissioner Washburn stated he would like the following verbiage added to
Condition #12 after the word "plan,": "including slope along the off-ramp
up to I-15." He said he meant just the portion from the on-ramp until you _
reach the freeway - about 1000 feet.
Mr. Crowe asked what he had in mind for landscaping.
Commissioner Washburn answered that.it should be some kind of vegetation that
is hardy for this environment and will act as slope retention as well as
beautification. .
. ....-;,i
Considerable discussion ensued regarding maintenance; watering; clean-up; if
not maintained might look worse than if left alone; Council desire to have
Cal Trans do something with the on/off ramps beautification; attach as a
condition to the Map that condition must be met prior to issuance of building
permit; everything depending on Cal Trans decision; if condition is attached
to Map it should state subject to an agreement with Cal Trans; maybe the City
could have planting done and Cal Trans would handle upkeep and irrigation;
making loose condition.,. if possiblet let's do it - if not, forget it; effec-
tively condition it to meet our needs as well as Cal Trans; leave at develop-
ment stage - burden would be on developers and would be prorated.
City Engineer offered the folowing wording for addition to Condition #12:
"Provide landscaping plans to be reviewed and approved for continuous main-
tenance by Ca 1 Trans."
Commissioner Washburn stated he would like to go with what the City Engineer -
put together as a condition and add it to Condition 12.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if Condition #3 implied it was going to be an
integrated center. Staff replied it would. He then asked about maintenance
for this center and whether it was covered by CC & R's, which he feels the
City Attorney should review. Community Development Director Corcoran informed
the Commission members that in a letter from the last City AttorneYt Mr. Portert
he recommended that the City Attorney not revi ew anYi more CC & R I S because they
are pretty standard and were costing the City a lot in terms of reviewing them
for what he considered standard features.
Commissioner Mellinger asked about letter from E.V.M.W.D. about temporary;
systems. What does it mean?
City Engineer Culp explained what he is attempting to do is trying to stan-
dardize conditions and feels that that particular condition is an either/or
condition. It is an attempt to try to streamline their review process in
writing up conditions.
City Engineer Culp, at the concurrence of the Commission, clarified condition
he stated earlier in the meeting on landscaping Cal Trans property as follows:
"Landscaping and irrigation pl an to be submitted and approved by Cal Trans
for continuous maintenancet to be reviewed by City Engineer if permit is un-
obtainable. Cal Trans approval does not preclude processing of said Parcel
Map."
-
Motion by Commission Washburn to approve Tentative Parcel Map 20268 with staff
recommendations and amending Condition #12 to read as follows: "Provide land-
scaping and irrigation plant including slope along the off-ramp up to I-15t
to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineert including street trees.
Landscaping and irrigation plan to be submitted and approved by Ca1 Trans for
continuous maintenancet to.be reviewed by City Engineer if permit is unob-
tainable. Ca1 Trans approval does not preclude processing of said Parcel
Map," second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Pa ge 19
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20268 - HOWARD PALMER C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. - CONTINUED
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
- D l. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
D 2. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
D 3. Applicant to provide agreement for reciprocal parking and access
throughout project site.
N/D 4. Compl y with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and City Codes.
D 5. Verification of legal description by City Engineer.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS TO BE DEFERRED UNTIL BUILDING PERMIT STAGE:
STREETS
N/D 6. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572 and applicable ordinances
at building permit stage.
N/D 7. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered civil
engineer and will include signing and ~riping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
-
N/D
8. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City-
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
N/D 9. Access to Parcel Number 1 must be provided to Casino Drive by ease-
ment due to the proximity of this parcel to the intersection of
Railroad Canyon Road and Interstate 15 freeway southbound off-ramp
and on-ramp. Limited access via right turn ingress/egress due to the
approved median to be constructed on Railroad Canyon Road between
Casino Drive and the freeway. Caltrans (letter dated July 23, 1984)
has recommended that no access be directed to Railroad Canyon Road
from Parcels 1 and 2, due to future signalization of the freeway
interchange. The City Engineer shall judge as to the application to
site plan at development stage.
GRADING
N/D 10. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and Uniform Build-
ing Code, Chapter 70.
N/D 11. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommenda-
tions. Provide final soils report showing complictnce with preliminary
report to include compaction results and final grade certification.
-
N/D 12. Provide landscaping and irrigation pl an, INCLUDING SLOPE ALONG THE
OFF-RAMP UP TO 1-15, to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION PLAN TO BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY CAL
TRANS FOR CONTINUOUS MAINTENANCE, TO BE REVIEWED BY CITY ENGINEER,
IF PERMIT IS UNOBTAINABLE. CAL TRANS APPROVAL DOES NOT PRECLUDE PRO-
CESSING OF SAID PARCEL MAP.
N/D 13. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered civil engineer. All
property lines shall be at top of the construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
N/D 14. (a) Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
(b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Lan-
scaping Maintenance District.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 20
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20268 - HOWARD PALMER C/O BUTTERFIELD SURVEYS, INC. - CONTINUED
N/D 15. Comply with the requirements of Riverside County Flood Control report
dated July 24, 1984, and additional or alternate requirements of the
City Engineer, to direct flows through storm drain system to the San
Jacinto River. The City Engineer shall judge as to the interpretation
of flood control recommendations.
-
N/D 16. Submit revi sed hydrology and hydraul ic studies, necessary master pl an-
ning, and detailed plans and profiles of the proposed extension and
up-sizing of downstream storm drain faciolities to the City Engineer
for review and approval for .lFinalMap recordation.
SEWER AND WATER
.' ... -;;.
N/D 17. Provide will-serve letter guaranteeing water availability from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
N/D 18. Provide approval from Riverside County Health Department and Riverside
Water Quality Control Board for sewage disposal system to designed
to accommodate future sewer service to site.
N/D 19. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
N/D 20. Meet all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
FEES
N/D
21. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
-
N/D 22. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedul e, if appl icabl e.
N/D 23. Pay all Public Safety fees (Police and Fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
D 24. Pay Street Sweeping Maintenance Mitigation fee in the amount of $200.00
pe r pa rc e 1 .
N/D 25. Pay Traffic Mitigation fee for future traffic signalization per Reso-
lution No. 83-61, as follows:
Parcel 1 - $ 5,781 .
Pa rce 1 2 8,094.
Parcel 3 - 13,875.
Pa rce 1 4 - 26,791.
Pa rce 1 5 - 2,478.
Parcel 6 36,393.
TOTAL $ 93,411.
6. Focused Environmental Impact Report for Tentative Tract Map 14639 Revised -
Lakeland Properties - Fred Miller - Community Development Director Corcoran
requested this item be continued to the meeting of September 18, 1984, due
to pertinent information from various agencies not yet received. _
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 9:54 p.m. and asked if anyone
wished to speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 14639 Revised.
Mr. Robert Vatcher, representing the applicant, stated he couldn't understand
the continual delays and continuations. He feels they have done everything
and submitted everything staff required. He is anxious to conclude this matter
and asked if the project could still go before the City Council on September
25, 1984, if this Focused E.I.R. is continued to the next Planning Commission
meeting. Staff answered in the affirmative.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 21
FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED -
LAKELAND PROPERTIES - FRED MILLER - CONTINUED
-
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
reply, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
response to his inquiry, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 9:58 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue the public hearing on the Focused
Environmental Impact Report for Tentative Tract Map 14639 Revised to the
meeting of September 18, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
7. Zone Change 84-8 - Vivian Sanches - Community Developemnt Director Corcoran
presented proposal for a zone change from M-l (Manufacturing) to R-l (Single-
Family Residence) Zoning District to accommodate the development of a single-
family residence on property located approximately 800 feet south of Pierce
St reet .
Chairman Dominguez opened the public hearing at 10:01 p.m., asking if there
was anyone present wishing to speak in favor of Zone Change 84-8. Receiving
no response, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Again receiv-
ing no response, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 10:02 p.m.
Discussion was held on the fact that applicant should be aware that they are
juxta position to an industrial zoned area and that at some point in time, if
industry does grow there, they will be subject to noxious fumes, toxins, etc.
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Zone Change 84-8 with staff recom-
mendations and applicant notified that properties to the north are zoned M-l,
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 16388 McPherson Avenue - P. J. Fenton - Community
Development Director Corcoran presented proposal to construct a single-family
residence at 16338 McPherson Avenue in the Country Club Heights area.
Discussion was held on conformance with setbacks; whether it can meet perc
test; and considered a buildable lot due to being subdivided prior to December
1 95 3 .
Motion Commissioner Mellinger to approve proposal for Single-Family Residence
at 16388 McPherson Avenue, subject to the 20 conditions recommended by staff,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
NjD 1. Applicant is to meet all setbacks.
NjD 2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
NjD 3. All items depicted on Site Plan unless otherwise modified by the
Planning Commission/Design Review Board.
N/D 4. Meet County Fire Department requirement for fire protection.
D 5. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division a document that veri-
fies Riverside County Health Department approval for wastewater
disposal system.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
N/D 6. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 22
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16388 MCPHERSON AVENUE - P. J. FENTON - CONTINUED
NjD 7. Construct asphalt paving to City standards from centerline to lip
of gutter on McPherson Avenue. Tests must be provided to show that
existing paving is to City standards and will support the traffic
load represented by the City Engineer's traffic index.
NjD 8. Construct curb, gutter and paving to the specifications of the City
Engineer.
-
NjD 9. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
NjD 10. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Draw:i,pgs and Specific~tions,.
D 11. (a) Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
(b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street L~ghting and Land-
scaping Maintenance District.
CONDITIONS #7, #8, #9, #10, AND #ll(a) TO BE DEFERRED BY STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT
FOR FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS.
GRADING
NjD 12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
NjD 13. Provide soils report including street design recommendations, Certi-
ficate of Survey, and finish grade certification.
-
NjD 14. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All
property lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with
the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
SEWER
NjD 15. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District, County Health Department and California Regional Water
Quality Control Board for on-site sewage disposal.
WATER
NjD 16. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing water service from Elsinore
Water Di st ri ct.
D 17. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or
its assignees.
FEES
NjD 18. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
NjD 19. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedule, if applicable.
NjD 20. Pay all school fees.
2. Single-Family Residence - 16660 Arnold Avenue - David Hartzheim - Community
Development Director Corcoran presented proposal to construct a single-family
residence at 16660 Arnold Avenue on a 11,700 square foot lot in the Country
Club Heights area. Said proposal, as submitted, meets all Planning Division
requ i rement s.
-
Discussion was held on house next door having block wall and wanting that
block wall continued in either block wall fashion or in some fashion other
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1 984
Page 23
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16660 ARNOLD AVENUE - DAVID HARTZHEIM - CONTINUED
-
than vegetation. It could be railroad ties put in place, or something of
that sort. Just putting in vegetation on that slope with the wall that is
very nicely providing slope control and quality environment for the other
house would be undermining what they are trying to accomplish in that area
for slope control.
The applicant informed the Commission that the block wall does not sit on the
property line but ten (10) feet in from the property line of the house next
door, so it would leave a gap of ten (10) feet from a wall on their property
and the existing wall on the next door property.
Discussion continued on some type of means to retain that slope so it looks
architecturally pleasing to the eye - either railroad ties, block wall, retain-
ing trees, ties stepped-up or cut and put in ground to retain tiered slope.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 16660
Arnold Avenue, subject to staff recommendations with Condition #6 changed to
read, "Applicant shall plant erosion control vegetation on all slopes and put
in place slope control measures which could include tiered railroad ties
protecting the slope and two (2) Eucalyptus trees to remain, subject to appro-
val of the Planning DiviSion," second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
N/D
1. All items depicted on Site Plan shall be provided as indicated on
the Plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission/Design
Review Board.
-
'"
N/D 2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
N/D 3. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
N/D 4. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater
disposal.
N/D 5. Applicant shall meet all setbacks.
D 6. Applicant shall plant erosion control vegetation on all ,slopes MID
PLACE SLOPE CONTROL MEASURES WHICH COULD INCLUDE TIERED RAILROAD
TIES PROTECTING THE SLOPE AND TWO (2) EUCALYPTUS TREES TO REMAIN,
subject to approval of the Planning Division.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
N/D 7. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
N/D 8. Existing street right-of-way is 40 feet. No additional dedication
is required.
-
N/D 9. Construct street improvements to City standards to centerline of
street right-of-way. Improvements to consist of paving, curb and
gutter, sidewalk, street lighting, drainage and utilities. To bt'
deferred with a Lien Agreement as was done recently for the adjacent
development at 16668 Arnold Avenue.
N/D 10. Provide a grading and drainage plan by a Civil Engineer conforming
to City Ordinance No. 636 and Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building
Code.
N/D 11. Provide a Certificate of Survey.
N/D 12. Provide a will-serve letter for water supply.
N/D 13. Provide sewage disposal as approved by the City, County Health
Department and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 24
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16660 ARNOLD AVENUE - DAVID HARTZHEIM - CONTINUED
NJD 14. Pay applicable Capital Improvement fees required by Ordinance
No. 572.
NJD 15. Pay sewerage fees, if required by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District.
3. Residential Project 84-8 ~ SQS, Inc. (Seers) - Community Development Director
Corcoran presented proposal to construct two (2) four-plexes on two (2) lots
on .42! acres located at the end of the cul-de-sac on Nashland Avenue between
Joy Avenue and Lincoln Street. .
-"
Discussion was held on applicantls exact number of parking spaces; 24-foot
driveway approach, and Condition #5 regarding retaining wall and additional
height to block wall; glare and noise; and surchar~ on walT.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Residential Project 84-8, subject
to staff recommendations, and amending Condition #5 to read, "Applicant shall
provide a six-foot (61) wooden fence or rehabilitate existing fence along the
entire south area of subject property to be approved by the Planning Division,"
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
NJD 1. Applicant shall meet all setbacks.
NJD 2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
NJD 3. All items depicted on Site Plan shall be provided as indicated on
the Site Plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission/
Design Review Board.
NJD 4. Meet County Fire Department requirements.
-"
D 5. Applicant shall provide a six-foot (61) WOODEN FENCE OR REHABILITATE
EXISTING FENCE along the entire south area of subject property to be
approved by the Planning Division.
NJD 6. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division site plans indicating
the exact layout of the uncovered parking spaces required on-site,
subject to the approval by the Planning Division.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
N/D 7. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
NJD 8. If removal and replacement of existing public improvement are required
to match proposed improvements, approval of the City Engineer will be
required before encroachment permit issuance. As built street,
grading, utility, and drainage improvement plans are required.
NJD 9. Public improvements (if required) are to conform with City Code
requirements and City~approved Riverside County Standard Drawings
and Specifications.
-"
N/D 10. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
N/D 11. Provide City Engineer with soils and geology report; Certificate of
Survey and a final grade certification showing compliance with
approved grading plans.
NJD 12. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All
property lines shall be at top of construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 25
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-8 - SQS, INC. (SEERS) - CONTINUED
D 13. Coop~rate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
-
N/D 14. Provide City Engineer with verification that existing block retain-
ing wall along the westerly property line of Lots 12 and 13 can
handle the additional load, due to the proposed parking stalls, as
shown on the site plan submitted to staff.
N/D 15. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing sewer service from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
N/D 16. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water service from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
D 17. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or
its assi gnees.
N/D 18. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
N/D 19. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No.
572.
N/D 20. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Muncipal Water District
schedule, if applicable.
-
N/D 21. Pay all school fees.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Community Development Director Corcoran reminded the Commissioners of the City/
County Planning Commissioner's Conference in San Bernardino at the Hilton Hotel,
September 20, 1984 - a summer conference - and he commented that he would like
to reserve dinners for as many Commissioners as would like to attend this event.
The program is "New Approach for Downtown Revitalization," which would be bene-
ficial for all the Commissioners and urged their attendance. Commissioner Domin-
guez said he believes the President of the Downtown Business Association and
several of the Council members will accompany them.
The Community Development Director then stated he would like to try to establish
a study session with his staff and the Planning Commis~ion for review of Title 17.
The study session was set for Thursday, September 6th at 6:00 p.m. The Commis-
sioners were reminded that they need to adopt the new Zoning Ordinance by Decem-
ber 14, 1984. Re-zoning of property to bring it into conformance with the General
Plan and the new Zoning Ordinance will be done later by targeting specific areas
and working their way around the City - a very large endeavor. This will be
City's responsibility.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
-
Commissioner Barnhart - Said she had a phone call from Susan Peters in Riverside
that the Riverside County Community Action Committee is looking for two or three
people from the Lake Elsinore area to become a part of that Committee. It is a
Committee for the betterment of the community. If anyone wishes to volunteer,
she has Susan's phone number.
Commissioner Washburn - Just for their information, at some point there will be
staff and possibly a Planning Commissioner or two working to put together a
workshop dealing with the revitalization of downtown.
Commissioner Mellinger - Said there are some parkways in town that really need
maintaining. The City Engineer asked the locations. Commissioner Mellinger
responded it's where you come into the City off of Lakeshore. There are weeds
and water runs constantly. The bill is paid by Kaufman and Broad.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 4, 1984
Page 26
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - CONTINUED
Commissioner Saathoff - None.
Chairman Dominguez - Asked the City Engineer if they could get the improvements
in at Graham and Scrivener. Just as a point of interest, asked if anyone watched
the news last night on Channel 4 on Lake Elsinore as compared to Perris. City
Engineer Culp said he had and he thought it left a bad impression of the City.
They talked about-dirty lake, throwing trash around, nobody cared - very negative. ...
Then they shifted to Lake Perris - showing it nice and clean, which put Lake Elsi-
nore in a very bad light. .
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0 . _ ..~~
...
...
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
4TH
DAY
OF
SEPTEMBER
1984
MINUTE ACTION
~
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of August 21, 1984, as sub-
mitted, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 16388 McPherson Avenue - P. J. Fenton - Associate
Planner Fields presented proposal for design and building elevations for con-
struction of a single-family residence at 16388 McPherson Avenue.
Discussion was held on the design and building elevations and neighbors of
property objecting to its construction.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to deny without prejudice Single-Family
Residence at 16388 McPherson Avenue, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
2. Single-Family Residence - 16660 Arnold Avenue - David Hartzheim - Associate
Planner Fields presented proposal for design and building elevations for con-
struction of a single-family residence at 16660 Arnold Avenue. Staff stated
proposed project, as submitted, meets Planning Division requirements.
~
Commissioner Washburn stated Condition #7 should contain same wording as
Condition #6 under Planning Commission approval of said project.
~otion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 16660
Arnold Avenue, subject to staff recommendation with Condition #7 to read,
"Applicant shall plant erosion control vegetation on all slopes and place
slope control measures which could include tiered railroad ties protecting
the slope and two (2) Eucalyptus trees to remain," second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
o 1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the devel-
opment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or p~b1ic streets.
o 2. All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler system.
o 3. Applicant shall submit a landscaping/irrigation plan to Planning
Division and shall implement plan prior to issuance of Certificate
of Occupancy.
0 4. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
0 5. Applicant shall plant trees outside of public right-of-way, to be
~ approved by City Engineer.
0 6. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart along
Arnold Avenue.
D. 7. Applicant shall plant erosion control vegetation on all slopes AND
PLACE SLOPE CONTROL MEASURES WHICH COULD INCLUDE TIERED RAILROAD
TIES PROTECTING THE SLOPE AND TWO (2) EUCALYPTUS TREES TO REMAIN,
subject to approval of the Planning Division.
3. Residential Project 84-8 - SQS, Inc. (Seers) - Associate Planner ~elds pre-
sented proposal to construct two (2) four-plex two-story buildings on two (2)
lots (17,425 square feet), located at the end of cul-de-sac on Nashland Avenue
between Joy Avenue and Lincoln Street.
Minutes of Design Review Board
September 4, 1984
Page 2
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-8 - SQS, INC. (SEERS) - CONTINUED
Discussion was held on landscaping and grass in the back.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Residential Project 84-8, subject
to staff recommendation and adding the following verbiage "grass in the back"
after the word "shrubs" in Condition #3, second by Commissioner Me" inger.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
D 1. All planting and landscaping areas shall have permanent and automatic
sprinkler systems.
N/D 2. Grading plans to be approved by the Engineering Department.
. .~~ ' .
D 3. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division a landscape/irri-
gation plan detailing trees, shrubs, GRASS IN THE BACK, ground
cover and other landscape features.
D 4. Applicant is to provide street trees at thirty-foot (301) intervals
along the frontage of Nashland Avenue to be approved by the City
En gi neer.
N/D 5. Applicant shall provide along designated sections of landscaped
driveway a six-inch (6") high concrete curb for the purpose of
separating paved and planting areas.
D 6. Applicant shall provide trash enclosures placed in a location that
is central to residents who dwell within the complex, and will be
approved by Planning Division.
D
7. All roof mounted equipment, trash enclosures, storage, and gr~und
support equipment shall be effectively screened from public view
and subject to approval from Planning Division.
-
D 8. Applicant shall have landscaping/irrigation plan implemented prior
to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
D 9. Applicant shall provide low-level security lighting in the south
uncovered parking area of the site, and shall be designed to direct
illumination only onto site by shielding the emission of glare from
the lighting source.
N/D 10. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, unless
otherwise modified by Design Review Board. Any proposed changes by
applicant will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
D 11. Applicant shall utilize clay tile roofing within proposed elevation
des i gn s .
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 11:00 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
APprov.ed'~~.
'.~~C?
~:mHigUeZ ~~
Cha i rman
~
~"t!~
Rut h Edwa rds
Acting Planning
Commission Secretary
For official record the City Clerk's Office saved audio cassettes for the following
Planning Commission meetings:
September 11, 1980
September 6, 1984
September 12, 1984
October 3, 1984
October 25, 1984
November 7, 1984
November 13, 1984
February 20, 1985
March 3, 1986
May 29, 1986
June 12, 1986
V rginia J.(Warn, "V Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Fa,bl�,It &wIlL, . . Rollo Lei
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
18TH
DAY
OF
SEPTEMBER
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
.....
PLEDGE OF ALLEGAINCE was led by Community Development Director Corcoran.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn
and Chairman Dominguez. Commissioner Barnhart was absent.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant City Engineer Rubel, Associate Planner Fields, Assistant Planner Coleman
and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve the minutes of September 4,1984, with the
correction of the word "commended" to "commented" on Page 5, last paragraph, second
by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Draft Focused Environmental Impact Report for Tentative Tract Map 14639 Revised -
Lakeland Properties - Fred Miller - Staff presented proposal for evaluation of
Focused Environmental Impact Report for a two hundred forty-two (242) parcel sub-
division of 51 .93r acres into single-family residential lots, located southerly
of Washington Avenue and northerly of Lincoln Street.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
__ speak in favor of the Draft Focused Environmental Impact Report for Tentative
Tract Map 14639 Revised.
Mr. Lloyd Zola stated that his firm prepared the Environmental Impact Report
being discussed. In looking through the revisions that staff has recommended
we agree to all of them, and they should be included in the Final Environmental
Impact Report along with the actual conditions of approval as adopted by the
City Council. On the City Engineer's comments regarding the Four-Corners inter-
section (the traffic signal warrant), the Environmental Impact Report was based
originally on using a urban warrant for that intersection. The City of Lake
Elsinore is right about 10,000 by the time the tract is built, it will probably
be a urban warrant. However, under rural criteria that would require a signal;
so we agree to that on the basis of that intersection being outlined from the
downtown. We will include a letter to that effect from the traffic engineer in
the analysis. The second issue brought up by Engineering in terms of access was
the need for additional access points, and those are included in the revised
mitigation measures. We have comments, first of all, from the Elsinore Union
High School District about developer agreements, those are part of the approval.
There is a letter from Southern California Gas Company, that is their basic, will
provide service letter. The Fire Department has made basically three requests:
one that the project participate in acquisition of a fire station site. It is my
understanding, that this project will be dedicating a site, so we have met that
requirement. Also, the Fire Department request that mention be made to Lincoln
Street, and that is part of the mitigation measures and conditions of approval.
..... The third request from the Fire Department is basically R-l fire protection.
There was another response from the Edison Company on locating the nearest Edison
lines and stating that they are capable of serving the project, and those are all
of the comments received to date.
Mr. Robert Vatcher, representing the applicant, stated that there are some new
conditions of approval, some of them as a result of the Environmental Impact
Report, and he has comments on fourteen of the total conditions, some are merely
clarification. Chairman stated that after the public hearing portion they would
call him back to the podium to discuss the conditions in question.
Ms. Cappy Carpenter stated that she was very pleased with this particular sub-
division. They are offering us 240 homes with a mix of quality build for our
bedroom community, as it was designated by our own City, and with all of the
development here and around us, it can't come any too soon. These people have
been working on this for some time and in talking with them, I realize that they
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 2
DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED CONT.
are in complete accord with complying with all of your conditions. I just
hope that you act favorably for them.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, the
Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:45 p.m.
-
Mr. Robert Vatcher stated that he has a question on the new condition number 22,
(thinks this is repetition of a prior condition) the last sentence of that condi-
tion regarding "City and Flood Control", in the prior condiHon it was City
and/or Flood Control; condition number 25, need clarification regarding the
block wall along the west tract boundary. The block wall we would agree to,
but for clarification, it should not be on the west boundary, it should be
set on the east side of the channel adjacent the west boundary; condition
number 26, would like to add on the traffic signal fee, to be collected at
the time of issuance of building permits; condition number 37, on any of the
a.b.c. conditions, there is no evidence of this to date, that we would be
involved with, however, 37.a. to show on the map all geologic fault lines, I
believe for clarification on that, if I'm not wrong, would be as defined under
the Alquist Priolo Act; condition number 37.b. why the 500-year flood plain;
condition number 39 goes with condition number 47, I will bring this up later
when we come to condition number 47; condition number 42, on the name change
from Rancho Laguna Road to Terra Cotta is fine with us, there is just one
problem, the County named this Shirley Drive, would like the City to petition
the Board of Supervisors of the County to make this name change in the County;
condition number 43, last sentence on "Oil and "[I' Streets shall intersect pro-
posed Rancho Laguna Road at ri ght angl es, "E" Street is a probl em,
Commissioner Barnhart arrived at 7:50 p.m.
this is involving the lot that is being given for a fire station site, as
selected by the City; condition number 44, confused on Terra Cotta Road, are
you asking that we put the other half of the improvements in; if you are want-
i ng us to make this other hal f street, and why are we goi ng to extend the curb
and gutter. The next question, is right-of-way requirement, is the City going
to get it if we have to do it; condition number 45, would like to add that the
fee be collected at the time of issuance of building permits; condition number
47, regarding bonding for half of California Street improvements along our west
boundary line. I assume that, that would be at such time as all the master
drainage facilities are in, and that bond to be held outstanding to when? I
don't think this street should go through, there is another paper street
(Michigan Street) which would be a more logical tie in; condition number 50 and
51, have to do with the left turn lane and some new paving down at Machado and
Zieglinde. I question this, what are we doing to cause improvements on Zieglinde
and Machado, or are you talking striping; condition number 52, regarding Tenta-'
tive Tract Map to conform to minimum 350 foot radius requirement, would like this
to be or at the concurrence of the City Engineer; condition number 53, would like
or as approved by the City Engineer included.
A lengthy discussion was held on the above mentioned conditions, condition number
16 (pertaining to when flood mitigation measures would be done and easements);
condition number 40 (pertaining to eminent domain to acquire right-of-way);
traffic study, conditions to be incl uded in the Environmental Impact Report; and
ci rcul a tion.
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Tentative Tract Map 14639 with recom-
mendations as proposed by staff with the following revisions: on page 2 (Report
to Commission) Section "A", should be included in the Environmental Impact
Report; comments on traffic study, items 1 and 2 should be included in the
Environmental Impact Report; condition number 22, the last li.ne should read
and/or Flood Control District; condition number 25, the last sentence should
read: "install block wall along the east side of flood control channel"; condi-
tion number 26, add verbiage at issuance of building permit stage; condition
number 39 and 47, amended by adding: "bond must be posted prior to the issuance
of building permits for Phase 4 and Phase 5, for a period of one-year beyond
the total build-out of the tract; condition number 42, to request the City to
petition the County for name change for the service street to Terra Cotta;
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 3
DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED CONT.
-
condition number 43 and 53 to contain the verbiage that is shown in the
Draft Environmental Impact Report, which states: (this is pertaining to the
90 degree angle) unless the City Engineer agrees to a minor deviation; condi-
tion number 45, should be at the issuance of building permit stage, second by
Commissioner Washburn with disucssion.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he would like the maker of the motion to
amend condition number 39 and 47 to specify the number of units built.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that he would amend his motion pertaining to
condition number 39 and 47 to read: "bond must be posted prior to the issuance
of building permits through Phase 4 and Phase 5 or after the completion of 150
units and extend one year beyond the total build-out.
Approved 5-0
Commi ss ioner Mell i nger asked if the above motion i nc1 uded the Envi ronmenta1
Impact Report.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to accept the Draft Environmental Impact
Report with the amendments as previously stated by Commissioner Saathoff,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MODIFICATIONS TO DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT
-
Section A - Geology and Seismicity
Soils and Erosion: Page 7.3.(b) (4):
"Areas not immediately to be developed will be stabilized with erosion
control p1antings as soon as possib1e."
Soils and Erosion: Page 8.3.(b)(5):
Insert the following sentence:
"Project proposal will be reviewed by the Senior Building Official
and/or I.C.B.O. to determine the Code values to utilize for seismic
structural design."
Page 8.B., a. End of first paragraph:
Shou1 d make reference to run-off from both watersheds, t1cVicker and
Lincoln, not just from McVicker watershed.
Page 8.B., a. (7):
Insufficient amount of mitigation for downstream protection or up-
stream conveyances.
-
Page 8.C., a:
At project completion, three (3) access routes shall be in service:
to Lincoln Street, down Zieg1inde to Machado Street, and the exten-
sion of Rancho Laguna Road northerly to Terra Cotta Road. There is
doubt that emergency access is possible to the cul-de-sac to existing
Tract 19402. At least two (2) access roads shall be constructed by
completion of the first phase.
Page 8.C., a. (9):
Include statement that traffic safety mitigation for traffic signaliza-
tion requires developer consent to sign an agreement to pay $250.00
per lot to be collected at time of issuance of building permits.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 4
DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED CONT.
Page 9.C., b:
Perimeter streets shall be constructed to ten feet (10') beyond
centerline unless specifically approved otherwise by the City
Engineer.
Page 9.C., (11) (12) (13):
-
Conform with subdivision requirements in the City 'code regarding
street geometrics. Streets shall intersect at right angles unless
City Engineer specifically approved minor deviations.
Comments on Traffic Study Section:
1. Recent City traffic study indicates the Four Corners intersection (River-
side Drive and Lakeshore Drive) presently meets the volume warrant under
rural intersection criteria for traffic signal installation. The traffic
study submitted indicates a traffic signal is not presently warranted,
thus no impact mitigation fees should be imposed. Therefore, staff dis-
agrees with the present traffic study submitted.
2. Staff feels there is no sufficient access or street capacity to proposed
tract. Additional traffic loads and capacity will be needed to accommo-
date construction vehicle traffic and residential traffic. Staff recom-
mends extending Rancho Laguna Road to Terra Cotta Road and Lincoln Street
witll full improvements.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS - REVISED
11. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
-
12. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees.
13. All grading to conform to Ordinance No. 636 and Uniform Building Code,
Chapter 70.
14. Pay all Public Safety fees per Resolution No. 83-87.
15. Provide Soils and Geology Report including street design recommendations.
Provide Final Soils Report showing compliance with preliminary report
and finish grade certification.
16. Easement to provide for storm drain and Lincoln Street channel facilities
per Riverside County Flood Control District's suggested master plan align-
ment or other alternate alignment of facilities as approved by Riverside
County Flood Control District and City Engineer.
17. Grading plan to be prepared by registered Civil Engineer and to be approved
by the City Engineer.
18. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer, including street trees.
19. Dedicate additional street right-of-way as approved by the City Engineer.
20. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All pro-
perty lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes' with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
-
21. Submit street improvement plans prepared by a registered Civil Engineer,
designed to the specifications of the City Engineer. Plans are to
include signing and striping, As built streets, grading, utility, and
drainage improvement plans are required.
22. Submit drainage improvement plans with complete hydraulic and hydrology
supporting calculations to be reviewed and approved by Riverside County
Flood Control and/or the City Engineer. Approval of this Map does not
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 5
DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED CONT.
imply approval of drainage facilities shown thereon. City reserves the
right to require alternate drainage facilities as determined by the City
AND/OR Flood Control District.
23. Submit plans for the extension of utilities including storm drains and
storm channel extensions off-site as may be required by Riverside County
Flood Control and/or the City Engineer.
24. If any drainage facilities are to be owned and maintained by Riverside
County Flood Control District, the developer shall enter into an agree-
ment with the Flood Control District for the construction and subsequent
acceptance of the improvements.
25. Construct street improvements, on-site storm drain channels to the satis-
faction of the Riverside County Flood Control District and/or the City
Engineer as they are applicable. Install block wall along the EAST SIDE
OF FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL.
26. Consent to sign an agreement to pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for
traffic signalization in the amount of $250.00 per lot as an environ-
mental impact mitigation AT ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT STAGE.
-
27. Dedicate ground water rights for Tract to the City of Lake Elsinore.
28. Dedicate to provide future water well site construction facilities in
the vicinity of Lot 54.
29. Obtain will-serve letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
CE . V . M . W . D . ) .
3Q. Provide fire protection facilities as required by County Fire Department.
31. Pay required School District fees.
32. Provide for sewage disposal approved by the City, County Health Depart-
ment, and the Water Quality Control Board.
33. Pay required Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (E.V.M.W.D.) sewer
hoo k- up fees.
34. Applicant to agree to participate in the formation of a Landscaping and
Lighting Assessment District.
35. Install street lights as requried by the City Engineer.
36. Applicant to provide Soil and Geology Report including street design
recommendations. Provide Final Soils Report showing compliance with
preliminary report.
37. Final map shall show the following items with a prominant note:
- a) All geologic fault lines.
b) 100-year and SOO-year flood plain.
c) Areas subject to flood haza rds .
38. Bonding required for each phase shall be as approved by the City Engineer.
39. Bond for extension of California Street and future connection to Lincoln
Street and Washington Avenue. BOND MUST BE POSTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE
OF BUILDING PERMITS THROUGH STAGE 4 AND 5 OR AFTER THE COMPLETION OF 150
UNITS AND EXTEND ONE-YEAR BEYOND THE TOTAL BUILD-OUT.
40. Provision must be made for the extension southerly of Rancho Laguna Road
to intersect Lincoln Street. Without this extension there will not be
adequate access to this proposed subdivision. Construct the extension
or provide a bond to the City in an amount sufficient to acquire the
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 6
DRAFT FOCUSED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14639 REVISED CONT.
right-of-way and construct a full width street from the entire inter-
section and street improvements on Lincoln Street, to conform to those
improvements to the east which have been constructed in connection with
Tract 16062. City will consider eminent domain to acquire the right-of-
way for this extension.
41. Bond for construction of the portion of Lincoln Street within the -
boundary of this proposed subdivision. Improvements to be constructed
when remainder of Lincoln Street is extended by adjacent property owner.
Dedicate right-of-way for Linco1n'Street within the Tract boundary.
42. The minimum width of paved roadway on proposed Rancho Laguna Road shall
be 30 feet measured from curb face. Dedicate a minimum width of 40
feet right-of-way for proposed Rancho Laguna Road. Change name of Rancho
Laguna Road to Terra Cotta Road to conform with existing road to the
northeast in Tract 18211. REQUEST THE CITY TO PETITION THE COUNTY FOR
NAME CHANGE FOR THE SERVICE STREET TO TERRA COTTA.
43. Along Washington Avenue proposed streets shall align with existing
dedicated right-of-way for future streets to the north. Align IIJII
Street with Ohio Street. 11011 and IIEII Streets shall intersect proposed
Rancho Laguna Road at right angles. THIS CONDITION TO CONTAIN THE
VERBIAGE THAT IS SHOWN IN THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (THIS
IS PERTAINING TO THE 90 DEGREE ANGLE) UNLESS THE CITY ENGINEER AGREES
TO A MINOR DEVIATION.
44. Construct proposed Rancho Laguna Road to connect to Terra Cotta in
existing Tract 18211. Developer of Tract 18211 may construct this
street to centerline. This developer of Tract 14639 shall widen and
extend proposed Rancho Laguna Road to the northwest, including paving
and curb and gutter.
45. Consent to sign an agreement to pay $50.00 per lot to mitigate the
environmental impact of added street sweeping requirements. AT THE
ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT STAGE.
-
46. Install sidewalks adjacent to curb.
47. Bond for future construction of one-half of California Street extension
along the west Tract boundary for a 50-foot right-of-way and 40-foot
curb-to-curb roadway. BOND MUST BE POSTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS THROUGH STAGE 4 AND 5 OR AFTER THE COMPLETION OF 150
UNITS AND EXTEND ONE-YEAR BEYOND THE TOTAL BUILD-OUT.
48. IIBII Street from Street IIW to proposed Rancho Laguna Road to be 50-foot
right-of-way and 40-foot roadway, curb-to-curb.
49. IIJII Street al igned with Ohio Street to be 44-foot roadway (curb-to-curb)
with 55-foot right-of-way. Construct a 5-foot sidewalk adjacent to curb.
50. Bear the cost of providing a left turn on Machado Street at Zieglinde
Drive and at Joy Street to provide for this added traffic and because
the off-set of Zieg1inde Drive and Joy Street is substandard.
51. Provide resurfacing of the added traffic lane needed across the frontage
of Machado Park to accommodate this left turn lane.
-
52. Revise Tentative Tract Map to conform to minimum 350' radius require-
ments for interior street center1ines per City of Lake Elsinore Land
Division Ordinance.
53. Revise Tentative Tract Map to conform to 900 intersection streets per
City of Lake Elsinore Land Division Ordinance. THIS CONDITION TO
CONTAIN THE VERBIAGE THAT IS SHOWN IN THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (THIS IS PERTAINING TO THE 90 DEGREE ANGLE) UNLESS THE CITY
ENGINEER AGREES TO A MINOR DEVIATION.
-
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 7
2.
Tentative Tract Map 20296 - The Grayson Companies - Staff presented proposal to
subdivide 77t acres into 65 single-family residential lots, located westerly of
Ortega Highway (Route 74), southerly of Laguna Avenue and easterly of Macy
Avenue.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:43 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Tentative Tract Map 20296.
Mr. Bill Pierce of Psomas and Associates, Civil Engineers for The Grayson
Companies, stated they feel they have presented a well desi gned and good develop-
ment; thinks it will be a benefit to the City, and certainly to the Hillcrest
Plaza shopping center, which was approved by Council about a month ago.
Mr. Pierce stated that the development itself comprises about 35.7 acres; we
will be donating to the open space preserve approximately 41.3 acres; with 35
acres in the development and with 65 lots it averages out at about half an
acre per lot, at this time Mr. Pierce presented to the Commission a map illustrat-
ing the open space for the development; there is green area indicated on the map
which is part of the back lots, but it will be undisturbed and have no develop-
ment on it, so basically that is what you will see as the open space. Also, the
Grayson Companies have eliminated about six of the original view lots that they
were proposing in the upper reach of the property, which are valued in excess of
three hundred thousand dollars, so that plus the open space dedication is a gift.
Mr. Pierce stated that they have worked with staff to establish the hillside
development limits; the highest elevation of a pad in this subdivision is around
1570 and the back reaches of the hill is 2190, so you have a 620 foot grade
differential separating the back of the Grayson properties from the nearest lots.
Mr. Pierce stated that he has a few questions on about three or four of the
conditions. Chairman stated that after the public hearing portion they would
call him back -to the podium to discuss the conditions in question.
Ms. Cappy Carpenter stated that she was pleased that we were getting more view
lots . .
The Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no
response, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
response, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:47 p.m.
Commissioner Saathoff asked for clarification on the streets, stating throughout
the report reference is made to A, B, C, etc. but not on the map.
Community Development Director Corcoran stated that the streets have been named
as follows:
"A" Street -
"B" Street -
"C" Street -
"D" Street -
"E" Street -
Mesa Grande Drive
Stone Canyon Drive
Deleted
Santiago Drive
Murrieta Drive
Mr. Pierce questioned condition number 19, stating that they were abutting the
rear of lots to Ortega, but not doing any improvements, at least did not think
they were doing any improvements to Ortega; so the dedication is not a problem,
but on condition number 20, it gets into some street improvements on Ortega,
that could be a requirement from Cal Trans, but have not received any corre-
spondence from them; condition number 28, there is an easement running across
which is an access easement for part of the Grayson property and also someone
elses, so this item that I am questioning mentions that they would like us to
get the easement down further, we can't do anything with this portion because
it doesn't belong to us; so will there be just half road easement; condition
number 41, regarding the sewer wondering what you have in mind, we have a will
serve letter fnom Elsinore Valley to hook-up to sewer; unless this just means
the normal sewer system design which we are in the process of doing.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if there was supposed to be a fire hydrant at the
end of Santiago, not illustrated on the map. Mr. Pierce stated that one was
definately needed there and this was just an oversight.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 8
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20296 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONT.
Discussion was held on condition number 20 (pertaining to County Fire Depart-
ment letter regarding cement block wall for fire break, where this would be
located; when this condition would be performed; possibility of a lien agree-
ment or bond and curb and gutter; condition number 28 (pertaining to access
from Ortega Highway); condition number 27 (pertaining to the width of Grand-
view Avenue; accessibility along easements for fire protection (Commissioner
Washburn recommended breakaway posts or reflectors for fire easements); open ....",
space preserve, 1 abel ed on the map as Lot IIBII, who woul d be the owner of this
property? Mr. Pierce stated that this will probably de dedicated to the
City of Lake Elsinore, it won1t be retained by the Grayson Companies.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Tentative Tract Map 20296 with
staff recommendations and adding condition number 52, which will read: liThe
applicant will offer Lot IIBII to the City, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration.
3. Applicant shall submit design elevations and landscaping plan to the
Design Review Board for approval.
4. Applicant shall record City Council CC & R's for the Tract prohibiting
on-street storage of boats, motorhomes, trailers, and trucks over one-
ton capacity, roof mounted microwave antennas.
5. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
6. Applicant shall meet all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
7. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Elementary and High
School District to off-set overcrowdi ng.
8. Applicant shall submit landscaping plan for street trees, trees are to
be placed at 30-foot intervals and be approved by the City Engineer.
9. All trees planted along streetscape must be a minimum of eight feet
(8 I) h' h
_ _ 1 g .
10. If applicable, applicant shall submit to the Planning Division and
Engineering Department, a map showing all phases of development.
11. Trailers utilized during the construction phase shall be approved by
the Planning Division.
-
12. All signage must be under permit.
13. Participate in Landscaping and Lighting District.
14. All slopes must be planted with erosion control vegetation to be
approved by Planning Division.
15. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
-
16. Meet County Health Department requirements.
17. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
18. Agree to participate in City wide signage program. Applicant shall
present to the Planning Division three (3) alternatives for City wide
entry-signage program.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 9
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20296 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONT.
STREETS
-
19. Dedicate street right-of-way along Ortega Highway to provide a 50-foot
wide one-half street conforming to the General Plan requirements for a
100-foot wide right-of-way and 76-foot wide roadway corridor classifica-
tion.
20. Construct as pha It pavi ng to City Standards from centerl i ne to new gutter
on Ortega Highway. Some paving exists and must be reconstructed unless
tests are provided showing that existing paving is to City Standards and
will support the traffic load represented by the City Engineer's traffic
index.
21. Construct curb, gutter and paving on all proposed streets to the
specifications of the City Engineer.
22. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and to include signing and striping. As built streets, grading,
utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
23. Consent to sign agreement to pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for future
traffic signalization in the amount of $225.00 per lot.
24. Consent to sign agreement to pay Street Sweeping Maintenance Mitigation
fee in the amount of $50.00 per lot.
25. Install six-foot (6') sidewalk adjacent to all curbs and gutters.
-
26. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and specifications.
27. Grandview Avenue with 66-foot wide right-of-way shall be constructed with
a 50-foot wide roadway (curb-to-curb). Excess right-of-way is proposed
to be abandoned.
28. The access easement from Ortega Highway southerly and along the east
boundary of this proposed tract shall be realigned along lot lines to
the intersection of A and B Streets. Access to this easement from
developer's property should not be onto Ortega Highway. Grade a 20 foot
wide easement so that access is possible along the lot line.
29. Provide a 20 foot wide graded easement along a lot line from the end of
Murrieta Drive for the access.
GRADING
30. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
-
31. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommendations.
Provide final soils report showing compliance with preliminary report
and finish grade certification.
32. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer, including street trees.
33. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All pro-
perty lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
34. a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
35. Comply with the requirements of Riverside County Flood Control report
dated July 24, 1984, and additional or alternative requirements of the
City Engineer and the City Code. The City Engineer shall judge as to
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 10
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20296 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONT.
interpretation and application of flood control recommendations.
Approval of drainage plan for this subdivision is conditioned upon
completion of the master plan drainage facility required as a condition
of approval of Tentative Tract 20139, with extensions as
necessary and required by the City Engineer to serve this proposed sub-
division. The concerns by Flood Control regarding debris collection ---
shall be addressed and resolved as approved by the City Engineer.
36. Submit hydrology and hydraulic studies, necessary master planning and
detailed plans and profiles of the proposed flood control facilities
to Riverside County Flood Control District and to the City Engineer for
review and approval prior to Final Map recordation. Provide drainage
easements as required by the City Engineer.
Box cul vert(s) to be constructed under Grand Avenue and Ortega Hi ghway
shall be to the satisfaction of Cal Trans, Riverside County Flood
Control and the City Engineer.
All drainage facilities in this tract shall be constructed to Riverside
County Flood Control District Standards and agreement entered into with
the District for construction, ownership and maintenance.
37. Provision must be made to effectively and safely collect storm water
run-off and debris from the hill areas to the south, including, but
not limited to, block walls, shelf drain, and debris collectors. These
facilities outside the dedicated street right-of-way must be privately
owned and maintained.
38. Adjacent Tract 20139 to the northeast may be constructed prior to this
proposed Tract 20296. Therefore, Tract 20139 would be required to
construct the Ortega drainage channel from the northeast side of Grand
Avenue to and across Ortega Highway. As a result, this proposed Tract
20296 would benefit from and utilize this major drainage channel; there-
fore, it should contribute to its cost. If the Ortega channel is
constructed by the developer of Tract 20139, this proposed developer of
Tract 20296 shall consent to sign an agreement to pay $400 per lot as a
contribution to the cost of this major Ortega drainage channel.
-
39. All natural and realigned drainage courses and drainage swales must be
clearly delineated on the final map. An approximate width of easement
must be identified along the drainage courses and the easement irrevocably
offered for dedication. The City will not accept the dedications; the
responsibility for maintenance of drainage courses will be left to the
private property owner. A note clearly stating maintenance responsibility
shall be placed on the final map. The drainage course along the westerly
tract boundary shall be directed into Grandview Avenue and/or a drainage
facility with proper inlet and debris removal facility. There are other
drainage channels which must similarly be safely and properly directed
into streets with debris collection and removal.
SEWER
40.
Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department, and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal.
41. Design on-site sewage collection and disposal system so that future
connection can be made to the regional sewage system. Install cleanouts
behind the sidewalk on all sewer laterals as required by the City and/or
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
---
WATER
42. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing water service.
43. Dedicate underground water rights to the City or its assignee.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 11
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20296 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONT.
-
FEES
44. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
45. Pay all sewer fees required by the Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District.
46. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
47. Pay all school fees.
FINAL MAP
48. Prior to Final Map recordation, a subdivision agreement shall be
entered into with the developer("s), owner(s), and the City.
49. Final Map shall show all geologic fault lines with a prominent note,
as well as areas subject to flood hazards.
50. Provide tract phasing plan for City Engineer's approval. Bonding of
public improvements for each phase shall be as approved by the City
Engineer.
MISCELLANEOUS
-
51. Developer must record reciprocal access easement deeds for private
access to lots. Developer must provide a means to guarantee
maintenance of these common access roads. Lots involved are: 1, 2,
3, 63, 64 and 65.
52. THE APPLI CANT WILL OFFER LOT liB II TO THE CITY.
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residences - 1301 and 1303 West Heald Avenue - Ron Perardi - Staff
presented proposal to construct two (2) single-family residences on two (2)
adjacent parcels, located on the northwest corner of West Heald Avenue and Mohr
Street.
Chairman asked the City Engineer if condition number 22 was a condition that was
going to appear on all proposals now? City Engineer Culp stated that for in fill
lots he intends to condition to try to recover costs for water lines that were
constructed to the benefit of the developer. Discussion ensued at the table
regarding the feasibility of this condition.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residences at 1301 and
1303 West Heald Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barn-
hart.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant must increase the width of the alley to 20' and it shall be
fully improved to City Engineering specifications.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation to be
approved by the Planning Division.
4. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler systems for all planting
areas.
5. Applicant shall meet all setbacks.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18t 1984
Page 12
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES 1301 AND 1303 WEST HEALD AVENUE - RON PERARDI CONT.
6. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and requirements.
7. Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements for
fire protection.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
-
8. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
9. Dedicate 2.5' of right-of-way along alley property frontage.
10. Dedicate additional right-of-way for corner cutback at Heal d Avenue
and Mohr Street.
11. Construct curbt gutter and 6-foot sidewalk along total property front-
ages for Heald Avenue and Mohr Street. Construct curb onlYt and
standard ribbon gutter along total property frontage of alleyway.
12. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter on
Mohr Street and Heald Avenuet and street alley paving from ribbon
gutter to curb. Tests must be provided to show that existing paving
is to City Standards and will support the traffic load represented by
the City Engineer's traffic index.
13. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include required signing and striping. As built
streets, gradingt utilitYt and drainage improvement plans are required.
14. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
15. al Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
bl Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and
Landscaping Maintenance District.
-
16. Install full alley approach and half cross-gutter and spandrel with
pedestrian ramp.
GRADING
17. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and Uniform Building Codet
Chapter 70.
18. Provide soils and geology reportt including street design recommendations.
Provide final grade certification and compaction report to the City
Engi neer for approval.
19. Provide grading plan, Certificate of SurveYt to be prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of the construction
slopes with the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
SEWER
....,
20. Will serve letter for sewer availability has been provided by Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District dated August 21, 1984.
WATER
21. There is an existing 10" water main in Heald Avenue.
22. City requests applicant to agree to enter into an agreement with the City
to pay the depreciated half cost front footage reimbursement to the City
for the 1963 waterline installation program to assist the City in recoup-
ing those costs borne by the City.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 13
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES 1301 AND 1303 WEST HEALD AVENUE - RON PERARDI CONT.
-
23. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
24. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
25. Possibly relocate and/or upgrade the existing fire hydrant at the
site.
FEES
26. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572.
27. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedule.
28. Pay all school fees.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Community Development Director Corcoran stated that he has nothing to report, but
would like to remind the Commissioners of the City-County Planning Commissioners
Conference this Thursday night (September 20th). I am trying to make arrangements
for an automobile at this time.
Chairman Dominguez asked the Secretary if she had received and made reservations
for Joe Royball for this Conference. The Secretary answered in the affirmative.
-
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Saathoff - Asked the Commission, if they wanted to set a date for the
next Title 17 meeting. The Commission agreed to schedule October 3, 1984, at 6:00
p.m. for this meeting.
Mr. Saathoff stated that he wanted to comment, that he has given each Commissioner
a copy of the letter that he sent to City Council, and whether or not anything is
done about it, but has very strong feelings about Lakeshore Drive being converted
back to a two-way street.
Also, out of curiosity, does the Planning Department keep an updated map of Tenta-
tive Tract Maps, Commercial Projects that are approved? Community Development
Director Corcoran answered in the affirmative, stating the map is color coded to
Parcel Maps and Tract Maps, and with an additional copy of who the applicant is
and how many acres.
Commissioner Mellinger - None
Commissioner Barnhart - I only have one thing, and that is an accommodation; we were
down working on the Lakepoint Community Park, Saturday. Loren Culp was down there
driving a truck and James Corcoran was down there driving a Cat.
-
Commissioner Washburn - I think it would be prudent on our part with TV about ready
to pounce on us, that we come to an understanding on how we want them so set up the
cameras. I would prefer that we set up requirements right off the bat, stating that
the cameras will not be placed in back of the conference table.
Mr. Corcoran recommended that time also be included, so that they would not be zoom-
ing in when conversing before a meeting. Commissioner Washburn recommended that Mr.
Corcoran talk with King Video, discussion being on setting a time to start and end,
especially with sound.
I think that we have allowed far too many automobile junk yards, they are growing
in leaps and bounds by their own doing. I think the existing ones are going to have
to screen more, Crowbar from the freeway looks terrible, I would like to see that we
get that property screened if we continue to allow him to park on the higher terrace,
that really bothers me as a citizen and as a Planning Commissioner.
Minutes of Planning Commission
September 18, 1984
Page 14
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS CONT.
At the Joint Study Session, wondering what came about with some of the questions
we brought up? Mr. Corcoran stated that he has been writing recommendations and
addressing Council on them, when in fact,I should be making the same reports and
recommendations to Planning Commission. Also, I have addressed a number of those
concerns, and I will be addressing two more of them this week at the City Council
meeting.
....
Mr. Corcoran informed the Commission that the Lakeshore Overlay Ordinance will be
coming back on the Council Agenda next Tuesday, with revisions. Chairman Dominguez
asked Mr. Corcoran if we had a copy of the tape from NBC, to show before the Over-
lay Ordinance? Mr. Corcoran stated that he has not secured a copy of this tape.
Commissioner Barnhart stated that Mr. Raymond Kemp has talked to the News Director
of Channel 4, and has informed them that they filmed about 200 yards that was not
our beach, it was abandoned property, and this is the second time you have compared
it to Perris in an unfair manner and we want a retraction. The News Director stated
that he would pull the tape and view it and then get back. Mr. Kemp also invited
him to come out and photograph the good portions of the beach.
Chairman Dominguez - Some years back (3-5 years), we had a problem with noise at
the lake; boats taking off at 5:30 in the morning and waking everybody up, and
going on until 10:00 at night. Dwayne Frazer was putting together an ordinance and
it got put on the shelf and never came back to us. The ordinance started out good,
as I remember it, the lake opens at 6:00 in the morning and closes at 10:00 in the
evening; it started out from 6:00 to 8:00 a.m. up to ten horsepower; from 8:00 a.m.
to 8:00 p.m. all horsepower boats allowed on the lake; from 8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.
(which is the time the lake closes) they would go back to the ten horsepower boats,
but it never got back to us and became a reality. They were working with the State
Park, and the State Park was going along with everything that was being done. I
would like to ask staff to look into this and see what you can come up with.
Mr. Corcoran stated that he would be very happy to look into this, and that he has
some other things that have to be worked out with the State Recreation Area, would
like to pursue that matter in conjunction with the placement of the buoys.
....
Commissioner Barnhart - Don't know how many of you have seen this, it is a notice of
a hearing on the State Park and Recrea~ion Commission (Cali~rnia State Park Recrea-
tion Commission), will hold a hearing to approve or disapprove the General Plan for
Lake Elsinore State Recreation Area and Oxnard State Beach and department fee schedules
and to accept proposals for the '84 Bond Act. Any person may file a written statement
on the above proposed actions in writing or by presenting oral or written statements
or arguments at the hearing to be held October 12, 1984 in the Riverside Main Library
Auditorium. Notice is also given that the Commission will tour Lake Elsinore, SRA
and the California Citrus State Historic Park on October 11, 1984. Commissioner
Barnhart asked Mr. Corcoran if he was aware of this? Mr. Corcoran answered in the
affirmative. Commissioner Washburn asked if someone from the City was going to attend?
Mr. Corcoran stated that he knows that one Councilman had a very deep concern with
attending this meeting, and it is my understanding that he will be present and I
imagine that one of my staff or myself will be in attendance with him.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
~
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
18TH
DAY
OF
SEPTEMBER
1984
MINUTE ACTION
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve minutes of September 4, 1984, as sub-
mitted, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residences - 1301 and 1303 West Heald Avenue - Ron Perardi - Staff
presented proposal to construct two (2) single-family residences on two (2)
adjacent parcels, located on the northwest corner of West Heald Avenue and Mohr
Street.
Commissioner Washburn asked if the proposal meets all the setback requirements
for a corner lot. Staff answered in the affirmative.
-
Discussion was held on plaster siding; street dedication and roof material.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residences at 1301 and
1303 West Heald Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner
Saa tho ff .
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from neigh-
boring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, and pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way, to
be approved by the Planning Division.
5. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:35 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Hashburn with
discussion.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he was just recently in Coalinga, two interesting
facts, one; alot of new construction in Coalinga is brick, could the Engineering
Department tell me why? The City Engineer stated that it is probably because of the
earthquake they had. Commissioner Washburn stated that the other is when they had
the earthquake, Security Pacific Bank collapsed; they cleared it off and put modular
units (temporary modular units) there. City Council and the applicant (Security
Pacific Bank) is arguing over the fact that Council wants them to rebuild and Security
Pacific Bank says no, temporary is fine; so in other towns we find that banks do not
_ really want to build.
Commissioner Saathoff asked what happened to our temporary bank? Commissioner
Saatnoff was informed that their time was due to expire or has expired.
Chairman stated that he had a motion and a second to adjourn and asked for the vote.
Approved 5-0
Respectfully ~mi:ted,
~~
Linda Grindstaff ~
Planning Commission
Secretary
A~.~
~~? d
Fred Do . nguez ..
Chairman
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 2ND.
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
OCTOBER
1984
-
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Saathoff.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
Chairman Dominguez stated that before continuing with the meeting, he would like to
introduce the new City Manager Ron Molendyk.
Mr. Molendyk stated that he just wanted to introduce himself and looks forward to
working with the Planning Commission, and if we can assist you in any way just let
us know.
MI N UTE ACT! ON
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of September 18, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1 . Tentative Parcel Map 20468 - The Grayson Companies - Staff presented proposal to
subdivide 12! acres into two (2) parcels consisting of 7.64 acres and 4.68 acres
respectively, located approximately 110 feet east of the intersection of Lake-
shore Drive and Elm Street.
-
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 20468.
Mr. Bill Pierce of Psomas and Associates, Civil Engineers for The Grayson Compa-
nies, presented an exhibit of the proposed commercial development for the
Commission to review. Mr. Pierce stated that they think this is a very finely
designed center that will be of great benefit to the City.
Mr. Pierce stated that he has questions on some of the conditions, mainly needs
clarification. But under STAFF DISCUSSION regarding "temporary interim measure
will necessitate a development bond for a two-year period to provide sewer
service if it does not become available within a two-year period"; what will
that bond be for? Chairman stated that after the public hearing portion they
would call him back to the podium to discuss the items in question.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, the
Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:36 p.m.
Mr. Pierce stated that their first concern was the two-year period for the bond
to provi de sewer servi ce to the site. We have proposed a ho 1 di ng tank or septi c
tank with leach fields because it is about two years off before Elsinore Valley
provides sewer service down Lakeshore Drive; this pertains to condition number
5 and 18. Mr. Corcoran stated that this ;s basically the same condition that
was put on Heritage Thrift and Loan; after a meeting with Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District, we are pretty much satisfied that the sewer would be
intact within the two-year period. Staff later recommended that the condition
for Heritage Thrift and Loan be changed to if sewer is not within place within
a two-year period the applicant is willing to participate in an assessment
district; it would be fine to change this condition to read that also, "if with-
in a two-year period sewer is not in place, the applicant show written documenta-
tion that they are willing to participate in a sewer assessment district.
Mr. Pierce stated that on condition number 8, it mentions access to the future
commercial site, and further down it mentions that the "appl icant shall purchase
an existing residential lot on the east side of Elm Street at the appropriate
location for access to Lot 1. Applicant shall consent to this as a condition of
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 4
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20468 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONTINUED
8. Access to a future commercial development on Parcell shall include
access from Elm Street if required by the City Engineer and/or the
Director of Community Development. Applicant shall ENDEAVOR to
purchase an existing residential lot on the east side of Elm Street
at the appropriate location for access to Lot 1. Applicant shall
consent to this as a condition of a future building permit.
9. Applicant shall agree as a condition of a future building permit, to
give up parking along the Lakeshore Drive frontage of Parcell if
required by the City Engineer for traffic safety.
10. Applicant is advised of the following requirement of Section Three of
City Ordinance No. 711 which must be complied with as a condition of
a building permit:
1
-
- ----"
IINo person, firm or corporation shall construct any new non-residential
structure within the City of Lake Elsinore with the foundation or base-
ment lower than the elevation of 1270' mean sea level within the peri-
meter streets of Lake Elsinore consisting of Grand Avenue, Riverside
Drive, Lakeshore Drive, Mission Trail and Corydon Road, except as speci-
fically permitted by the City Council on a case by case review..1I
The entire property is below elevation 1270' MSL.
11. Applicant is advised of the following requirement of Section 2.1,
2.3-1 (3), and 3.6-1, of City Ordinance 603, which must be complied with
as a condition of a building permit:
IISection 2.1 - A Development Permit shall be obtained before construction
or development begins within any area of special flood hazard established
in Section 1.3. Application for Development Permit shall be made on
forms furnished by the Building Department.1I
,
!
H
~
Section 2.3-1 - Permit review
II 3. Revi ew 0 fall development permits to ,determi ne if the proposed
development adversely affects the flood carrying capacity of
the area of special flood hazard. For purposes of this ordi-
nance, 'adversely affects' means that the cumulative effect of
the proposed development will not increase the water surface
elevation of the base flood more than one foot at any point in
the City of Lake Elsinore Flood Plain.1I
Section 3.6-1 - Prohibit encroachments in floodways, including fill,
new construction, other improvements and development unless certifi-
cation by a registered professional engineer or architect is provided
demonstrating that encroachments shall not result in any increase in
flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge.1I
The entire property is within the area of Special Flood Hazard. The
greater portion of Parcell is in the San Jacinto River F1oodway.
12. Pay a Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for traffic signalization of
$4,775.35 for a small portion of this property as required by Resolu-
tion 83-19 and consent to sign an agreement to pay, in addition, a fee
of $20,000.00 for the remainder or greater portion of Parcell and for
Parcel 2. These fees shall be paid as a condition of issuance of build-
i ng permi t .
13. Consent to sign an agreement to pay a Street Sweeping Mitigation fee of
$600.00 at time of issuance of a building permit.
14. Consent to sign an agreement to participate in A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW FOUR-LANE BRIDGE OVER
SAN JACINTO RIVER.
,
.."J'
15. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572 at time of issuance of
a building permit. The future curb to centerline width on Lakeshore
Drive will be 32 feet. Sidewalk width on Lakeshore Drive to be 12 feet.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 5
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20468 - THE GRAYSON COMPANIES CONTINUED
Pavement on lakeshore Drive to be reconstructed to centerline. Street
trees to be included of the size, type and spacing required by the City
Engineer.
16. Construct full street improvements on Elm Street from lakeshore Drive
to the south side of Parcell. These improvements shall include curb
and gutter on both sides at 40 feet curb-to-curb, pavement to City
Standards to resist traffic loads represented by a traffic index of
7.0, 6-foot wide sidewalk on the east side, driveway approach, street
lighting, and drainage facilities as required by the City Engineer, AT
TIME OF ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. APPLICANT SHAll ENTER INTO A
RECIPROCAL AGREEMENT WITH OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS FRONTING ELM STREET TO
PROVIDE FOR THE IMPROVEMENT COSTS OF SAID ELM STREET.
-
17. Agree to participate in a lighting and landscaping Maintenance District.
18. Construct sewer or bond for construction of sewer to the satisfaction
of both Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the City Engineer.
19. Extend and upsize waterline facility in lakeshore Drive to include
necessary looping for adequate fire flows to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
20.
21.
22.
-
23.
24.
25.
Dedicate underground water rights to the City of lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
Pay Public Safety Impact Mitigation fee required by Ordinance No. 83-4.
Sign agreement of notification to future owners regarding 100-Year
Flood Hazard.
Provi de i rrevocabl e offer of dedi cation to the City for the portion of
the San Jacinto River floodway as required by the City Engineer.
Applicant shall not place fill in 100-Year Flood Plain without a Develop-
ment Permit from the City.
Comply with all requirements of the City and Flood Control District re- .
garding flood control and embankment protection along San Jacinto River
and including the area through and adjacent to bridge crossing. Required
as a condition or issuance of building permit.
26. Comply with all requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
27. The Final Map shall show the following:
a) All geologic fault lines.
b) lOO-Year and SOD-Year Flood Plain.
c) The Floodway.
28. APPLICANT SHAll ENTER INTO RECIPROCAL ACCESS AGREEMENT BETWEEN PARCEL 1
AND PARCEL 2.
-
2. Conditional Use Permit 84-9 - Al Hertz - Staff presented applicant's request for
a continuation on Conditional Use Permit 84-9 to the meeting of October 16, 1984.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:14 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-9. Receiving no response, he asked
if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, the Chairman
closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Conditional Use Permit 84-9 to the
meeting of October 16. 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 6
3. Conditional Use Permit 84-10 - First Church of the Nazarene - Staff presented
proposal for a Conditional Use Permit which would allow the Church to place
two (2) trailers on their property at 911 West Graham Avenue for the purpose
of providing additional Sunday School facilities, located on the northeast
corner of Graham Avenue and Lewis Street. Staff showed slides on the area
of subject proposal.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-10.
Reverend Saucedo stated that he and his Church is in favor of this request.
Chairman Dominguez asked Reverend Saucedo if he received a copy of the condi-
tions? Reverend Saucedo answered in the affirmative.
...",
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor. Receiving
no response, he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no
response, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:19 p.m.
Discussion was held on condition number 29, regarding Street Sweeping Mitigation
fee; condition number 14.a., regarding street lighting; with a recommendation
from Commissioner Washburn that the words Ilif needed" be added; condition number
23, Commissioner Washburn asked that Mr. Cu1p explain this condition -- Mr. Cu1p
stated that this condition is an attempt to reclaim or recoup the costs for
construction of the waterlines in the past, we are requiring the developer to pay
or agree to pay the City a depreciated value of that waterline for the frontage
distance for his development, what we are trying to do is recover our cost for
waterlines that were installed many years back in our present City Water District.
Reverend Saucedo stated that he plans to ask for deferment from City Council, he
then stated he would like clarification on some of the conditions; believes condi-
tions 7 through 29, most of them do not pertain directly to the trailers. Chair-
man Dominguez stated that he believes some of these conditions are just formality
and they have probably already been met.
-
Reverend Saucedo then pointed out condition number 8, dedication of 10 feet of
right-of-way along total property frontage. Mr. Cu1p stated that presently our
General Plan calls for 100 foot right-of-way, 40 feet of half street right-of-way,
we need an additional 10 feet.
Discussion ensued on requesting that the applicant be relieved of some of the
conditions at this particular point in time; requesting app1icant(s) post some
sort of security that at the end of the Conditional Use Permit that these build-
ings will, in fact, be removed or permanent structures placed there; renewal of
Conditional Use Permit; allowing for replacement or repair of sidewalk, deleting
conditions from 10 down -- adding deferred agreement for conditions 10, 11, 12
and 13; adding condition number 30:"All conditions to be met prior to issuance
of Occupancy Permit"; adding condition number 31 :"Trailers shall be removed at
expiration of Conditional Use Permit".
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-10 with
staff recommendations and amending condition number 1 to read: "Approval shall
be for a period of three (3) years, and a Deed Restriction requiring the removal
of the trailers at expiration of Conditional Use Permit; amending conditions '10,
11, 12 and 13 by adding the following verbiage "App1 icant shall enter into a
Deferred Agreement for these improvements with the City Engineer; amending condi-
tion number 14 by adding the words "if required"; and adding condition number 30,
which will read: "All conditions shall be met prior to the issuance of a Certifi-
cate of Occupancy", second by Commiss ioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
--
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Approval shall be for a period of three (3) years, AND A DEED RESTRICTION
REQUIRING THE REMOVAL OF THE TRAILERS AT EXPIRATION OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT .
2. Issuance of a Categori ca 1 Exemption.
3. Trailers are to be fully skirted and maintained.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 7
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-10 - FIRST CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE CONTINUED
4. Meet County Health Department requirements.
5. Meet County Fire Department requirements on number of fire extinguishers.
-
6. If approved, use only for Sunday School activities.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
8. Dedicate 10 feet of right-of-way along total property frontage on Graham
Avenue for conformance to City General Plan. Graham Avenue is classified
as a major roadway with ultimate right-of-way of 100 feet and curb-to-
curb separation of 76 feet. No additional right-of-way required along
Lewis Street.
9. Dedicate additional right-of-way for corner cutback at Lewis Street and
Graham Avenue.
10. Construct curb and gutter and sidewalk along total property frontages of
Graham Avenue and Lewis Street. There is existing sidewalk that may have
to be removed and replaced to match the existing location. APPLICANT SHALL
ENTER INTO A DEFERRED AGREEMENT FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CITY
ENGINEER.
-
11. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter on Graham
Avenue and Lewis Street. Tests must be provided to show that existing
paving will support the traffic load represented by the City Engineer's
traffic index of 6.0 for Lewis Street and 8.0 for Graham Avenue. APPLICANT
SHALL ENTER INTO A DEFERRED AGREEMENT FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CITY
ENGI"NEER.
12. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include required signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required. APPLICANT
SHALL ENTER INTO A DEFERRED AGREEMENT FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CITY
ENGINEER.
13. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City approved
Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications. APPLICANT SHALL
ENTER INTO A DEFERRED AGREEMENT FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS WITH THE CITY ENGINEER.
14. a) Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer, IF REQUIRED.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
15. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
-
16. Provide soils and geology report, including street design recommendations.
Provide final grade certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and a final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
17. Provide grading plan and Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of construction
slopes with the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
18. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer, including street trees.
19. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing sewer availability from Elsinore
Valley MuniCipal Water District.
20. Install cleanouts behind the right-of-way on all sewer laterals as re-
quired by the City and/or Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
21. There is an existing 811 water main in Lewis Street and an existing 611 water
main in Graham Avenue.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 8
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-10 - FIRST CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE CONTINUED
22. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
23. City requests applicant to enter into agreement with City for the 1963
waterline installation program, to assist the City in recouping those
costs borne by the City.
24. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
-
25. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
26. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
27. Pay City water connection and meter installation fee per Resolution No.
83-18.
28. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
29. Applicant to enter into agreement with the City to pay Street Sweeping
Mitigation fee in the amount of $50.00.
30. ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY.
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 699 Acacia Street - Jeffrey R. Long - Staff presented
proposal to construct a two-story single-family residence. located on the north-
west corner of Acacia Street and High Street. Staff showed slides on the area
of subject proposal.
-
Chairman Dominguez left the table at 8:43 p.m.
Vice-Chairman Washburn asked Mr. Long if he had any questions. Mr. Long ques-
tioned condttion number 8. construct asphalt paving on' High Street when it is
a new street. and condition number 13. providing soils and geology report; this
has already been submitted, but the street design will be submitted later.
Chairman Dominguez returned to the table at 8:45 p.m.
Discussion was held on condition number 8. regarding paving of High Street;
condition number 13, regarding soils report; condition number 7, regarding 6
foot sidewalks -- Commissioner Washburn recommended that condition number 7 be
reworded to conform with existing sidewalks in that area; condition number 14.
provide grading plan.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 699 Acacia
Street with staff recommendations and amending condition number 7. by adding the
following verbiage" Construct curb and gutter and sidewalk to conform with side-
walks' within that district", second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
2. Applicant shall meet all setback requirements.
.....
3. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire
protection.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
5. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 9
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 699 ACACIA STREET - JEFFREY R. LONG CONTINUED
-
6. Dedicate additional right-of-way for corner cutback at Acacia Street
and High Street.
7. Construct curb and gutter and SIDEWALK TO CONFORM WITH SIDEWALKS WITHIN
THAT DISTRICT. Install pedestrian access ramp at the northwest corner
of Acacia street and High Street. There is existing curb and gutter
along the total property frontage on High Street.
8. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter on
Acacia Street and High Street. Tests must be provided to show that
existing paving is to City Standards and will support the traffic
loads represented by the City Engineer's traffic index at 6.0.
9. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include required signing and striping. As built
streets, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
10. Public improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and
City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and specifications.
11 . a)
Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscap-
ing Maintenance District.
12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
-
13. Provide soils and geology report, including street design recommendations.
Provide final grade certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and a final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
14. Provide grading plan and Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of
construction slopes with the required Uniform Building Code setback
requi rements .
15. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Heal th Department and Cal ifornia Regional Water Qual ity Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal.
16. There is an existing 4-inch water main in High Street and an existing
6-inch water main in Acacia Street. Applicant to consent to reimburse-
ment of one-half the depreciated value of the lines installed across
his total property frontages to assist the City in recouping those costs
borne by City.
17. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass i gnees .
-
18. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572.
19. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule,
if requi red.
20. Pay City water connection and meter installation fees per Resolution
83-18.
21 . Pay a 11 school fees.
2. Single-Family Residences - 1308 and 1310 West Sumner Avenue - LaFleche Vaundry _
Staff presented proposal to construct two (2) single-family residences on two
(2) parcels, located on the southeast corner of Sumner Avenue and Davis Street.
Staff showed slides on the area of subject proposal.
Commissioner Barnhart left the table at 8:50 p.m.
Chairman Dominguez asked if the applicant was in the audience, and if he had
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 10
S INGLE- FAMILY RES I DENCES 1308 AND 1310 WEST SUMNER - LAFLECHE VAUNDRY CONTINUED
received a copy of the conditions. Mr. Vaundry answered in the affirmative.
Mr. Vaundry stated that the only question he had was on condition number 13,
installing street lighting. Chairman Dominguez stated that this is a standard
condition and if required.
Commissioner Barnhart returned to the table at 8:53 p.m.
Discussion was held on location; due to severe slopes what precautions can be
ta ken.
..."
Mr. Fred Crowe of Butterfield Surveys, representing the applicant, stated that
Butterfield Surveys has completed a topo on the property, and there might be a
need for some fill in the back yard to direct water to Davis Street.
Mr. Crowe requested that the second paragraph in condition number 16, not be
required as part of the condition, as it takes away a method of accomplishing
the drainage; on condition number 10, the traffic index of 6.0 be deleted; and
on condition number 20, questions where the monies come from to install the
initial waterline, the legality of collecting a reimbursement; it is possible
that this waterline was already paid for once.
Discussion ensued on the above mentioned conditions.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residences at 1308 and
1310 West Sumner Avenue with staff recommendations amending condition number 10
by deleting the words lIof 6.011; amending condition number 16, b,)t deleting the
second paragraph; and amending condition number 13.a., by adding the words lIif
requiredll, second by Commiss ioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
2. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation to be
approved by the Planning Division.
3. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler systems for all planting
areas.
-
4. Applicant shall meet all setbacks.
5. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
6. Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire
protection.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
8. Dedicate additional right-of-way for corner cutback at Sumner Avenue
and Davis Street.
9.
Construct curb and gutter and 6-foot sidewalk along total property
frontages of Sumner Avenue and Davis Street. Install pedestrian access
ramp at the southeasterly corner of Sumner and Davis Street.
10. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter on
Sumner Avenue and Davis Street. Tests must be provided to show that
existing paving is to City Standards and will support the traffic load
represented by the City Engineer's traffic index ef-e~Q.
-
11. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include required signing and striping. As built
streets, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 11
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES 1308 AND 1310 WEST SUMNER - LAFLECHE VAUNDRY CONTINUED
~
12. Public improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
13. a) Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer, IF REQUIRED.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
14. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
15. Provide soils and geology report, including street design recommendations.
Provide final grade certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and a final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
16. Provide grading plan and Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer.
A++-~~e~e~ty-+tReS-sRa++-ge-at-tRe-te~-ef-e9Rst~~et49R-s+9~e5-w4tR-tRe
~e~~4~eQ-YR4f9~ffi-g~4+e4R~-Ggee-setBaek-~e~~~~effieRts~ DELETED.
17. Will serve letter for sewer availability has been provided by Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District dated September 13, 1984.
18. There is an existing 6-inch water main in both Sumner Avenue and Davis
Street.
19. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
.----
20. City requests applicant to agree to enter into an agreement with the City
for the 1963 waterline installation program to assist the City in recoup-
ing those costs borne by the City.
21. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572.
22. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
23. Pay City water connection and meter installation fees per Resolution 83-18.
24. Pay all school fees.
3. Request to Annex (Annexation Number 38) - Edward Lambert - Staff presented a
request to annex approximately three (3) acres into the City of Lake Elsinore,
located westerly of the intersection of Dexter Avenue and Second Street. Staff
showed slides of subject area.
~
Chairman Dominguez asked if the applicant was in the audience. Mr. Edward
Lambert stated that he would like to bring this property into the City.
A brief discussion was held on zoning of the property (Light Manufacturing).
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve the Request to Annex (Annexation
Number 38), second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
WALK-ON ITEM
Tentative Tract Map 20313 Revised- Thompson Investment - Mr. Corcoran stated
that this is not really a revised map since it never reached the City Council
level; this map came before the Commission on August 21,1984 and was approved
at that time. The applicant later decided to redesignate and eliminate a
partial of his map and redesigned certain sections of his map to eliminate the
access on Ul1a Lane. Mr. Corcoran asked, that instead of going through the
staff report, since we have already been through it, that he make a quick surmise
of the changes.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Pa ge 1 2
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20313 ~EVISED - THOMPSON INVESTMENT CONTINUED
Mr. Corcoran stated that the old map indicated ingress/egress on Ulla Lane,
and that parcel has been compl etely removed wi th the ingress/egress on
Machado Street. There are two cul-de-sacs (IIBII Street and IICII Street) whi ch
the old map show a through way with a future ingress/egress onto Ulla Lane.
The new map has reduced the density of the tract from 70 units to 63 units.
Mr. Corcoran stated that staff feels very comfortable with this redesignation
and redesign of the map, since it does eliminate that access on Ulla Lane,
that we were trying to maintain the integrity of that neighborhood, so with
tha t s ta ff recommends approval with the conditions as revi sed._ __
Chairman Dominguez asked if the applicant was in the audience, andif he has
any questions. Mr. Thompson stated that all of the conditions were acceptable.
Discussion was held on condition number 7, staggering of front yard setbacks;
Mr. Corcoran stated that we do not have that problem with new map. Commissioner
Saathoff recommended that being as this was no longer applicable that it be
deleted.
Mr. Culp asked that the Commission review and make recommendation or give staff
direction on how we might overcome the problem of maintenance of parkways; stating
we are going to have a six-foot walkway and then a decorative reverse frontage
wall along Grand and Machado (condition number 6). A lengthy discussion was held
on including this in the CC & R's; forming a Homeowner's Association to maintain
landscaping; putting the wall against the sidewalk; wider sidewalk being installed;
maybe putting a restriction on the 10 lots on Machado that these people will have-
the responsibility of maintaining the parkways; assessment district for the tract;
City taking responsibility for the maintenance of parkways; establishing mainte-
nance district in CC & R's. Commissioner Washburn recommended that on condition
number 8, include to establish a maintenance agreement; Commissioner Mellinger
recommended that the maintenance agreement vehicle be worked out between staff
and the applicant.
Motion by Commiss ioner Saathoff to approve Tentati ve Tract Map 20313 REVISED wi th-
staff recommendations and deleting condition number 7; amending condition number
8 by adding the following verbiage lIand provide an agreement for maintenance of
parkway, to be approved by the City Engineer and/or staffll, second by Commissioner
Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Applicant shall meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
5. Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Elementary and High School
District to off-set overcrowding.
6. Applicant shall provide a six foot (61) decorative reverse frontage wall
along Grand Avenue and Machado Street, to be approved by Design Review
Board.
7.
~ta9geF-fFeRt-yaFeI-setBa6ks-a+eR9-ea6R-stFeet-t!!.Q!!.-aReI-!.!E!.!t-w;tR-+f~-eeh~
2Q-feeti-+f~-ee;R9-22-feet;-aReI-+fd-8e;R9-24-feet;-fe~-tRe-~~~~ese-8f-
a +t ey:j. a U R9-FR8 R8 taRa ~S-I3+a eeFReRts -9 f-s t~t:i6 h ~es -8 R- + 8 ts -a +8 R9- tRese- r:4 9Rt-
8f-ways;-S~8~e6t-t8-al3l3r:8Ya+-8y-tRe-ges;9R-ReY4ew-gea~e1~ DELETED.
-
8. Applicant shall submit landscaping plan for street trees, trees are to be
placed at 30-foot intervals outside of public right-of-way and be approved
by City Engineer, AND PROVIDE AN AGREEMENT FOR MAINTENANCE OF PARKWAY, TO
BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER AND/OR STAFF.
9. All trees planted along streetscape must be a minimum of eight feet (81)
high.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Pa ge 13
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20313 REVISED - THOMPSON INVESTMENT CONTINUED
10.
11.
-
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Trailers utilized during the construction phase shall be approved by
the Planning Division.
Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
Meet County Health Department requirements.
Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
Applicant shall submit design elevations and landscaping plan to the
Design Review Board for approval.
Participate in City wide entry-signage program.
All signage must be under permit.
Participate in Landscaping and Lighting District.
Provide transit facilities as deemed applicable by Chairman of L.E.T.S.
Pay applicable Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution 83-87.
If applicable, all slopes must be planted with erosion control vegetation
to be approved by Planning Division.
Applicant shall utilize as many existing Olive Trees on site that is
feasible for inclusion within the proposal's landscaping design.
-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
22. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
a) Dedicate 14 feet of right-of-way along total property frontage
of Machado Street.
b) Dedicate 10 feet of right of way along total property of Grand
Avenue.
c) Dedicate 60 feet of right-of-way for proposed extension of
Washington Street into subdivision.
d) Dedicate 50 feet of right-of-way for proposed IIBII through 11011
Streets.
e) Dedicate 40 feet right-of-way to provide for 50 feet ultimate
right-of-way for IIAII Street.
f) Provide additional pavement widening on Machado Street along the
property frontage des i gnated as future development. Provi de
temporary 8-inch A.C. dike as approved by the City Engineer.
g) No lot access from Machado Street not Grand Avenue due to
future traffic demands.
23. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping by separate plan. As
-- built street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are re-
quired.
24. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
25. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and Uniform Building Code,
Chapter 70.
26. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommendations.
Provide final soils report showing compliance with preliminary report to
include compaction results and final grade certifications.
27. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer, including street trees.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 14
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 20313 REVISED - THOMPSON INVESTMENT CONTINUED
28. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. All pro-
perty lines shall be at the top of the construction slopes with the
required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
29. a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
30. Comply with the requirements of Riverside County Flood Control report
dated July 25, 1984, and additional or alternative requirements of the
City Engineer and the City Code. Submit Revised Tentative Map for Flood ...
Control District review for any changes to previous recommendations.
31. Submit hydrology and hydraulic studies, necessary master planning and
detailed plans and profiles of the proposed flood control facilities to
Riverside County Flood Control District and to the City Engineer for
review and approval for final map recordation. Provide recorded drainage
easements as determined and needed by the Riverside County Flood Control
District and City Engineer for those storm flows within this project
being directed toward that area designated as drainage easement to connect
to the existing Riverside County Flood Control District drainage channel
easterly of this project.
32. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing sewer and water availability from
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
33. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass i gnees .
34. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance 572.
35. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
36. Pay all school fees.
37. Pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for future traffic signalization in the
amount of $250.00 per lot.
-
38. Pay Street Sweeping Maintenance Mitigation fee in the amount of $50.00
per lot.
39. Pay Drainage Impact Mitigation fee in the amount of $350.00 per lot.
40. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 529 and Subdivision Map Act.
41. Prior to final map recordation, a subdivision agreement shall be entered
into wi th the deve1 operLs)' owner(s), and the City.
42. Final map shall show the following items with a prominent note:
a ) All geo 1 0 gi c fa u 1 t 1 i nes .
b) 100-Year sheet flow flooding.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran informed the Commission that on October 17, 1984, at 6:00 p.m. there will
be a joint study session with County Planning, Supervisor Abraham and City Council in
the Council Chambers. Also, there is a Title 17 review set for October 3,1984, at _
5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. There will also be a Lakepoint Community Park meet-
ing on Thursday, October 11, 1984, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, all interested
parties and groups are invited to attend this meeting for their input, and their dona-
tions are greatly appreciated.
Mr. Cu1p stated that Edmunson Construction is interested in making a contribution of
services and equipment.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - Wondering about the logic of changing the meeting to 7:00 p.m.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 2, 1984
Page 15
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
-
to conform with the City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Dominguez asked if
there was a problem with meeting at 7:30 p.m. Commissioner Saathoff answered in
the negative.
Would like to get the Commissioner's view point on when staff reports to the City
Council, on items that appeared at the Planning Commission level and then go to the
City Council level; I feel that sometimes it would be beneficial from reactions that
I've seen, that staff should make the statement that it was approved by the Planning
Commission -- I think it should be noted what changes were enacted or recommended by
the Planning Commission also, feels that it might be a good idea to mention the vote.
The reason that I suggest this is, if there is some what of a controversial item and
the vote is mentioned that is passed say 3-2, it alerts the Council that this is some-
thing to look hard at because there was some concern at Planning Commission level.
Mr. Corcoran stated that staff was di rected by Council to try and condense the reports;
the indication that we received was all of the backup material was there and that they
do read their packets, and that tells them all the information that they need to know.
Our reports state that the Planning Commission recommends approval with modifications
or deletions as noted; and those conditions that are deleted or modifie& are capitalized
so that they stand out. We are trying to condense our reports to try and expedite
matters at Council level.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he was not opposed to putting the vote in the reports
because it is a quick index.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that he just wants a statement that the Planning Commission
recommended approval with revisions or some statement; feels that the City Council and
the pUblic should be aware that there were changes made from the original, and not every-
one was in favor, it was not just stamped and ran through the mill.
-
Commissioner Mellinger - Just out of curiosity, what is happening with Lakeshore Drive,
what is the next step between King Videocable and the most recent paving? Mr. Culp
stated that they were goi ng to be pavi ng tomorrow from the Four Corner's intersection
toward Machado, stating that they would not be overlaying the newer portions of pave-
ment that are in place. Commissioner Mellinger stated that one side of the street is
undrivab1e, trench there. Mr. Culp stated that they are going to be repaving that
section through the intersection to Machado tomorrow; and the contractor is still
responsible for 12 foot width of overlay from Machado all the way out to the new tract
development.
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Commissioner Washburn - Would like to find out when we are planning to complete the
crosswalks for Main Street, and the new stop signs incorporated for Poe Street, or was
it p1annted not to do this? Mr. Cu1p stated that they were going to put in the cross-
walks as the last part of the Main Street project; stating they have had all of the
manholes and water valves raised to surface, and now they have to go through and apply
what is known as a fog-seal; this seals the pores in the pavement and then we do the
painting.
-
Chairman Dominguez - At the parking lot at Heald and Main, we have a problem with all
that gravel and dirt coming on top of the sidewalk all of the time. Is there a pos-
sibility of placing some railroad ties at the end of the sidewalk, right in front, so
it would serve as a bumper for the cars not to go on top of the sidewalk, and at the
same time retain all of that dirt, or some type of retainer? I have checked into this
and the most economical retainer would be the railroad ties.
Commissioner Saathoff - Asked if the other three Commissioners would be at the October
16th meeting, as he and Commissioner Washburn will be gone that week; just wanted to
be sure that there will be three Commissioners present that night.
Mr. Cu1p stated that very soon he would be notifying the Planning Commission and the
City Council on demolition of the ceiling plaster in the Council Chambers. At the
last Council meeting, Council wanted us to go ahead and proceed with the demolition of
the ceiling plaster. We may have to reschedule a Planning Commission meeting to some
other location. I believe there is a law that requires 24 hour notice.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Commissioner
Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
2ND
DAY
OF
OCTOBER
1984
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of September 18, 1984, as sub-
mitted, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
-
1. Conditional Use Permit 84-10 - The First Church of the Nazarene - Staff presented
report and brochure on the two (2) trailers that the Planning Commission reviewed
and approved earlier. The trailers are 10' x 241 and 101 x 281 (from Golden
Office Trailers), consisting of the following materials: 5/811 wood exterior sid-
ing, galvanized roof and sliding glass windows, and will be used for additional
Sunday School facilities at 911 West Graham Avenue.
Discussion was held on which trailers were to be used, referencing brochure; pro-
viding ramp, wood or concrete, entrance to the classrooms for the handicapped;
trailers being anchored to the ground by standard methods; and color of trailers
to be in conformance with existing buildings.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-10 with
sta ff recommendations and addi ng condition number 3, which wi 11 read: IIEntrance
to the classrooms to have a ramp, handicapped entrance wayll; adding condition
number 4, which will read: IITrailers are to be anchored by standard methods; add-
ing condition number 5, which will read: liThe colors of said trailers to conform
to earthtones, as approved by Planning staffll, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
1.
All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the trailers
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Applicant shall submit irrigation/landscaping plan to be reviewed and
approved by Planning Division.
-
3. ENTRANCE TO THE CLASSROOMS TO HAVE A RAMP, HANDICAPPED ENTRANCE WAY.
4. TRAILERS ARE TO BE ANCHORED BY STANDARD METHODS.
5. THE COLORS OF SAID TRAILERS TO CONFORM TO EARTHTONES, AS APPROVED BY
PLANNING STAFF.
2. Single-Family Residence - 699 Acacia Street - Jeffrey Long - Staff presented pro-
posal to construct a two-story single-family residence, located on the northwest
corner of Acacia Street and High Street.
A brief discussion was held on material to be used for structure; elevations;
and condition number 6, whether or not this would be sufficient for controlling
sneet flow.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 699 Acacia
Street with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1.
All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
snall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, and pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
~
3. Grading plans are to be approved by the Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way, to
be approved by the Planning Division.
Minutes of Design Review Board
October 2, 1984
Page 2
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 699 ACACIA STREET - JEFFREY R. LONG CONTINUED
-
5. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart.
6. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation, to be
approved by Planning Division.
7. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler systems for all planting
a reas ~
3. Single-Family Residences - 1308 and 1310 West Sumner - LaFleche Vaundry - Staff
presented proposal to construct two (2) single-family residences on two (2)
parcels, located on the southeast corner of Sumner Avenue and Davis Street.
A brief discussion was held on installing sprinkler system and landscaping
other than the trees, and architectural theme.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residences at 1308
and 1310 West Sumner with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
nei ghbori ng property or publ i c streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Grading plans shall be approved by the Engineering Department.
-
4.
Applicant shall plant trees outside the public right-of-way, to be
approved by the Planning Division.
5. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
10:00 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
Approved,
P4~
Fred Domi nguez,-
Chairman
-
Respectfully SU'-itted,
~~d/ ~~
Linda Gri nds ta ff
Planning Commission
Secretary
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
. LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
16TH.
DAY
OF
OCTOBER
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Barnhart.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Commissioner Saathoff and Commissioner Washburn were absent.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Cu1p,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of October 2, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 84-9 - A1 Hertz - Staff presented app1icant1s request
for a continuation on Conditional Use Permit 84-9 to the meeting of November
6, 1 984 .
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to continue Conditional Use Permit 84-9 to the
meeting of November 6, 1984, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0
-- 2. Conditional Use Permit 84-11 - O. A. Childress - Staff presented proposal for
Conditional Use Permit to allow Casa De Mob1e to expand its facilities to
accommodate a total of 68 recreational vehicles, a net increase of 38 spaces,
located approximately 400 feet southwest of the intersection of Como Street and
Corydon Road.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
speak in favor of CondHiona1 Use Permit 84-11.
Mr. Dwayne Frazier, representiDg the applicant, spoke in favor of Conditional
Use Permit 84-11 and stated that he would like to discuss the 30 conditions.
Chairman stated that after the public hearing portion they would call him
back to the podium to discuss the items in question.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
he asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, the
Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:35 p.m.
Mr. Frazier stated that the first thing that he would like to point out is that
it is possible that there was a discrepancy when the original application was
filed, there is only 36 spaces proposed to be added for a total of 66 spaces.
Mr. Frazier then stated that in the body of the ANALYSIS, second paragraph, it
indicates that lithe proposed pads will follow the Park's existing pattern. The
proposed pads, however, will be located below the 1270' MSL mark. This will re-
quire that the pads, and their associated appurtenances, be elevated above the
12701 MSL mark." The applicant disagrees with this primarily because recreation-
al vehicles, travel trailers are not permanent type structures; they are not
considered or classified as permanent structures, and all of the grading out
there has been done, so there is no need to elevate any pads, in fact that would
more likely be a violation of City Ordinance, and it would definate1y have an
adverse impact on the flood carryi ng capacity of the 1 ake if those pads were
elevated because that would mean substantial grading on the site. The utilities
there is no problem there, they can be controlled by switches, valves or what-
ever elevated to or above 1270. There has been discussion with the City Engineer
on the grading aspects and there won't be any grading and I don1t see the need
for elevating the pads to 1270.
Mr. Corcoran stated that he has slides that will show, in more detail, the grad-
ing and exact location, if later you would like to get into further detail on this.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-11 - O.A. CHILDRESS CONTINUED
Mr. Frazier questioned condition number 6, regarding paving of internal streets;
condition number 7, regarding street widths--stating right now the streets are
30 feet in width with parking on one side; condition number 8, regarding land-
scaping stating landscaping is indicated on the revised plan submitted; condi-
tion number 12, regarding the six-foot sidewalk--no where else on Corydon Road
is there sidewalk, if it must be the applicant would be willing to sign a lien
agreement; condition number 13, regarding street lighting--there is a street
light at the corner of applicant's property adjacent to Norman Industries, if
it is a requirement that cannot be totally alleviated then the applicant re- ...
quests a lien agreement be approved; condition number 17, regarding the grading
plan again there will be no additional grading, the grading has already been
done; condition number 18, no need for grading plan to be submitted, I had a
meeting with the City Engineer prior to submitting the Conditional Use Permit
application and it was agreed that this would not have to go to Riverside
County Flood Control; condition number 23, regarding the drainage and grading
plan situation there is not going to be any grading done; the drainage has been
the way it is now for some time, there is a certificate of survey on file in
the City Building Department records and we can work with Mr. Culp on any
certification of topos, elevations for sewer facilities and things of that
nature; condition number 24, ties back in with condition number 8; condition
number 25, regarding Capital Improvement fees, clarification more than anything,
what are the Capital Improvement fees going to be predicated on--is this on the
area that will be involved with the additional spaces or are we looking at the
entire site, if we are looking at the entire site then there is definately going
to be a request for consideration; condition number 26, regarding Public Safety
fees, this is not new construction with the addition of pedestals and a main
control panel for the electrical; condition number 27, regarding school fees,
Mr. Childress has a policy now that he does not allow children in his Park and
he would be willing to agree to a condition of this Conditional Use Permit that
no children, no school age children be allowed in the Park to alleviate the need
to pay these school fees; condition number 28 through 30, it is my understanding
that these are not covered by City Ordinance
get these conditions deleted then the only way Mr. Childress will agree to it is ...
by signing of an agreement, we would perfer the deletion of these conditions.
Chairman stated that alot of these conditions are by ordinance and they could
not speak to them, you would have to go directly to Council.
Mr. Corcoran stated that condition number 6 and 8 should be discretionary condi-
tions not non-discretionary conditions, stating that we are trying to improve
the status of our recreational vehicle parks, upgrade the whole concept; condi-
tion number 8, on the revised map received this afternoon it does show landscap-
ing.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if the applicant, on condition number 6, would be
willing to consider this condition at a future date? Mr. Childress answered in
the affirmative. Commissioner Mellinger asked if staff would be opposed to
deferring this until a time agreeable between the applicant and staff? Mr.
Corcoran stated that he saw no problem with having it completed before applicant's
three-year review came up.
Discussion ensued on condition number 11, City Engineer being firm on this condi-
tion; condition number 12, applicant to enter into deferred lien agreement;
condition number 13, street lighting as requried; this is a standard condition
and it could not even be required. Mr. Childress asked if it was possible to
have this done within, possibly, a year or year and a half? Commissioner Mel~
linger suggested that this be done with the street improvements. Mr. Culp stated
Mr. Childress has all of the street improvements in front of his property, the
only thing he is lacking is the six-foot sidewalk.
Commissioner Barnhart stated that before going into conditions 17 and 18, that
staff show the slides he has that have to do with the grading and the property.
Mr. Corcoran showed slides on the area of subject proposal.
Commissioner Mellinger asked that staff address conditions 17, 18 and 23. Mr.
Culp stated that on condition number 17, request to have grading plan waived,
he has no problem with that feels that there is sufficient topography mapping
done on that project, as it was previously submitted; condition number 18, feels
Mr. Frazier is correct,believes there is the ability for us to waive this condi-
~
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-11 - O.A. CHILDRESS CONTINUED
tion as well; condition number 23, a certificate of survey was presented to
me in discussion with Mr. Frazier, and it is evident that the certificate of
survey had been performed previously; condition number 24, believes that is
a condition that parallels Planning Division condition number 8, plan already
submitted; condition number 25, Capital Improvement fees, that is per ordinance,
there will be permits issued for the development of this project. Therefore,
Capital Improvement fund fees shall apply, however, we do need to make a
determination on whether fees have been paid previously for the previous pro-
ject or not. Commissioner Mellinger asked if this would be researched by the
time it goes to Council. Mr. Culp answered in the affirmative; condition
number 26, Public Safety fees, these fees were not paid at the time this pro-
ject first came around therefore they would apply. There would be a need to
review those fees to see how they are applicable to this particular development;
condition number 27, regarding the school fees, this is an oversight on the
Engineering Department's behalf. Commissioner Barnhart asked if this could be
deleted? Mr. Culp answered in the affirmative; condition number 28, 29 and 30,
are discretionary conditions, however, they are impacts that will be generated
due to the additional load to our communi ty in the form of tra ffi c; drai nage
will have to be taken care of at some point in time, as well as street mainte-
nance, street sweeping requirements due to the additional load. It is very
important that the applicant understand this this is a voluntary condition.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if the applicant still had to sign an agreement?
Mr. Culp stated that they would desire that.
-
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-11 with
staff recommendations, amending condition number 6, by adding the following
verbi age II thi s condition shall be compl eted withi n three years II; amendi ng condi-
tions 12 and 13 by adding the following verbiage lIapplicant shall enter into a
deferred 1 i en agreement wi th the City for these improvements II; del eti ng condi-
tions 17, 18, 23 and 27; and addi ng condition number 31, which will readll IIAll
conditions shall be met prior to occupancy or use unless otherwise specifiedll,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-0
-
Mr. Culp stated that he would like to express, even though we have waived the
requirement of the grading plan; it is very important that the applicant know
that there is to be no fill placed within the regulatory flood plain; that
there will be a balance of materials within the flood plain, if there is a
cubic yard brought in there will be a cubic yard brought out.
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
-
Approval shall be for a period of three (3) years, with yearly reviews.
Issuance of a Categorical Exemption.
Meet all County Health Department requirements.
Meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
All internal streets and alleys, beginning with the entrance to the site,
shall be paved with asphaltic concrete at least 2-1/2 inches in thickness
and shall be approved by the City Engineer. In addition, a base shall be
provided as required by the City Engineer. THIS CONDITION SHALL BE
COMPLETED WITHIN THREE YEARS.
7. Streets shall be a minimum of 25' in width, with an additional 5' if
parking is allowed on one (1) side and 10' if parking is allowed on both
sides.
8. Applicant shall submit a landscaping and irrigation plan which will show
the proposed location of all ground cover, shrubbery and trees. Plans
shall be approved by the Planning Department.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-11 - O.A. CHILDRESS CONTINUED
9. No additional right-of-way dedication for Corydon Road across the
frontage of applicant's property is required. A 50-foot wide one-
half street complying with the General Plan requirement for a 100-
foot major corridor classification exists.
10. Concrete curb and gutter exists across the frontage of applicant's
property at the required distance of 38 feet from centerline. Paving
exists and will be accepted as conforming to City Standards.
11 . Provi de a 1 eft turn 1 ane in Corydon Road, as approved by the Ci ty
Engineer, for improved traffic safety. This is subject to Riverside
County approval.
12. Construct a 6-foot wide sidewalk across the total frontage of applicant's
property adjacent to the curb. Applicant can request deferral of these
public improvements by lien agreement. APPLICANT SHALL ENTER INTO A
DEFERRED LIEN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS.
-
13. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer. APPLICANT
SHALL ENTER INTO A DEFERRED LIEN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY FOR THESE
IMPROVEMENTS.
14. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
ORAl NAGE
15. Record a "Notice of 100-Year Flood Hazard; Waiver of Liability Claims;
and Agreement to Noti fy Future Purchasers or Encumbrancers. II
16. ThE lower portion of applicant's property is within the lOO-Year Flood
Plain or within the area of Special Flood Hazard. Applicant is advised
of Ordinance 603, Section 2.1 and Section 2.3-1; 1, 2, and 3:
-
2.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PERMIT:
A Development Permit shall be obtained before construction
or development begins within any area of special flood
hazard established in Section 1.3. Application for a
Development Permit shall be made on forms furnished by the
Building Department.
2.3-1 PERMIT REVIEW:
1. Review of all development permits to determine that the
permit requirements of this ordinance have been satisfied.
2. Review all permits to determine that the site is reasonably
safe from flooding.
3. Review all development permits to determine if the pro-
posed development adversely affects the flood carrying
capacity of the area of special flood hazard. For pur-
poses of this ordinance, "adversely affects" means that
the cumulative effect of the proposed development when
combined with all other existing and anticipated develop-
ment will not increase the water surface elevation of the
base flood more than one foot (1') at any point in the
City of Lake Elsinore Flood Plain.
17. A-~~a~iA~-~~aA-s~a~~-s~ew-t~at-ste~ffi-~~aiRa~e-s~eet-f~ews-f~effi-t~e-FeaF
e f-a ~~+ ieaAt.!. 5- ~Fe~eFty-eRte-a~~aeeRt-~~e ~eFtY7 DELETE D.
18. +~e-~eve~e~ffieRt-~~aR-s~a~+-~e-s~~ffiitte~-te-t~e-F+eee-beRtFe+-Q4stF4et-feF
eFai Ra.~e-FeeeffiffieRea UeRs7 --A~~+ iea Rt-te- ~ay- FeEji/4Fee- fee7 DELETE D.
-
SEWERAGE
19. Sewage disposal service must be approved by the City Engineer, the County
Health Department, the Regional Water Quality Control Board and Elsinore
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 5
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-11 - O.A. CHILDRESS CONTINUED
Valley Municipal Water District.
20. Applicant shall sign an agreement with Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District for participation in the cost of regional collection, treat-
ment and disposal of sewage from the site. Future connection to public
sewer shall include a cleanout at the property line and applicant or
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District responsibility for maintenance
of sewer laterals.
-
WATER
21. Dedicate underground water right to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee.
GRADING
22. Applicant is advised of Ordinance No. 711, Section 4:
SECTION FOUR:
No person, fi rm or corporation shall construct and addi tions, a 1 tera-
tions or repai rs, nor conduct any rehabil itation or restoration
activities upon existing structures within the City of Lake Elsinore
with the foundation or basement lower than the elevation of 1270'
mean sea level within the perimeter streets of Lake Elsinore consjst~
ing of Grand Avenue, Riverside Drive, Lakeshore Drive, Mission Trail
and Corydon Road, except as specifically permitted by the City Council
on a case-by-case review.
23. S~eIfi4.t-.a -!jf'a e14R!j-~+a R- BY -a-b4 vH.- ~ R!j4Reef'~ - - be Rfe f'1fi- te - YR4.fe f'1fi- g~4 ~ ei R~
Geee,-GRaptef'-~Q~--Qf'a4Rage-5Rall-Be-5ReWR-eR-tRis-plaR-aRe-eeRfef'lfi-te
tRe-f'e~~4f'emeRts-ef-tAe-G4tY-~R!j4Reef'~--SAew-watef'SRee-aedaeeRt-te-tRe-
s4te-aRe-Aew-stef'lfi-watef'-flews-ff'elfi-tAe-tetal-watef'SAee-af'ea-e14f'eetee-
te - :EA.e- bake, - te!je :EAef'-w4:EA - Et ~a RH H es -e.f- new~ - - Pf'e v4 ee-.f4 Ra l- 9f'a ee-
6ef't4.f46at4eR~--Pf'ev4ae-6ef'Hf4€ate-ef-5~f'Vey~ DELETED.
24. Provide Landscaping and Irrigation Plan to be reviewed by the City
Engineer, including street trees.
-
FEES
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
- 30.
31.
Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
Pay Public Safety fees (police and fire) as required by Ordinance 83-87.
PaY-f'eEt~4f'eel-5eAeel-.fee5~ DELETED.
Consent to sign an agreement to pay a Traffic Safety Impact Mitigation
fee in the amount of $3,500 for future traffic signalization.
Consent to sign an agreement to pay a Drainage Impact Mitigation fee
in the amount of $4,000.
Consent to sign an agreement to pay a Street Sweeping Mitigation fee
in the amount of $500.
ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR USE UNLESS OTHERWISE
SPECI FlED.
3. Zone Change 84-9 - Edward Lambert - Staff stated that the applicant has request-
ed that this item be continued to the meeting of November 20th, so that we can
process his Zone Change and General Plan Amendment concurrently, and also we
are adding on to his Zone Change with additional properties. Its a pre-zoning
for industrial property for an annexation into the City of Lake Elsinore.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to continue Zone Change 84-9 to the meeting of
November 20, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 6
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - Ruben and Vivan Sanchez - Staff presented proposal
to construct a single-family residence on one (l) lot that is approximately
three (3) acres, located approximately 800 feet south of Pierce Street.
Commissioner Barnhart asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he
has any problems with the conditions? Applicant was not present.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if a precise grading plan had yet been submitted?
Mr. Culp answered in the negative. --
Mr. Culp stated that on condition number 18 and 19, the applicant desires to
sink their own well in that area. Presently, there is not water available to
them on Baker Street; believes most of the residents there are on their own
well system. Chairman asked Mr. Cu1p if the applicant did not have to apply
for this through Water Quality Control? Mr. Culp stated that he believes
there is a well permit required. Commissioner Mellinger stated this means he
cannot get a will serve letter or dedicate under ground water rights. Mr.
Culp answered in the affirmative and stated that they would like to review any
Water Quality analysis that are submitted for the well. Chairman asked if
this doesn't come from the Health Department? Mr. Culp stated he believes
they have to have a well permit and the analysis of the water quality is review-
ed by the County Health Department; so we would like to review that as it is
our understanding that the water quality in that area is not very good.
Discussion ensued on deleting condition number 18 and 19 and adding condition
that any water well permit shall be reviewed by the City Engineer.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence for Sanchez
with staff recommendations and deleting condition number 18 and 19, and adding
condition number 23, which will read: IIApplicant shall obtain a well permit
and shall be reviewed by the City Engineer.1I
Commissioner Mellinger asked if the motion includes the staff recommendation
that conditions 8, 9 and 12.a. be deferred by standard lien agreement? Com-
missioner Barnhart stated that was included.
-
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on site plan shall be constructed as designated on
plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission/Design Review
Board.
2. Applicant to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
3. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
4. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater disposal.
5. Applicant shall meet all setback requirements.
6.
Applicant is to provide (if determined applicable by Engineering Depart-
ment) plans for the prevention and control of potential flood inundation
through the placement of appropriate vegetation barriers and/or retain-
ing walls located on-site, to be approved by Engineering and Planning
Departments.
-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
7. Dedicate three feet (31) of right-of-way along total property frontage
along Baker Street to be in conformance with General Plan Amendment 84-10.
8. Construct curb and gutter 31 feet from street centerline along total
property frontage of Baker Street.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 7
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - RUBEN AND VIVAN SANCHEZ CONTINUED
-
9. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter along
total property frontage of Baker Street.
10. Street plans and specifications were prepared and are approved as of
January 10, 1979. Applicantls registered Civil Engineer must revise
the approved plans to reflect the changes made by the General Plan
Amendment 84-10. Revised plans must include signing and striping. As
built street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are re-
quired.
11. Public improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and
City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
12. a) Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer (if re-
quired).
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscap-
ing Maintenance District.
NOTE: Staff recommends that conditions 8, 9, and 12.a. be deferred by standard
lien agreement due to the existence of no street improvements in the
area.
GRADING
13. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chpater 70.
-
14. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Provide
final Grade Certification of pad elevation per approved grading plan
and a final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
15. Provide Grading Plan to be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer.
The Certificate of Survey has been approved via the recorded Parcel Map
No. 11395. All property lines shall be at the top of construction slopes
with the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements. Limits of
the 100-year flood plain must be shown.
16. A portion of the applicant's property is located within the lOO-year
flood plain (elevation 1258) of the Temescal Wash. Ordinance No. 711,
Section Five stipulates "No person, firm or corporation shall construct
any new structure, nor make additions, alterations or repairs, nor
conduct any rehabilitation or restoration activities upon existing
structures along the outflow channel and upon the Temescal Wash flood
plain which is within five (5) vertical feet of the 100-year flood
plain, except as specifically permitted by the City Engineer and the
Director of Building and Safety, on a case-by-case review, with the
right of administrative appeal to the City Council."
Staff recommends that applicant must meet the requirements of Ordinance
No. 711 and 603 (regarding flood proofing of structures) and must record
a "Notice of 100-year Flood Hazard" holding the City harmless due to
flooding. At this time a precise grading plan has not been submitted so
_ that staff could review the applicant's proposed pad and finished floor
elevation. Staff feels that once this information is submitted, we can
better determine whether any of the above requirements have to be com-
pleted.
SEWER
17. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and California Regional Water Quality Control
B.oard for on-site sewage disposal.
WATER
18. Pf'8\1:iEle-wnl--sef'\le-leUef'-~b1a l"aRtee~R~-wa tefl-a\la HaeHHy-.ff'81f1-n 5~f18f'e
lIaneY-~l:IR4e:i~a+.-Watel"-Q~stl":iet-: DELETED.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 8
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - RUBEN AND VIVAN SANCHEZ CONTINUED
19. ee6t€ate-tiA6el"~1"8!Hlel-watel"-I":HlAts-t8.-tRe-GHY-8f-l:ake-HstFl8f"e-sf"-Hs
aS54~Flee5~ DELETED.
FEES
20. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
21. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's
schedule, if required.
-
22. Pay all school fees.
23. APPLICANT SHALL OBTAIN A WELL PERMIT AND SHALL BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY
ENGINEER.
2. Commercial Project 82-5 REVISED - Butterfield Savings and Loan c/o Butterfield
Development Corporation -
Commissioner Mellinger requested to be excused on this item due to conflict of
i nteres t.
Mr. Corcoran stated that a quorum was needed to reach court on any item, and
due to potential conflict of interest we will not have a quorum existing with
the elimination of one Planning Commissioner. Therefore, staff requests this
item be continued until we do have full quorum.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to continue Commercial Project 82-5 REVISED
to the meeting of November 6, 1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-0
3. Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 78-9 - Arta Valenzuela - Staff pre-
sented applicant's request for time extension of Conditional Use Permit 78-9,
to extend the permitted operating tenure of DBA Clean Valley Recycling Center,
located northerly of the intersection of Collier and Central Avenues.
-
Staff stated a review was conducted by the Planning Division with a finding
that applicant has conformed to all the conditions of approval except condition
number 3, II Appl i cant I s acti vi ti es are schedul ed to termi nate when the Freeway
off-ramp is completed."
Commissioner Mellinger asked staff if he could explain the reason why condition
number 3 in the original conditions of the Conditional Use Permit was there in
the first place? Mr. Corcoran stated that this occurred ~n 1978, and from what
he can gather from looking at the past minutes, at that time they wanted to
complete the freeway, the realignment of Highway 74 and they wanted to complete
the off-ramp. It is his understanding, at this point, that the total alignment
for Highway 74 has still not been completed with the curve. Commissioner Mel-
linger stated obviously, we would have to replace that with something else, a
time limit. Mr. Corcoran stated that was correct.
Moti on by Commiss ioner Mell i nger to approve Time Extens ion for Conditional Use
Permit 78-9 with staff recommendations and addinq condition number 20, which will
read: "This extension shall be valid for a three (3) year period with annual re-
view, to account for the Cal~Trans alignment of Highway 74~~, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
1. Landscaping and irrigation plan as approved by Planning Division.
2. Appropriate screening as approved by Planning Division.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
3. Applicant shall obtain an ll-foot wide dedication of property to the
City for widening of Collier Avenue across the frontage of the parcels
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 9
TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78-9 - ARTA VALENZUELA CONTINUED
-
-
4.
of land utilized by the applicant. The existing Collier Avenue right-
of-way width is 60-feet. Ca1-Trans required an 82-foot wide right-of-
way for Collier Avenue, or 41-foot one-half street width. The City's
General Plan identifies Collier Avenue as a Modified Collector, requir-
ing a total 66-foot wide right-of-way. The City must require the wider
width to comply with Cal-Trans requirements. At building permit stage.
Applicant shall dedicate a l5-foot width of additional right-of-way
along Central Avenue to provide a one-half street width of 55-feet.
The existing half-street right-af-way width is 40-feet. The General
Plan identifies Central Avenue as a ll0-foot wide Arterial corridor.
The dedication along Central Avenue can be a irrevocable offer of
dedication which the City can accept at a future date if a lien agree-
ment is recorded to guarantee relocation of fence and obstructions to
clear the right-of-way. The right-of-way dedication for Collier Avenue
and Central Avenue shall include a corner cut-off as required by the
City Engineer and/or City standards. At building permit stage.
5.
Applicant must provide for constructing curb, gutter, sidewaik, paving
and drainage facilities for widening of Collier Avenue and Central
Avenue. The roadway or curb-to-curb width on Collier Avenue is
identified in the General Plan as 62-feet, and on Central Avenue as 86-
feet. Applicant is responsible for these street improvements to the
street centerline. Tests must show that existing paving conforms to
City standards and will support the wheel loads represented by the City
Engineer's Traffic Index. To be deferred with standard lien agreement,
at building permit stage.
6.
Sidewalk shall be 8-feet wide (to be deferred).
7. Meet all conditions of Ordinance 572.
8. Applicant shall agree to limit access to these parcels to those locations
specifically approved by the City. Present access can continue to be
used until the street is widened and the Central Avenue-Collier Avenue
intersection is improved. Applicant shall agree to limit parking along
the frontage of these parcels presently being utilized, as approved by
the City.
9_. Street plans and specifications for street and drainage improvements to
be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and will include signing and
striping. As built street, grading, utility, and drainage improvement
plans are required. Public improvements to conform with City Code re-
quirements and City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and
Specifications. To be deferred by lien agreement, at building permit
stage.
10. As a voluntary measure, pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for future
traffic signalization in the amount of $3,000, at the building permit
s ta ge .
11. Pay Street Sweeping Maintenance Mitigation fee in the amount of $100.00,
at the building permit stage.
12. a) Install ornamental street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
To be deferred by lien agreement, at building permit stage.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
13. Provide Class II or equivalent bike lane on Central Avenue and Collier
Avenue as approved by the City Engineer. To be deferred.
14. Pay a Storm Drainage Impact Mitigation fee of $5,000 to provide drainage
facilities from the site to the outflow channel, at building permit stage.
15. Provide acceptable on-site sewage disposal system.
Minutes of Planning Commission
October 16, 1984
Page 10
TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 78-9 - ARTA VALENZUELA CONTINUED
16. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee, at building permit stage.
17. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection.
18. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
19. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87. ...
20. THIS EXTENSION SHALL BE VALID FOR A THREE (3) YEAR PERIOD WITH ANNUAL
REVIEW, TO ACCOUNT FOR THE CAL-TRANS ALIGNMENT OF HIGHWAY 74.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR1S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran stated that he would like to remind the Planning Commission that we
have a meeting with Supervisor Abraham and the Riverside County Planning Department
on Wednesday, October 17th, at 6:00 p.m. in the Library.
Would also like to make the Commission aware of the Fall Conference for the City-
County Planning Commissioners that will be held November 8th, at the Hungry Tiger
in Redlands. The program is Southern California - The Wierd Redlands or How do we
look.
Mr. Culp stated that he had one informational item for the Commission and the public,
that is, on October 27th, the Boy Scouts are scheduling another Lakeshore clean-up.
It would be greatly appreciated, if there are any others in the community that would
care to offer their assistance in the clean-up, whether it be through services or
hamburgers for the kids, trash bags or any kind of support you can offer. I believe
there is another clean-up scheduled on December 8th, cleaning up after the parade.
...
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Mellinger - Likes the improvements of the parkway along Lakeshore, thinks
it looks pretty good.
Commissioner Barnhart - Would like Mr. Corcoran to verify that we are having a work
party at Lakepoint Community Park on November 3rd. Mr. Corcoran answered in the
affirmative. Also, stated that he is planning on being out there on Saturday,
October 20th, with some City equipment to do some cleaning up before the work party
comes in.
Would like to verify the meeting dates on Title 17, I have down October 25th at 5:00
p.m. and October 27th, at 12:00 noon. Then I have October 29th at 7:00 p.m. as a
study session with City Council, are these dates and times correct? Mr. Corcoran
answered in the affirmative.
Chairman Dominguez - None
Commissioner Saathoff - absent
Commissioner Washburn - absent
...
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-0
MI NUTES 0 F
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
16TH
DAY
OF
OCTOBER
1984
-
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of October 2, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - Ruben and Vivan Sanchez - Staff presented proposal
to construct a single-family residence on one (1) lot that is approximately
three (3) acres, located approximately 800 feet south of Pierce Street.
A brief discussion was held on elevation for proposed project.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence for Sanchez
with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0
2.
- 3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets, and subject to approval
from the Design Review Board.
Building elevations shall be as depicted on plans. Any proposed changes
will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
Landscaping/irrigation plans shall be approved by Planning Division.
All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler system.
Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way, to
be approved by the Planning Division.
Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart.
Grading plans are to be approved by the Engineering Department.
Applicant is to provide (if determined applicable by Engineering Depart-
ment) plans for the prevention and control of potential flood inundation
through the placement of appropriate vegetation barriers and/or retain-
ing walls located on-site, to be approved by Engineering and Planning
Departments.
2. Landscaping/Irrigation Plan for Residential Project 83-2 - Thomastown Builders -
Tom Smith and William S. Buck - Staff presented Landscaping/Irrigation plan for
Residential Project 83-2 (112 Unit Apartment Complex), meeting condition number
4 of the original conditions of approval.
-
Commissioner Mellinger asked if the applicant was present. Applicant was not
present.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that this seems to be fairly adequate, especially
with these conditions.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Landscaping/Irrigation Plan for
Residential Project 83-2 with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Approved 3-0
1. All areas not designated for buildings, parking, patios and walkways
shall be landscaped. Landscaping shall be approved by Planning Division.
2. A landscaping theme and irrigation system shall be incorporated along
the perimeter of the proposed landscaping plan indicating "Recreational
Area"
Minutes of Design Review Board
October 16, 1984
Page 2
LANDSCAPING/I RRI GATION PLAN FOR RES IDENTIAL PROJECT 83-2 - THOMAS TOWN BUI LDERS
3. Applicant shall provide landscaping design theme for street entrances
to the Apartment Complex.
3. Monument Sign - 31361 Riverside Drive - Steve Anthony - Staff presented pro-
posal for the construction of a monument structure, advertising all available
businesses within the Patricia Plaza.
A brief discussion was held on lettering being consistent coloring and size, ...
and 1 0 ca t ion 0 f s i g n .
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Monument Sign at 31361 Riverside
Drive with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0
1. Monument sign shall be placed a minimum distance from any street of
ten feet (10 I ) .
2. Monument sign shall be appropriately landscaped, per Community Develop-
ment Director.
3. Lighting shall not shine or interfer with any adjacent properties.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
8:30 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 3-0
AAPP~-fove~~, ,//, , C'
.c;;; ." _.
/",U-;:? " ", ~'>-------
, Fred Domi~P--
Cha i rman
....."
Respectfully sUb~ted,
~~.~
Linda Gri nds ta ff
Planning Commission
S ec reta ry
...."
For official record the City Clerk's Office saved audio cassettes for the following
Planning Commission meetings:
September 11, 1980
September 6, 1984
September 12, 1984
October 3, 1984
October 25, 1984
November 7, 1984
November 13, 1984
February 20, 1985
March 3, 1986
May 29, 1986
June 12, 1986
V rginia J.(Warn, "V Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Fa,bl�,It &wIlL, . . Rollo Lei
MI NUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
6TH
DAY
OF
NOVEMBER
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Washburn.
-
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve minutes of October 16, 1984, as sub-
mitted, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLI C HEARl NGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 84-9 - Al Hertz - Staff stated that a letter was re-
ceived, today, from the applicant requesting that the public hearing on
Conditional Use Permit 84-9 be continued to the meeting of December 18, 1984,
so that he may complete his further investigation of the conditions imposed.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to continue Conditional Use Permit 84-9 to
the meeting of December 18,1984, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
2. Zone Change 84-6 - Zimmerman Consulting Engineers/Tomlinson.- Staff presented
proposal to change existing zoning designation to facilitate commercial develop-
ment within the City for 21.4 acres, located northerly of the intersection of
Grand Avenue and Riverside Drive, known as Amfac Nurseries.
The applicant is requesting a change of zoning from R-3 (Multiple-Family Re-
sidence) to C-P (Commercial Park) for a 21.4 acre parcel. The General Plan
Land Use Designation is for Specific Plan Area which would accommodate this
designation (land use zoning compatibility matrix).
-
Staff feels this proposal for said Zone Change will facilitate commercial
development along Riverside Drive. Since subject site is the gateway to the
Riverside Drive area from the south, it is important that the land be proposed
for it's highest and best use along a major highway. Current zoning designation
of R-3 (21.4 acres) along a major highway does not follow good planning theory.
Subject proposal will eliminate High Density designation along Riverside Drive
and provide in its place a commercial designation conducive to an office-pro-
fessional environment. This Zone Change proposal will accommodate the need for
continuing quality commercial development and compatibility of uses.
Staff foresees many positive benefits derived including: increasing the economic
base to accommodate our high population growth rate and also provide for a
greater level of diversified commercial uses. The intent of the General Plan
will be accommodated by said proposal and will hasten the development process.
Staff feels aforementioned proposal will not adversely affect the environment.
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 84-6 and issuance of a Negative
Decl ara ti on.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Zone Change 84-6. Receiving no response, Chairman asked if
anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response, the Chairman
closed the public hearing at 7:36 p.m.
Co~missioner Me~l~nger asked, despite this going to Commercial Park, will there
stlll be a Speclflc Plan required for any development? Mr. Corcoran stated that
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 2
ZONE CHANGE 84-6 - ZIMMERMAN CONSULTING ENGINEERS/TOMLINSON CONTINUED
this was correct. Commissioner Mellinger stated that we do have a Specific
Plan District, why don't--when you have a General Plan aren't they just zoned
Specific Plan District? Mr. Corcoran stated that they spoke to the applicants
about this Specific Plan District and they felt for their needs, at the
current time, it would be more apropos to go for this designation.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Zone Change 84-6 with staff recom-
mendation, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
Commissioner Saathoff asked if a motion was needed on the issuance of a Negative
Declaration? Mr. Corcoran answered in the affirmative.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to issue a Negative Declaration on Zone Change
84-6, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
3. Conditional Exception Permit 84-3 - Donald E. Ash - Staff presented proposal
for a Conditional Exception Permit to construct a room addition to an existing,
non-conforming, single-family residence for sleeping quarters, located 100 feet
west of the intersection of Avenue 5 and Mill Street.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. and asked if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Exception Permit 84-3.
Mr. Donald E. Ash stated that this was his main home; it is a small building as
is stated, eight-hundred and some feet. I am attempting to enlarge my living
room 193 square feet which would square off the back of the building. The
house was constructed at the back of the property that is why it is infringing
on the setbacks. I have no other place to go with the addition; because I
don't have space on either side and there is a carport and shed in front.
-
Chairman asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak in favor. Receiving
no response, the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Re-
ceiving no response, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:42 p.m.
Commissioner Barnhart asked Mr. Ash if he had read all of the conditions that
has been put on this application, and if he has any problems with them? Mr.
Ash stated that he has met with the Engineering Department, and as he under-
stands the conditions are discretionary and would ask that those conditions be
deferred.
Commissioner Washburn asked the applicant if he was planning to add a bathroom?
Mr. Ash answered in the negative. Commissioner Washburn then asked if there
was an existing fire hydrant (211 fire hydrant), located near the property? Mr.
Ash stated that he thought there is one located on the corner of Mill and Avenue
5. Commissioner Washburn stated that his feelings were, if the applicant has
an existing bathroom and was just going to add living quarters or living room
space, he doesn't see a need for him to go forward with sewer; and has no prob-
lem with deleting condition number 16; also concurs with the Engineer's report-
that conditions 7 through 11 .a. be deferred. Commissioner Washburn asked Mr.
Culp on conditions 13 and 14, you are still requesting soils report even though
the soils reports would be for Mill Street rather than for Pell Street-- it
represents Mill Street, he would have to go and have a Soils Engineer do a
study on that street not Pe1l Street. Mr. Culp answered in the affirmative.
Commissioner Washburn stated that if we do have an existing fire hydrant in that _
location he could see deleting condition number 18 or adding if needed.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that he disagrees with staff as far as the feel-
ing of the property owner is being precluded from benefits of the designation
of property; finds that most of the homes in the area are at least 1,000 feet,
and that is what this woul d end up with the addition. Subsection IIBII indicates
that such conditional exceptions are necessary for the preservation and enjoy-
ment of substantial property rights. I don't think he is getting substantial
property ri ghts, so therefore, I am pretty much in support of the Condi tional
Exception Permit.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 3
CONDITIONAL EXr.EPTION PERMIT 84-3 - DONALD E. ASH CONTINUED
-
Chairman Dominguez asked Mr. Ash if the street right behind his property is
Pell Street, and if it is a dedicated street? Mr. Ash stated that it is a
dirt street. Chairman Dominguez then asked Mr. Ash if he puts this addition
in what would the location of the structure be to Pell Street? Mr. Ash
stated that it would be at least 12 feet from the road.
Mr. Ash requested a deferment on the requirement of putting sidewalk, curb
and gutter on Mill Street. Chairman stated that if he was referring to condi-
tions 7 through 11.a. it has been recommended that these conditions be deferred
by staff. Commissioner Washburn stated that this was only on Pell Street.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that the applicant was requesting deferment on
both streets, Mill and Pe11. Commissioner Washburn asked what was the closest
single-family residence with curb, gutter and sidewalk? Mr. Culp stated that
it was across the street. Commissioner Washburn suggested maybe a A.C. berm
a long the 1 i P of the current pavement or somethi ng of tha t sort ,- and i ncl ude
Mill Street with Pell Street. Chairman Dominguez stated that on condition
number 12, there won't be any grading. Commissioner Washburn stated that
conditions 12, 13, and 14, there won't be an impact if we go ahead any delete
the words IIwith regards to Pell Streetll and make it both streets; the only
thing the applicant will have to do is provide landscaping/irrigation which
would be okay out there.
Mr. Ash stated that on condition number 18 and 19, to have an existing hydrant
close enough or whatever; that they would require him to go to Riverside County
Fire Department and get approval, that is okay.
Chairman Dominguez asked when do we determine that its construction and the
difference between a room addition; what is the square footage. Mr. Culp
stated that is is 650 square feet, however, the ordinance reads lIif there are
building permits or permits issued and if the addition, alteration or even
repairsll, if there are building permits or permits issued an-d that amounts up to
650 square feet then ordinance 572 comes into play; with the addition being under
650 square feet, we felt the conditions should be discretionary.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Conditional Exception Permit 84-3
with staff recommendations and deleting the words IIwith regard to Pell Streetll
after condition number 11, under NOTE; delete condition number 15 and 16,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
-
A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Meet County Fire Department requirements, for fire protection.
The structural addition as depicted on plot plan shall be provided as
indicated on the plot plan.
Meet all City Codes and Ordinances, with exception to allowances made
by the Planning Commission in association to the development standard
parameters of the subject proposal.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
6. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
7. Construct curb, gutter and sidewalk along total property frontages of
Mill Street and Pell Street.
8. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter on
both Mill Street and Pell Street. Tests must be provided to show
that existing paving will support the traffic load represented by
the City Engineer's traffic index of 6.0 for both Mill Street and
Pell Street.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 4
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION PERMIT 84-3 - DONALD E. ASH CONTINUED
9. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer, and will include required signing and striping. As built
street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
10. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
11. a) Install street 1 ighting as approved by the City Engineer, if
requi red.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street lighting and land-
scaping Maintenance District.
-,
NOTE: Staff recommends that conditions number 7, 8, 9 and 11 .a. w~tR
Fe9aF~-te-Pe++-StFeet- be deferred due to the lack of street
improvements at this time.
GRADING
12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
13. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Provide
Final Grade Certification of pad elevation per approved grading plan
and a Final Compaction Report to the City Engineer for approval.
14. Provide Grading Plan, Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of construction
slopes with the required Building Code setback requirements.
1 5 . PFe.y4~e-+aRQSea~~ R9-aR~-~ FF~ 9a HeR-13+aR- te-ee- Fe\l4ewe~-a R~-a1313l"9\1e~- ey-
tRe-b4tY-~R94ReeF'J-~Re+l:lEl~R9-stFeet-tFees~ DELETED.
SEWER
-
16. 6eftl~ty-w:ttR-tRe-Fe€lt:l:tFelfleRts-ef-~tS~ReFe-VaHey-Ml:lR~€~13a+-WateF- Q4StF4 et,
bet:lRty-Hea+tA-QeaFtftleRt-aREl-Ga+~feFR4a-Re9~eRa+-WateF_Ql:la+4ty-GeRt~e+
Bea ~El- fe F-e R-S 4te- 5 ewa ~e- e14 S ~esa+ - a ReI- e~q:)a RS 4eR-efl- e-K4 S t4 fl9- SYS teRh
DELETED.
WATER
17. Applicant to consent to reimbursement of one-half the depreciated value
of the lines installed across his total property frontage to assist the
City in recouping those costs borne by City.
18. Meet all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection to include Lif needed) upsizing existing hydrants as required.
19. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of lake Elsinore or its
assignees, if not completed with the initial project now in existence.
FEES
2Q. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572, at permit
s ta ge .
21. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule, __
if requi red.
22. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution 83-87, at
permit stage.
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Appeal; to use building at 133 North Main Street for church purposes on a tem-
porary basis - Paul Bryant, Pastor - Staff stated that the applicant is request-
ing to appeal Planning Division's decision of locating a church in the Central
-
-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 5
APPEAL: TO USE BUILDING AT 133 NORTH MAIN STREET FOR CHURCH PURPOSES ON A TEMPORARY
BASIS - PAUL BRYANT, PASTOR
Business District of Lake Elsinore.
It has been past City Council policy to discourage location of churches in our
downtown commercial corridor. This use would not be suitable towards the River-
side County's Department of Housing and Community Development/City of Lake
Elsinore Planning Divisionis efforts in attracting commercial uses that would
enhance current revitalization efforts of all agencies and associations involved.
The Planning Division is cognizant to church uses and would assist the applicant
in finding an alternative site. It is staff's feeling that the proposed use is
inappropriate and unsuitable under the current situation.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he would like to point out, for clarification,
this is the old Firestone building; concurs with past City Council and would
de ny tfl is.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to deny appeal of Paul Bryant, Pastor, second
by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
2.
Single-Family Residence - 16780 Hunt Street - William S. Buck - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residence on two (2) lots, .221"; acres,-,
located 100 feet east of the corner of Hague and Hunt Street.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that it says here that precautions should be
taken to prevent sheet flow on the parcel and also, it looked like from the
south side there is quite a natural wash going down there; where in the condi-
tions are those precautions going to be taken? Mr. Cu1p stated that through
the grading plan itself we can make provisions. Commissioner Mellinger asked
what types of things have been done for that? Mr. Culp stated-that first of
all, the applicant would have to provide a hydrology report; showing what is
coming towards the site, and what quantities. Once we know how much then we
know what degree of protection we can offer and what is available to us; the
amount of flow indicates the type of improvement.
Commissioner Mellinger asked what type of precautions are going to be taken
or what do they have to do? Mr. Cu1p stated that first of all, they must
maintain flows as exists in that swale; they cannot re-direct flows on their
neighbors; they have to be retained on site and cannot increase that amount to
downstream properties.
Mr. Cu1p stated that there is one additional condition that should be added;
tha t wou1 d be to process a lot merger for the two lots.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence at 16780
Hunt Street with staff recommendations and adding condition number 23, which
will read: "Applicant to process a lot merger for the two (2) lots", second by
Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
2. Applicant s ha 11 meet all setback requirements.
3. App1 icant s ha 11 meet all applicable City Codes and Ordi nances .
4. Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements, for fi re
protection.
5. App 1 i ca nt is to meet all applicable County Health Department regulations.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16780 HUNT STREET - WILLIAM S. BUCK CONTINUED
6. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
7. Construct curb and gutter 18-feet from street centerline along the
tota 1 property frontage of Hunt Avenue.
8. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter along
the total frontage of Hunt Avenue.
9. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built streets,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
-
10.. Public improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
11. a) Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer, if
required.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscap-.
ing Maintenance District.
NOTE: Staff recommends that conditions number 7, 8, 9 and 11 .a. be
deferred by standard lien agreement due to existence of no
street improvements in the area.
12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Ruilding Code, Chapter 70.
13. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Provide
Final Grade Certification of pad elevation per approved grading plan and
a Fi na 1 Compaction Report to the City Engineer for approval.
14. Provide Grading Plan, Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a registered _
Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of construction
slopes with the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
15. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the
City Engi neer, i ncl udi ng street tree locations.
SEWE R
16. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley MuniCipal Water District,
County Health Department and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal.
WATER
17. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water availability from Elsinore
Water District.
18. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass i gnees .
19. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department, for fire
protection to include hydrant installation and up-sizing, if required.
FEES
-
20.. Pay all applicabJe Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
21. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley MuniCipal Water District's
schedule, if required.
22. Pay all school fees.
23. APPLICANT TO PROCESS A LOT MERGER FOR THE TWO [21 LOTS.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 7
3.
Single-Family Residence - 1409 West Sumner Avenue - Gerald and Teresa Cherveny -
Staff presented proposal to construct a manufactured house (1,400 square feet)
on .18~ acres, located 50 feet northeasterly of Townsend Street and Sumner
Avenue.
-
Commissioner Washburn questioned condition number 20, asking if this was some-
thing that Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District asked us to include? Mr.
Culp answered in the affirmative.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 1409
West Sumner Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Appro ved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated on the
site plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission and/or
Design Review Board.
2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
3. Meet County Fire Department requirements, for fire protection.
4. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater dis-
po s a 1 .
5. Appl icant is to meet all conditions of approval prior to the issuance
of Certificate of Use and Occupancy.
6. Applicant is to meet all setbacks.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance 572.
8. No street dedication is required.
9. Construct street improvements, including asphalt pavement widening, curb,
gutter and 6-foot wide sidewalk. The one-half roadway width (curb to
center1inet shall be 18-feet. Existing paving will be accepted as con-
forming to City standards. Two to three feet of pavement widening is
necessary. Improvement plans to be prepared by a Civil Engineer.
10. Provide Soils Report, Grading and Drainage plan, Certificate of Survey,
and Final Grading Certification. There appears to be no outlet for the
drainage from this site, except by sheet drainage across the alley and
over the vacant lot to the northeast. Applicant's engineer shall pre-
pare a drainage plan to be approved by the City Engineer, which could
include easements, drainage release, indemnification and/or hold harmless
agreement approved by the City Attorney.
11. Construct alley improvements conforming to adjacent construction and/or
City Standards.
- 12. A water main exists in Sumner Avenue and water service is available to
applicant, upon payment of fees.
13. Dedicate 2.5 feet of additional width of right-of-way for alley across
appl icant's lot.
14. Pay Capital Imrpovement fees per Ordinance 572.
15. Construct sewer c1eanout on sewer lateral at property line. Applicant
is advised that property owner or Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District is responsi'b1e for sewer lateral maintenance.
16. Applicant shall pay one-half the depreciated cost of the waterline across
the 50-foot frontage.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 8
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 1409 WEST SUMNER - GERALD & TERESA CHERVENY CONTINUED
17. Comply with County fire protection requirements.
18. Install street light.
19. A sewer availability letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
has been provided to City.
2Q. Construct back flow prevention device to be maintained by property owner
and inspected yearly. _
4. Commercial Project 82-5 REVISED - Butterfield Savings & Loan c/o Butterfield
Development Corporation -
Commissioner Mellinger asked to be excused due to possible conflict of interest.
Staff presented proposal to allow existing Savings & Loan Institution (Butter-
field Savings and Loan) to remain as a permanent structure, located at 16856
La kes ho re Dri ve .
Commissioner Washburn stated that he concurs with most of what staff has put
together on this, expecially making it a permanent structure in the sense of
anchoring it to the ground or a foundation. The only thing that I would like
to change is, on condition number 8, where it says to IIdefer and bond for these
feesll. Commissioner Saathoff stated that the only question he has with that is,
thinks it has probably been standard practice until such time they actually put
it in. Commissioner Washburn asked if we were collecting fees for traffic
mitigation. Commissioner Saathoff stated that he thinks we are deferring and
bonding and collecting at the actual time the work is to be done.
Mr. Cu1p stated that if this is going to be the permanent str~cture then where
we have defer and bond for fees, in fact, we should be collecting those fees.
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 82-5 REVISED with
staff recommendations and amending condition number 6, by deleting the last
sentence; amendi ng condition number 8, by del eti ng the 1 as t sentence; amendi ng
condition number 11, by deleting the last sentence, second by Commissioner Wash-
burn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. A finding of conformance to the General Plan.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. Structure to be permanently bolted to foundation wi th steel bolts
embedded at least 7 inches into the concrete or reinforced masonry.
Sec. 2907 Ce)_ Uniform Building Code, 1979 Edition.
4. Plumbing fixtures shall be provided with approved inlet fittings for
fixture connections. Sec. 404 (a) Uniform Plumbing Code, 1979 Edition.
5. Electrical service conductors to be installed underground.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
6. Eight-foot (8') wide sidewalk shall be installed on Riverside Drive and
Lakeshore Drive. A six-foot (61) wide sidewalk shall be installed on
Wi scons inS treet . :n~e-$g;5QQ-6aSR-BeReI-wH+- ae-f'e+.easeel-wReR-tRe-W8f'k-
is-68ffi~+eteel-aReI-a66e~teel~
7. Cooperate with the City of Lake Elsinore in forming a Lighting and
Landscaping District.
-
8. Applicant to pay equitable share for Traffic Signal Mitigation fee for
Riverside Drive/Lakeshore Drive signal in the amount of $20,000. Qe.fef'-
a flel- 98 RQ-.f8 f'-tR es e- .fees ~
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6. 1984
Page 9
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 82-5 REVISED - BUTTERFIELD SAVINGS & LOAN C/O BUTTERFIELD DEVELOP-
MENT CORPORATION CONTINUED
-
9. Pay Public Safety fees, as follows:
Police - $ .15 per square foot of building area.
Fire $ .05 per square foot of building area.
10. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass ignees .
11 . Pay Ora i nage Miti gation fee of $8,000.00. Qefel'l-a.REI-eeAEI-fel'l-tl:lese
fees":
12. Capital Improvement fees have been paid.
13. Applicant to provide street repair and cross gutter repair at the
intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Wisconsin Street as approved by
the City Engineer.
14. Applicant to control excess irrigation of landscaped area. which is
causing constant nuisance flow and is damaging those street improve-
ments mentioned in Condition #13 above.
15. Construct A.G. swale across existing business on the easterly side of
Lakeshore Drive to accommodate the nuisance flows from the landscape
irrigation as approved by the City Engineer.
-
16. Construct A.C. swale at the intersection of Illinois Street and Lake-
shore Drive to direct those flows being generated from this project
as approved by the City Engineer.
17. Provide City Engineer with street striping plan to include stop bars,
pavement delineation and fire hydrant location delineation as approved
by the City Engineer.
18. Fog seal frontage A.C. improvements along Riverside Drive, Lakeshore
Drive, and Wisconsin Street.
Commissioner Mellinger returned to the table.
5. Commercial Project 84-11 - Taco Bell - Staff presented proposal to construct a
Taco Kell fast food restaurant with drive through facility on .66Z. acres. located
northeasterly of the intersection of Railroad Canyon Road and Mission Trail.
Commissioner Saathoff commented on the septic tank and leach field, wondering
it if shouldn't be a holding tank until such time they can connect to the sewer
system. Mr. Culp stated that staff would have no problem with that, but the
Commission should understand that we would then have to monitor that activity.
Commissioner Washburn stated that the appl icants on other projects have been re-
quired to show us the receipts. Mr. Corcoran stated that what we have required
in the past is that we have monthly receipts, and that we see some type of
contract or service agreement with the person pumping the holding tank. Also,
- what we have required in the past, in this area, is require that within a two-
year period if sewer service is not on 1 ine that they agree to enter into an
assessment district.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he agrees with Commissioner Saathoff, it is
the City1s responsibility, then we don1t have anyon-site disposal for one
thing, so there is no problem there and require them to post a bond to guarantee
their fair share in participation of sewer assessment district within two-years.
Commissioner Washburn then stated that on condition number 9. the last sentence,
where it states IIwiden sidewalk to l2-feetll this is an error and it should be
"widen sidewalk to conform to adjacent developmentll. On condition number 25,
thinks this was a good thing for Engineering to put on; eliminating the lot
between the building, if it were placed on the lot--likes to see these mergers
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 10
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-11 - TACO BELL CONTINUED
so that we eradicate these problems; thinks that we should ask the applicant
to sign an agreement to participate in his fair share, whatever it may be--
to be determined at some later point, of the construction of San Jacinto
River bridge, would like this added as a condition.
Commissioner Washburn asked staff, if we are going to go ahead and we have
the jurisdiction to provide for a holding tank, do we want to go ahead and
modify condition number 21, which pulls in County Health Department and
Regional Water Quality Control; I know Regional Water Quality Control has no
jurisdiction if we have a holding tank. Mr. Corcoran stated that this is
right, and what the County Health Department has said in the past is, they
will approve it but we have to monitor it .
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 84-11 with staff
recommendations and amending condition number 9, deleting the following verbiage
IIWiden the sidewalk to 12-feetll; condition number 21, change verbiage so that
they are providing a holding tank--it is the applicant's responsibility to pro-
vide the City with proof of pumping, deleting County Health Department, Regional
Water Quality Control; adding condition number 22.a which will read: IIAgree to
enter into a sewer assessment districtll; adding condition number 29, which will
read: IIAgree to enter into an assessment district for San Jacinto River bridgell
Commissioner Washburn asked if on the holding tank we should also, at this point,
ask them to provide for future hook-up to sewer lines? Mr. Culp stated that we
would ask the applicant to design the system such that it would be very easy to
hook-up.
Commissioner Saathoff amended his motion, on condition number 21 to leave in
County Health Department, also; regarding the holding tank that it be constructed
in accordance with City Engineer requirements and to provide that the applicant
can hook-up to the Regional Sewer Collection system when provided, second by
Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on-site plan shall be provided as indicated on the
site plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Division and/or
Design Review Board.
2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
3. Meet all written requirements of County Fire Department, for fire pro-
tection.
4. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division a document that verifies
Riverside County Health Department approval for wastewater disposal
system.
5. Applicant shall meet all project conditions prior to obtaining Certificate
of Use and Occupancy.
6. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
7. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
-
8. Meet all conditions of Ordinance No. 572.
9. The required roadway width (curb-to-curb) on Mission Trail for a Major
Street is 76-feet. Asphalt paving, curb, gutter and a 7-foot wide
sidewalk exists across the Mission Trail frontage of this proposed develop-
ment. The curb is 38-feet from the centerline. The public improvements
are accepted as conforming to City Standards except the paving which must
be improved as required by the City Engineer. Widen sidewalk to conform
to adjacent development.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 11
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-11 - TACO BELL CONTINUED
-
10. The required roadway width (curb-to-curb) on Casino Drive is 64-feet.
Developer shall construct curb and gutter 32-feet from centerline
across the frontage of this proposed development. together with asphalt
paving and an 8-foot wide sidewalk. Existing paving must be shown by
tests to conform to City Standards to resist traffic wheel loads re-
presented by the City Engineer's traffic index.
11. Sign an agreement to pay Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for future
traffic signalization in the amount of $4,671.54 in conformance with
Resolution 83-19.
12. Volunteer to sign an agreement to pay Street Sweeping Maintenance
Mitigation fee in the amount of $500.00 per lot.
13. Applicant shall pay a Storm Drainage Mitigation fee of $12,000 as an
equitable share of costs to provide off-site storm drainage facilities.
14. a) Install street lighting as approved by City Engineer.
b) Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscap-
ing Maintenance District.
15. Provide Class II or equivalent bike lane on Mission Trail and/or Casino
Drive as approved by the City Engineer.
16. Plans and specifications for street improvements to be prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer and will include signing and striping. As
built street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are re-
quired.
-
GRADING
17. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70. Provide grading plan prepared by a Civil Engineer.
18. Provide Soils and Geology Report including street design recommendations.
Provide Final Soils Report showing compliance with preliminary report
and finish grade certification.
19_. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the
CHy Engineer, including street trees.
20. Comply with requirements of the City Engineer for drainage of site.
5.EWE RAGE
-
21. Comply with the requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore, Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District, County Health Department FOR ON-SITE HOLDING
TANK; HOLDING TANK IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY ENGINEER
REQUIREMENTS TO PROVI DE THAT THE APPLICANT CAN HOOK-UP TO THE REGIONAL
SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM WHEN PROVIDED. IT IS THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSIBILITY
TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH PROOF OF PUMPING. Sign an agreement with Elsinore
Valley MuniCipal Water District to participate in a regional sewage col-
lection, treatment and disposal system.
22. Design on-site sewage collection and disposal system so that future con-
nection can be made to the Regional Sewage System. Install cleanouts
oehind the sidewalk on all sewer laterals as required by the City and/or
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. Acknowledge property owner or
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District responsibility to maintain sewer
1 ate ra 1 .
al AGREE TO ENTER INTO SEWER ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.
WATER
23. Provide a will serve letter guaranteeing water service from serving agency.
24. De,dicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 12
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-11 - TACO BELL CONTINUED
MI S CELLANEOUS
25. Eliminate lot line between Parcel 2 and 3 of Parcel Map 18811. Process
an application for parcel merger.
FEES
26. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
27. Pay all sewer and water fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedule.
-
28. Consent to sign an agreement to pay all Public Safety fees (police and
fire) per Resolution No. 83-87.
29. AGREE TO ENTER INTO AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR SAN JACINTO RIVER BRIDGE.
6. Industrial Project 84-3 - Barry Silver - Staff presented proposal to expand an
existing mini-storage facility by approximately 100 units, on 1.7 acres, located
approximately 20 feet northeast of the corner of Riverside Drive and Collier
Avenue.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if there were any concerns about structural or any
problems with it being safe? Mr. Corcoran stated that the real concern is the
way the area is developing.
Commissioner Saathoff stated, forgetting the metal shipping containers, if the
applicant wanted to expand his facilities, by 100 units, does he meet all the
requirements that would allow him to put in the 100 additional units? Mr.
Corcoran stated that this would be up to the Commission to review and determine.
Also, staff would tend to lean away from these types of facilities that do not
generate substantial income or employment opportunities within our City; to use
our industrial base or land designated for our industrial base for these types
of facilities; we would be more inclined to go with job creation, employment
mul ti pl ers those types of uses.
-
Commissioner Washburn stated that he concurs with staff. The basis of the
General Plan and the Redevelopment Area is trying to initiate manufacturing
employment. This is a key corner location, and I think it would signal ,basically,
that we are not pressing for the goals and objectives of the General Plan. If
it were in another more subdue location rather than a high traffic count location,
because of what we are trying to generate in that area per General Plan and the
Redevelopment Agency's request for positive development manufacturing jobs--this
will not generate jobs.
Commissioner Mellinger stated that he wanted to make sure that this is part of
the Redevelopment Plan policy, objectives or goals for that area, and stated
that he would not deny it as a use, as it is a permitted use in the district
now, what part of the Redevelopment Plan does not include--is there any industrial
districts or areas. Commissioner Mellinger was informed that there are not any
districts or areas. Commissioner Mellinger then stated that he finds it shouldn't
even be in the zoning ordinance if that is the case; if we are going to deny
these on that basis then it shouldn't be in the zoning ordinance because, there-
fore, it is inconsistent with the Redevelopment Plan--we have a catch 22. Mr.
Corcoran stated that there are some uses that provide employment opportunities
that incorporate storage; there are other manufacturing uses that have a certain
amount of storage also. Commissioner Mellinger asked what other districts do we
allow mini-storage? Mr. Corcoran stated under Commercial Park with a Conditional
Exception Permit. Commissioner Mellinger asked none other by use or Conditional
Use Permit. Mr. Corcoran answered in the negative. Commissioner Mellinger
stated that he thought the issue here was design, and if the Redevelopment Plan
states that then there shoula be at least some area where this can be obtained
without a Conditional Exception Permit, because a Conditional Exception Permit
in this case would be a use variance which wouldn't be legal.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he thinks the issue falls back on the Redevelop-
ment Area with the guidelines of the policy; trying to generate types of manu-
-
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 13
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-3 - BARRY SILVER CONTINUED
-
facturing job generation that manufacturing firms will provide. Commissioner
Mellinger asked should such a policy totally preclude such a use out of the
City, because right now the only way you can do it is with a Conditional
Exception Permit. Commissioner Washburn stated that any item that comes
forward in the industrial area always goes before the Redevelopment Agency,
we are catching it now.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to deny Industrial Project 84-3, second by
Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 3-2 (Commissioners Saathoff and Mellinger opposed)
Mr. Meyer, representing the applicant, spoke briefly on the project, express-
ing his views on its aesthetic appearance.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran stated that first he would like to give a brief report on Inter-Agency
coordination meeting which was held on November 5, 1984, in the City Council Chambers,
between Riverside County Planning Department staff and City staff. Conversation
centered on how County and City could improve its lines of communication. Planning
staff proposed three topics for discussion that could be better handled with support
from the County. One being, controlling development along the Ortega Highway and the
other scenic view sheds; second item being, coordi"nating a bike way system along the
lake perimeter; and thirdly, bring County Zoning within the City's Sphere of Influence
in line with City's General Plan Land Use Designation. The meeting was informative
and hopefully marks a new spirit of cooperation between the two agencies.
-
Also, I would like to bring to your attention a Code of Ethics that has been handed
down through City Council, I believe a copy was deposited in each of the Planning
Commissioner's mail boxes, for your review.
Loren Culp stated that he would like to express, on behalf of the City, a thanks to
the Boy Scouts, McDonalds, Vons and Stater Brothers for participating in another, the
second of four, clean-ups along Lakeshore. I would also like to thank the Sun Tribune
for coverage in the paper for the Boy Scout clean-up. We got quite a bit accomplished.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank those sponsors.
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
-
Commissioner Barnhart - Would like to thank Mark Colemen. Last Saturday, we had a
IIwork partyll out at the Community Park and Mark got the City truck for us. We had
a good work party, we didn't get as many people as we wanted to but we will be doing
it again and will be looking for more help.
Commissioner Washburn - Received a complaint (it was left in my mail box) it is a
complaint of the trashy condition found at the intersection of Mission Trail and
Malaga. When you turn to go up to the Sahara Dunes, you immediately look to your
left on Malaga and you will see tires building up and we've had tires just removed
locally from another spot and all of a sudden they are appearing at this location,
even though they are not related, it is used as a storage yard; it's unsightly and
the neigl'ibors, which are in the County, have submitted this official complaint to
the City. I just wanted to bring it up at the table because it really does look
pretty trashy. Chairman Dominguez asked if they weren't under a Conditional Use
Permit there? Commissioner Washburn stated no, that is long since old, they moved
away-- it was Wright's Towing and they don't use the facility anymore.
A local resident asked me if we have an off road vehicle ordinance. Mr. Corcoran
stated that we do. Commissioner Washburn stated that the resident's concern were in
the eastern part of the flat lake botton in which the 25 ATC rolled off a l5-wheel
vehicle, he is worried about the geese and water fowl in that area. If we have that
ordinance it might be dusted off. Mr. Corcoran stated that we do have an off road
vehicle ordinance and we have been enforcing it, starting to patrol that area
regularly, it started last week. The problem that we have been experiencing is that
the ATCs and motorcycl es can el ude our Code Enforcement patrol car. What we are
looking at now is installing a PA system to at least notify these people that it is
illegal and hoping that they will stop so we can issue a citation. Commissioner
Washburn stated that he thinks we can control the people in the parks through
identification and things like that; the so called outlaws that get out there we
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 6, 1984
Page 14
PLANNING COMMISSIONERS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
could control through the loud speaker system and maybe a motorcycle.
I am submitting to staff a copy of a complaint received on the assembly of auto-
mobiles, trucks, assorted equipment parked along Third Street off of Collier. I
have noticed quite alot of heavy equipment being parked there for several weeks.
I consider this an eyesore to the City and they should be cited and forced to be
removed.
Commissioner Mellinger - Just a note on that off road vehicle ordinance. We had ___
a complaint a while back and the Sheriff did respond, and in this area they are not
legal anywhere; public streets, off road anywhere and the officer indicated that he
had, in one weekend, issued 42 citations. There are alot of people who do believe,
even if you are not in the City Limits, that they are legal and they aren1t.
Another technicality, I noticed the other day, this zone change we had tonight in
the minutes the entire staff report with the recommendation has to be included in
the minutes, because it is over 10 acres. I happened to be reading our Planning
Commission Handbook the other day and that is in there. I did look it up and its
actually in the State Law.
Commissioner Saathoff - I have a question about the property that is lakeshore pro-
perty easterly of the park, the City Park and the Village and so forth, between
Main Street and Iowa where we have the new ordinance; people have been putting up
fences and this type of thing to attempt to keep people away from the lakeshore area,
and I am wondering if the property owners easterly of the City Park have been ap-
proached to cooperate along that same way? Commissioner Washburn asked if you mean
to continue that ordinance around the lake? Commissioner Saathoff stated that he
thinks the intent is to continue it around the lake, but in the interim if the
people were asked to cooperate with the City it would eliminate alot of the off-
street vehicles over in the flats and alot of people camping and staying overnight
and this type of thing, in fact, what has happened it shifted; alot has shifted
from that area over to easterly-- I was just wondering if the property owners have
been approached, by letter or whatever. I think they should be asked if they would -
cooperate in keeping trespassers off that property. Mr. Corcoran stated that we are
starting our Code Enforcement again on the weekends, starting this weekend. We will
have one Code Enforcement Officer out Saturday and Sunday to eliminate that problem
of shifting. It is illegal for them to drive to the lake across that part of the
property. Under the off road vehicle code and also under the trespassing ordinance
that the City Attorney is currently working on, there will be considerably more teeth
put into that.
Chairman Dominguez - None, Commissioner Saathoff addressed the fences. I was concern-
ed with the fences that are coming up now. Mr. Corcoran stated that any fence that
comes up after the 9th, in that area, will have to go before the Design Review Board
for approval according to the Lakeshore Overlay Ordinance.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
....
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
6TH
DAY
OF
NOVEMBER
1984
MI NUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of October 16, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 16780 Hunt Street - William S. Buck - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residence on two (2) lots, .22:!: acres,
located approximately 100 feet east of the corner of Hague Street and Hunt
Street.
Discussion was held on the existing Eucalyptus trees; Commissioner Washburn
recommended that the following verbiage "that the street trees remain if at all
possible" be added as a condition; condition number 7, indicate vegetation
control along Hunt enbankment.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 16780
Hunt Street with staff recommendations amending condition number 6, by adding
the following verbiage "street trees shall remain if feasibility of such is
demonstrated by Planning staff, and if existing street trees are removed they
are to be replaced with similar trees and placement of trees subject to ap-
proval from Planning staff (15 gallon tree) with a minimum of 30 feet apart;
amendi ng condition number 7, by addi ng the words "Hunt Street", second by Com-
missioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans. Any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Landscaping/irrigation plans shall be approved by the Planning Division.
4. All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler systems.
5. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way.
6. STREET TREES SHALL REMAIN IF FEASIBILITY OF SUCH IS DEMONSTRATED BY
PLANNING STAFF, AND IF EXISTING STREET TREES ARE REMOVED THEY ARE TO BE
REPLACED WITH SIMILAR TREES AND PLACEMENT OF TREES SUBJECT TO APPROVAL
FROM PLANNING STAFF (15 GALLON TREES). Street trees shall be planted a
minimum of 30 feet apart.
7. Applicant shall provide erosion control vegetation along HUNT STREET
enbankment to be approved by Planning Division.
2. Single-Family Residence - 1409 West Sumner - Gerald and Teresa Cherveny - Staff
presented proposal to construct a manufactured house (1,400 square feet), on
.1S:!: acres, located 50 feet northeasterly of Townsend Street and Sumner Avenue.
Discussion was held on whether this meets all the USC Codes and Ordinances;
being placed on a slab or foundation; landscaping and roof pitch.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 1409
West Sumner Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
Minutes of Design Review Board
November 6, 1984
Page 2
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 1409 WEST SUMNER AVENUE - GERALD & TERESA CHERVENY CONTINUED
3. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant trees at 3D-foot intervals outside of public
right-of-way, to be approved by Planning Division.
5. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
6. Landscaping/irrigation plan shall be part of the residence concept so
that a design theme is established that will provide sufficient
vegeta tion around the entire perimeter of the manufactured res i dence.
7. Landscaping beyond immediate planter perimeter surrounding unit shall
be placed at locations on subject site so that vegetation conveys
positive visual impact associated with public views, and will be sub-
ject to approval by Planning Division.
8. Applicant shall incorporate earthtone hues within the building
elevational designs for the purpose of conforming to existing neigh-
borhood character and environmental parameters.
-
9. Applicant is to provide masonry veneer building material within design
so as to be utilized along entire lower perimeter of proposed building
elevations.
3. Commercial Project 84-11 - Taco Bell - Staff presented proposal to construct a
Taco Bell fast food restaurant with drive through facility on .66r acres,
located northeasterly of the intersection of Railroad Canyon Road and Mission
Tra il .
Discussion was held on height of sign (no problem with sign provided it is at
least 8 feet above grade) and height of building; moving the fifteen foot sign
to Casino Drive and having a monument sign on Mission Trail; getting rid of
the freestanding sign and asking for a monument sign at the entrance; square
footage of sign; scratch the leach field on the plot plan; pumping station,
where ever they locate it, to be out of the through traffic on that site and
left to the discression of the City Engineer; condition number 6, regarding
roof mounted equipment to be totally screened (360 degrees); loading and un-
loading area on site; parking; landscaping; providing customized theme inside
pertaining to Lake Elsinore; playground; and condition number 3, regarding the
landscaping and irrigation plan being submitted to the Design Review Board for
approva 1 .
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 84-11 with staff
recommendations amending condition number 3, landscaping/irrigation plan to
be approved by Design Review Board; amending condition number 6, all roof mount-
ed interpretation is 360 degree; the sign as stated on the plan shall be 15 feet
in height with 8 feet of clearance from grade; adding condition number 11, which
will read "Placement of the pumping station for the holding tank shall be sub-
ject to City Engineer approva"', second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
1. Applicant is to provide no more than one freestanding sign along Mission
Trail that is restricted to a height of fifteen (15) feet. THE SIGN AS
STATED ON THE PLANS SHALL BE 15 FEET IN HEIGHT WITH 8 FEET OF CLEARANCE
FROM GRADE.
-
2. Applicant is to provide permanent and automatic sprinkler system for
planting areas.
3. Applicant 1.s to proyi de 1 andscapi ng/irri gation pl an subject to the ap-
proval of the DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
4. All planting areas shall be separated with a six (6) inch concrete
curb enclosure.
5. All trash areas and storage should be screened and approved by Planning
Division.
Minutes of Design Review Board
November 6, 1984
Page 3
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-11 - TACO BELL CONTINUED
6. All roof mounted (360 DEGREES) or ground support equipment incidental
to the development shall be architecturally screened so that they are
not visible from neighboring property or public streets.
7. All signs are to be approved by the Planning Division prior to the
- issuance of a permit.
8. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
9. All on-site lighting shall be effectively screened to prevent the
emission of glare onto adjacent properties and streets.
10. Applicant shall provide street trees outside of the public right-of-way,
to be approved by Engineering and Planning Departments.
11. PLACEMENT OF THE PUMPING STATION FOR THE HOLDING TANK SHALL BE SUBJECT
TO CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL.
4. Industrial Project 84-3 - Barry Silver - Staff presented proposal to expand an
existing mini-storage facility by approximately 100 units on 1.7 acres, located
approximately 20 feet northeast of the corner of Riverside Drive and Collier
Avenue.
-
Applicant proposed to use pre-fabricated shipping containers as the basic
structural component of the proposed mini-storage facility. The individual
containers are 8 feet high, 8 feet wide and either 20 or 40 feet in length.
They are white with brown doors and constructed entirely of metal paneling.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to deny Industrial Project 84-3, second by
Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:06 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Approved,
A;/ff"i/
Fred DO~
Chairman
.......
-
:e=s~
Linda Grindstaff ~
Planning Commission
Secretary
For official record the City Clerk's Office saved audio cassettes for the following
Planning Commission meetings:
September 11, 1980
September 6, 1984
September 12, 1984
October 3, 1984
October 25, 1984
November 7, 1984
November 13, 1984
February 20, 1985
March 3, 1986
May 29, 1986
June 12, 1986
V rginia J.(Warn, "V Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Fa,bl�,It &wIlL, . . Rollo Lei
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
20TH
DAY
OF
NOVEMBER
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Barnhart.
-
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of November 6, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. General Plan Amendment 84-11 - Railroad Canyon - A Joint Venture -
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused.
Staff presented proposal to amend the General Plan Lane Use Element for Daon
Specific Plan density from 2.0 dwelling units/acre to 3.0 dwelling units/acre
for 491 acres, located adjacent to Interstate Highway 15 and northerly of Rail-
road Canyon Road.
-
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-11.
Mr. Larry Buxton, of Courton and Associates, the Land Planner and Engineer for
the Canyon Creek project gave background presentation on the overall project.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
Discussion was held on density; filing of Specific Plan; requiring an Environ-
mental Impact Report and Physical Impact Report, staff stated that a Physical
Impact Report was not required; if there will be any Tentative Tract Maps pro-
cessed with the Specific Plan; how much acreage will be covered by Tentative
Tract Map and Steven's Kangaroo Rat, pertaining to habitat.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve General Plan Amendment 84-11, second
by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to adopt Resolution No. 84-12, entitled as
follows, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
-
RESOLUTION NO. 84-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION
OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-11.
Commissioner Washburn returned to the table.
2. General Plan Amendment 84-12 - Edward Lambert/William Maisel - Staff presented
proposal to amend the City's General Plan Land Use Element from the County
designation of Low Density Residential to the City's Land Use classification
of Limi ted Industrial for approximately 10. 79t acres, located wes terly of the
intersection of Dexter and Second Street. On October 19, 1984, the City Council
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 2
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-12 - EDWARD LAMBERT/WILLIAM MAISEL CONTINUED
approved intent to annex (Annexation No. 38), and the applicant is currently
processing Zone Change 84-9, Tentative Parcel Map 20518 and Commercial Pro-
ject 84-10 concurrently. Staff showed slides on the area of subject proposal.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:48 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-12.
Mr. William Maisel and Mr. Edward Lambert spoke in favor of this Amendment.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
Chairman called for discussion at the table. With no comments forthcoming,
Commissioner Washburn moved approval of General Plan Amendment 84-12, second
by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adopt Resolution No. 84-13, entitled as
follows, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
RESOLUTION NO. 84-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION
OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-12.
3. General Plan Amendment 84-13 - City of Lake Elsinore/Engineering Department _
City Engineer Culp presented proposal to amend the Circulation Element of the
General Plan by changing vehicular traffic corridor classifications and to
amend the Bikeway Plan as follows:
1. Bike Lanes
-
Figure CIR-l is revised to include additional bike lanes along
extension of Grand Avenue, on Lincoln Street, on Terra Cotta
Road, on Collier Avenue, on Baker Street, on Strickland Avenue,
and on Pottery Street. (See Exhi bit "B").
Also, Figure CIR-2 was revised to include the locations of the
bike 1 ane in the cross-section. (See Exhi bit "CII).
2. Collector Classification
The width is changed from 66-62 to provide a 7-foot parkway
for util iti es .
3. Graham Avenue:
From Lakeshore Drive to Main Street
Because of existing portions of improved roadway, it is pro-
posed to reduce width (100-76 to 80-64).
4. Collier Avenue: From Main Street to Nichols Road
It is proposed to increase right-of-way width 66 to 76-feet
to provide a 7-foot parkway for util ities. (66-62 to 76-62)
-
5. Baker Street:
From Riverside Drive to Nichols Road
It is proposed to increase right-of-way width from 66 to 76-
feet to provide a 7-foot parkway for utilities. C66-62 to 76-62)
6. Strickland Avenue: From Riverside Drive to Chaney Street
It is proposed to reduce the roadway width to provide an 11-
foot parkway. C66-62 to 66-44)
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 3
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-13 - CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE/ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED
7. Modified Collector Classification
-
Change this corridor classification from 66-62 to 66-44.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of General Plan Amendment 84-13. Receiving no response, the
Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition, Receiving no response,
the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:56 p.m."
Discussion was held on classification for Grand Avenue, Collier Avenue, Strick-
land Avenue and Resolution No. 84-14 correcting number 6, street width classi-
fication from 66-62 to 66-44.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve General Plan Amendment 84-13, second
by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to adopt Resolution No. 84-14, with correction
on number 6, street width classification from 66-62 to 66-44, entitled as
follows, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
RESOLUTION NO. 84-14
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION
OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 84-13.
4.
Zone Change 84-9 - Edward lambert/William Maisel - Staff presented proposal to
pre-zone 10.79~ acres, request filed for Annexation No. 38, changing County
Zoning of Industrial Park (IP) to M-l (light Manufacturing) Zoning District,
and County Zoning of Rural Residential to M-1 (Light Manufacturing), located
westerly of the intersection of Dexter Avenue and Second Street.
-
SUbject property was approved for intent to annex and commencement of proceed-
i ngs by the City Council on October 9, 1984 (Annexation No. 38). The City is
required to pre-zone annexed property. If the City does not pre-zone the land,
upon annexation, the land ceases to be zoned and has no use designation. (South
San Francisco v. Berry 1953 120 Cal. App. 2.d 252). The Sphere of Influence
designation on the General Plan land Use Map outlines areas identified for
possible future annexation into the City of Lake Elsinore.
Lake Elsinore Municipal Code provides for IIPre-zoningll areas prior to annexation.
Section 17.12.040 E of the Code states that IIterritory annexed to the City sub-
sequent to annexation to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this
Section shall be subject to the provisions of Section 65858 and 65859 of the
Government Code of the State. II
-
Section 65858 stated that lIa City may pre-zone unincorporated territory adjoining
City for the purpose of determining the zoning that will apply to such property
in the event of subsequent annexati on to the City. II The Government Code further
states that pre-zonings will follow the procedures established in the Code for
all zone changes and that pre-zoning shall become effective at the same time that
the annexation becomes effective.
Pre-annexation Zone Change 84-9 will provide a pre-zoning designation for lO.79r
acres. The current County Zoning is Industrial Park (Ip) and Rural Residential
(R-R), and the new proposed City Zoning is M-l (Light Manufacturing) Zoning
Di s tri ct.
Planning Division policy reflects a positive response to annexation requests and
feels the proponent's request is justified. The applicant has filed a General
Plan Amendment CG.P.A. 84-12) and Tentative Parcel Map in conjunction with Zone
Change 84-9.
The past County actions concerning subject site have been that of setting an
important precedent in relationship to the surrounding area. Generally, the
area-wide setting is that of Rural-Residential and sparsely populated, reflect-
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 4
ZONE CHANGE 84-9 - EDWARD LAMBERT/WILLIAM MAISEL CONTINUED
ing marginally utilized land. The General Plan outlines the area to the west
as General Commercial land use designation. This particular site was approved
through the County for two (2) industrial buildings with construction currently
under way. The applicant is proposing to expand this facility after the annexa-
tion takes effect. Identifiable benefits include employment opportunities, en-
large the City's economic base, and expand the Corporate City Limits.
Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 84-9 and issuance of a Negative
Declaration.
-
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:02 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Zone Change 84-9.
Mr. Edward Lambert and Mr. William Maisel spoke in favor of this Zone Change.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:04 p.m.
Chairman called for discussion at the table. With no comments forthcoming,
Commissioner Mellinger moved approval of Zone Change 84-9, second by Com-
missioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to issue a Negative Declaration on Zone Change
84-9, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
5. Tentative Parcel Map 20518 - Edward Lambert - Staff presented proposal to sub-
divide 2.7t acres into four (4) parcels, located westerly of the intersection
of Dexter Avenue and Second Street.
-
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Tentative Parcel Map 20518.
Mr. Edward Lambert, Mrs. Maria Maisel and Mr. William Maisel spoke in favor
of Tentative Parcel Map 20518.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor.
Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition.
the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:07 p.m.
Receiving no response,
Receiving no response,
Discussion was held on having recordation of reciprocal parking agreement on
each parcel added as a condition and condition number 10, pertaining to improve-
ments on Second Street.
Motion by Commissioner Mell inger to approve Tentative Parcel Map 20518 with staff
recommendations and adding condition number 28, which will read: "Applicant re-
cord reci procal parki ng agreement on each parcel II , second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Comply with all requirements of Subdivision Map Act and City Codes.
2.
Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
-
3. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
4. Verification of legal description by City Engineer~
5. Meet all requirements of County Fire Department.
6. Comply with all County Health Department requirements.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS AND DRAINAGE
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 5
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20518 - EDWARD LAMBERT CONTINUED
7. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance 572.
8. Dedicate 8-feet width of property across the Second Street frontage of
applicant's property to provide a 38-foot wide one-half street.
-
Improve Second Street to centerline to City and/or Riverside County
Standards. Existing paving can remain if tests show it can resist
traffic loads represented by ,the City Engineer's or County Road Com-
missioner's traffic index. Obtain permit from the Riverside County
Road Department for all work. Defer and obtain as condition of build-
ing permit.
10. Provide improvement plans by a Civil Engineer for street improvements
across total property frontage of appl i cant's property. Improvements
to include paving, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lighting,
drainage improvements, driveways, utilities and signing and striping.
As built street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are
required. Comply with City Code and Riverside County Standard Plans
and Specifications. Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
9.
11. The City shall have the discretion to approve location, number and
width of driveways and locations where no parking shall be allowed along
the curb line to provide visibility. Defer and obtain as condition of
building permit.
12. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer. Defer and
obtain as condition of building permit.
13.
Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
-
14. Provide Class II or equivalent bike lane as approved by the City
Engineer. Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
15. Submit site and grading plans to the Riverside County Flood Control
District for review and pay required fee. Comply with the Flood
Control District and/or City Engineer's requirements for flood control
and drainage including hold harmless and indemnification for the City
and on-site flood proofing. Provide hydraulogy study. Defer and
obtain as condition of building permit.
16. All grading shall conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Build-
ing Code, Chapter 70. Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
17. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommendations.
Provide final soils report showing compliance with the preliminary report
and finish grade certification. Defer and obtain as condition of build-
ing permit.
WATER
-
18. Comply with County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
19,. Dedicate water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its assignee.
20. Obtain will-serve letter and comply with Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District requirements for water service. Defer and obtain as a condition
of building permit.
SEWER
21. Comply with the requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore, Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District, County Health Department, and the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board for on-site sewage
disposal. Defer and obtain as a condition of building permit.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 6
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20518 - EDWARD LAMBERT CONTINUED
FINAL MAP
22. Identify and show geologic fault lines and areas subject to flood
hazard on final parcel map.
FEES
23.
Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572 and Resolution No.
77-39.
-
Street:
Park:
Storm Ora i nage:
$ .03 per square foot of lot area
$ .01 per square foot of lot area
$ .02 per square foot of lot area
Defer and obtain as a condition of building permit.
24. Volunteer to sign an agreement to pay a vehicular Safety Impact
Mitigation fee for traffic signalization of $2,000.00 Defer and
obtain as a condition of building permit.
25. Volunteer to sign an agreement to pay a Street Sweeping Mitigation
fee of $400.00. Defer and obtain as a condition of building permit.
26. Pay Public Safety fees required by Resolution No. 83-4 as follows:
Police:
Fi re:
$ .15 per square foot of gross floor area
$ .15 per square foot of gross floor area
27. Volunteer to sign an agreement to pay a Drainage Impact Mitigation
fee of $5,000.00. Defer and obtain as a condition of building permit.
28. APPLICANT RECORD RECIPROCAL PARKING AGREEMENT ON EACH PARCEL.
-
Commissioner Barnhart asked to be excused from the meeting as she has to
attend the Chamber of Commerce Installation.
BUS I NESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residences - 32148, 32150 Machado Street and 15081 Lincoln Street _
Sonny Davidson c/o Dane Hillyard - Staff presented proposal to construct three
(3) single-family residences on three (3) parcels of land, previously subdivided
through approved Tentative Parcel Map 19925. Proposed lots are .14I acres
(6,420 square feet), and are located on the southwest corner of Lincol nand
Machado Streets, and 68' and 120' southwest of the intersection of Lincoln and
Machado Streets. Staff showed slides on the area of subject proposals.
Discussion was held on on-site sump areas (construction of those areas); elevation
of pads (raised by 1 to 2 feet per approved parcel map); trees in right-of-way
remaining; heigbt of block wall; per approved parcel map height of block wall to
be 42 inches and of a design approved by City Engineer on the property line, and;
wheelchair ramp location and number required.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Single-Family Residences at 32148,
32150 Machado Street and 15081 Lincoln Street with staff recommendations and
adding condition number 9, which will read: "The sump areas be constructed so
that the retention of water is below surface", second by COlJlllissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
1. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
2. Applicant is to meet all setback requirements.
3. Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements, for fire
protection.
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 7
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES 32148,32150 MACHADO STREET AND 15081 LINCOLN STREET - SONNY
DAVIDSON C/O DANE HILLYARD CONTINUED
4. Applicant is to meet all County Health Department requirements.
5. Applicant is to meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
- 6. Approval of the three ()) Single-Family Residences is contingent upon
applicant recording Final Parcel Map 19925 (with the Engineering
Department) within one (1) year of their date of approval.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Applicant must comply with all conditions of approval for Tentative
Parcel Map No. 19925, approved by the Planning Commission on May 1,
1984 and the City Council on May 8, 1984.
8. The Final Parcel Map No. 19925 is being processed through the City
Engineer's Office for final approval to record. These proposed pro-
jects are subject to the final recordation of this parcel map and all
conditions associated with its recordation to create the three (3)
1 ega 1 pa rce 1 s .
9. THE SUt~P AREAS BE CONSTRUCTED SO THAT THE RETENTION OF WATER IS BELOW
SURFACE.
2. Commercial Project 84-10 - Edward Lambert - Staff stated that he had minor
revisions to this report. Proposal is for three (3) industrial buildings
instead of two, which will augment the two (2) buildings approved by River-
side County. Applicant proposes to place two (2) 9,000 square foot and one
(.1) 15,540 square foot commercial building on a three (3) acre parcel of
property abutting 1-15, and located westerly of the intersection of Dexter
Avenue and Second Street.
Discussion was held on proposal having adequate parking, and lighting to be
directed and/or shielded so as to prevent glare on adjacent properties.
Mr. lambert questioned condition number 9, pertaining to dedication of 8-feet,
and condition number 25, pertaining to the signalization fee. A lengthy dis-
cussion was held on these conditions.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 84-10 with staff
recommendations and adding to condition number 25, "if the applicant has paid
the County for si gnal i zation he shall not have to pay the City", second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
2.
- 3.
4.
5.
6.
7 .
1. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated on site
plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Division or Design Re-
view Board.
Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements.
Applicant is to meet all Riverside County Health Department requirements.
Applicant shall meet all project conditions prior to obtaining a
Certificate of Occupancy.
Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
Approval of project is contingent on approval of Zone Change 84-9,
General Plan Amendment 84-12 and ap.proval of Annexation No. 38.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS AND DRAINAGE
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 8
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-10 - EDWARD LAMBERT CONTINUED
8. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
~. Dedicate a-feet width of property across the Second Street frontage
of applicant's property to provide a 38..foot wide one-half street.
10.
Improve Second Street to centerline to City and/or Riverside County
Standards. Existing paving can remain if tests show it can resist
traffic loads represented by the City Engineer's or County Road
Commissioner's traffic index. Ootain permit from the Riverside
County Road Department for all work. Defer and obtain as condition
of building permit.
11. Provide improvement plans by a Civil Engineer for street improvements .
across total frontage of appl i cant's property. Improvements to i n-
elude paving, concrete curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lighting,
drainage improvements, driveways, utilities and signing and striping.
As built street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are
required. Comply with City Codes-and Riverside County Standard Plans
and Specifications. Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
-
12. The City shall have the discretion to approve location, number and
width of driveways and locations where no parking shall be allowed along
the curb line to provide visibility. Defer and obtain as condition of
bui 1 di ng permit.
13. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer. Defer and
obtain as condition of building permit.
14. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
15.
Provide Class II or equivalent bike lane as approved by the City
Engineer. Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
-
16. Submit site and grading plans to the Riverside County Flood Control
District for review and pay required fee. Comply with the Flood Control
District and/or City Engineer's requirements for flood control and
drainage including hold harmless and indemnification for the City and
on-site flood proofing. Provide hydraulogy study. Defer and obtain as
condition of building permit.
17. All grading shall conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70. Defer and obtain as condition of building
permit.
18. Provide soils and geology report including street design recommendations.
Provide final soils report showing compl iance with the preliminary report
and finish grade certification. Defer and obtain as condition of build-
i ng permit.
WATER
19. Comply wi th County Fi re Department requi rements for fi re protection.
Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
20.. Dedicate water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its assignees.
21.
Obtain will-serve letter and comply with Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District requirements for water service. Defer and obtain as a
condition of building permit.
-
SEWER
22. Comply with the requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore, Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District, County Health Department, and the
California Regional Water Quality Control Board for on-site sewage
disposal. Defer and obtain as a condition of building permit.
FINAL MAP
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 9
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-10 - EDWARD LAMBERT CONTINUED
23. Identify and show geologic fault lines and areas subject to flood
hazard on final parcel map.
-
FEES
24.
Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572 and Resolution
No. 77-39.
Street:
Pa rk:
Storm Drainage:
$ .03 per square foot of lot area
$ .01 per square foot of lot area
$ .02 per square foot of lot area
Defer and obtain as a condition of building permit.
25. Volunteer to sign an agreement to pay a Vehicular Safety Impact
Mitigation fee for traffic signalization of $2,000.00. Defer and
obtain as a condition of building permit. IF THE APPLICANT HAS PAID
THE COUNTY FOR SIGNALIZATION HE SHALL NOT HAVE TO PAY THE CITY.
26. Volunteer to sign an agreement to pay a Street Sweeping Mitigation
fee of $400.00. Defer and obtain as a condition of building permit.
27. Pay Public Safety fees required by Resolution No. 83-4 as follows:
Po 1 ice:
Fire:
$ .15 per square foot of gross floor area
$ .15 per square foot of gross floor area
28. Volunteer to sign an agreement to pay a Drainage Impact Mitigation
fee of $5,000.00. Defer and obtain as condition of building permit.
-
3. Industrial Project 84-4 - Charles Morris - Staff presented applicant's request
to have Industrial Project 84-4 continued to the meeting of December 4, 1984,
in order to work out design criteria for the proposed project.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Industrial Project 84-4 to the
meeting of December 4, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
4. Industrial Project 84-5 - Larry Hasty - Staff presented proposal to locate and
operate a Truss Manufacturing facility, at 29150 Riverside Drive, on 3.39t acres.
Applicant proposes to locate all three phases of the Truss Manufacturing process
out of doors. The three phases are: 1) wood cutting; 2) assembly, and; 3) storage
and transportation. The two (2) existing structures will be used for office and
storage space. Staff showed slides on the area of subject proposal.
Mr. Culp requested that conditions 9, 10,11,12,13, l4.a., 15, 16, 17, 24, 25,
and 30 be changed to discretionary conditions as these are applicable to Ordinance
572, and no building permit will be required for this proposal. Also, on condi-
tion number 30, would like to amend to read: IIProcess a lot merger, which is
applicable at building permit stagell. These conditions should also read IIDefered
until building permit stage; in the event a building permit or permit is required;
or a lien agreement in lieu of the construction of these improvements.
-
A lengthy discussion ensued on the above mentioned conditions being met prior to
occupying the site; deferred lien agreement for frontage along Riverside Drive;
permanent sanitary faci 1 i ti es and location; 1 i ghti ng to be di rected and/or shi el d-
ed so as to prevent glare on adjacent properties; adding condition that adequate
off-street parking, as determined by the Planning Division, shall be provided at
all times; drainage--share of cost for drainage mitigation between County and City,
and bow to determine applicant's share of cost; since it is a very sensitive piece
of property and sensitive with the City's involvement with justification of the
fees to help pay for flood control problem that this be continued, so that further
study can be done on the fee structure, Redevelopment guidelines; and Eucalyptus
trees rather than Oleander bushes be provided.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Industrial Project 84-5 to December
4, 1984, until which time this can be brought forward with research into the
Minutes of Planning Commission
November 20, 1984
Page 10
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-5 - LARRY HASTY CONTINUED
impact it would have on the Redevelopment Area and flood control charges that
the applicant may be charged with for said application, second by Commissioner
Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
5. Request to Annex - William Maisel - Staff presented applicant's request to
annex 8.23! acres into the City of Lake Elsinore, located westerly of the
intersection of Dexter Avenue and Second Street. The property is located ...
adjacent to Edward Lambert and has received recommendation for approval on
Zone Change 84-9 and General Plan Amendment 84-12.
A brief discussion was held on whether there were existing residences on the
site, and if so,then they would become non-conforming and could not be expand-
ed.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Request to Annex, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran stated that he had nothing to report.
Mr. Cu1p stated that they would be doing outflow channel reconstruction; one of the
contractors will be moving in this week. We anticipate the reconstruction to begin
the first of next week.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - None
...
Commissioner Mellinger - This is the second time in a row that we have had a problem
with the difference between Public Hearings and Business Items would ask that someone
go over that, perhaps staff. We have had confusion in the audience about Public Hear-
ings and Business Items, you may want to explain why there is a difference. Mr.
Corcoran expained the difference between a Public Hearing and a Business Item.
Commissioner Washburn - Question for the City Engineer, crosswalks for the City are
they scheduled to be painted shortly, because you have done the paving. The cross-
walk in front of the Methodist Church and a few other areas that is really hard to
see; there are a few of the people that need the crosswalks for identification. We
need to restripe with some paint other than K-Mart special. Mr. Cu1p stated that
they are presently soliciting for bids for street striping services within the City.
Commissioner Washburn asked if this would be a continuous service? Mr. Cu1p answered
in the affirmative.
Would like the Code Enforcement Officer look into the units, believes it is 122
Prospect, immediately behind the Ambassador Hotel for trashy conditions.
Cnairman Dominguez - For Engineering, at the intersection of Sumner and Main, south-
west corner, there is a big Oleander bush obstructing the view of the vehicles for
tra Hi c sa fety; it IS in the City's ri ght-o f-way.
Commissioner Barnhart - excused earlier in the meeting.
...
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
MI NUTES OF
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
20TH
OF
1984
DAY
NOVEMBER
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve minutes of November 6, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0
BUS I NESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residences - 32148, 32150 Machado Street and 15081 Lincoln Street -
Sonny Davidson c/o Dane Hillyard - Staff presented proposal to construct three
(3) single-family residences on three (3) parcels of land, lots are .14* acres
(6,420 square feet), located on the southwest corner of Lincoln and Machado
Streets and 681 and 120' southwest of the intersection of Lincoln and Machado
Streets.
Discussion was held on height of block wall and if it should be subject to
approval by the City Engineer; and no placement of satellite receiver disk be
in front yard; elevation and roof material.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Single-Family Residences at 32148,
32150 Machado Street and 15081 Lincoln Street with staff recommendations, second
by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
- 2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so they are not visible from neigh-
bori ng property or publ i c streets.
Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans. Any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
Landscaping/irrigation plans shall be approved by the Planning Division.
All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler systems.
Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way to
be approved by Planning Director.
Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart and shall be
a minimum of 15 gallons.
7. Wood shake shingles should not be used on any of the proposed structures.
2. Commercial Project 83-3 REVISED - Carl's Junior - Staff presented applicant's
request to have Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED continued to the meeting of
December 4, 1984, to allow the total project to be reviewed at the same time.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED to
the meeting of December 4, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
-
3. Commercial Project 84-10 - Edward Lambert - Staff presented proposal to add
three (3) industrial buildings; two (2) 9,000 square foot and one (1) 15,540
square foot commercial buildings on a three (3) acre parcel of property abutt-
ing 1-15, and located westerly of the intersection of Dexter Avenue and Second
Street.
A bri ef di scuss ion was he1 d on condition number 8, pertaining to street trees
and extended right-of-way.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Commercial Project 84-10 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0
1. Applicant is to provide a permanent and automatic sprinkler system for
Minutes of Design Review Board
November 20, 1984
Page 2
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 84-10 - EDWARD LAMBERT CONTINUED
all planting areas.
2. All planting areas shall be separated by a 611 - 811 concrete curb
enclosure.
3. All trash receptacles and storage areas shall be architecturally
screened.
4.
-
6. All signs are to be approved by the Planning Division prior to the
issuance of a permit.
7. On-site lighting shall be effectively shielded to prevent emission
of glare onto adjacent property and streets.
8. Applicant shall provide street trees, mimimum of 15 gallon, outside
the public right-of-way, minimum of 30 feet apart.
9. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
4.
Commercial Addition REVISED - Patricia Plaza - Steven Anthony - Staff presented
proposal to revise previously approved plans, for Patricia Plaza at 31361 River-
side Drive. The applicant desires to relocate his existing kitchen facility
(Ronls Sandwich Shop) and incorporate a new kitchen within the ground floor area
of the commercial addition; this area was previously approved as a video-game
room.
-
A brief discussion was held on video-game room area being converted to kitchen
area and not adding any seating capacity, and if additional parking would be
required.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Addition REVISED with
s-ta ff recommendations, second by Commiss ioner Mell i nger.
1. All items depicted on plot plan shall be provided as indicated on
said plot plan. Any changes will necessitate resubmittal .
2. All signs shall be in conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance
and be approved by the Planning Division.
3. Subject area never to be used as a separate business.
5. Industrial Project 84-4 - Charles Morris - Staff presented applicant's request
to have Industrial Project 84-4 continued to the meeting of December 4, 1984.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Industrial Project 84-4 to the
meeting of December 4, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:30 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Mellinger, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 4-0
...."
~~ly;k~A1w
Linda Grindstaff #
Pl anni ng Commi.s,s ion Secretary
AP:?~
~~uez,~~
Chairman
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
4TH
DAY
OF
DECEMBER
1984
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Mellinger.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve minutes of November 20, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Appro ved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.
Conditional Use Permit 84-11 - O.A. Childress - Staff presented proposal for
Conditional Use Permit 84-11 to allow Cas a De Moble to expand its facilities,
recreational vehicle park, by 36 spaces bringing the total number of on-site
RV spaces to 66, located approximately 400 feet southwest of the intersection
of Como Street and Corydon Road.
Mr. Corcoran requested that the following be added as condition number 35,
"All conditions shall be met prior to occupancy or usell, stating that when
this proposal was originally heard by the Commission on October 16, 1984,
it was requested that this be included as a condition.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:32 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-11.
-
Mr. Dwayne Frazier, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of Conditional
Use Permi t 84-11 .
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:33 p.m.
Discussion was held on definition of recreational vehicles pertaining to square
footage; condition number 21, regarding storm drainage sheet flow onto adjacent
property; condition number 31, regarding school fees, it was recommended that
verbiage be added in the agreement, if a student does enroll in the public
school system, at that time the applicant would be required to pay the applicable
school fees; condition number 1, regarding approval for three years with yearly
reviews; improvements being required; waste disposal at the site, whether it
should connect up with the sewer line or whether they should have a holding tank
but not the site disposal, and condition number 24, pertaining to sewer.
-
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-11 with staff
recommendations amending condition number 11, by adding the following verbiage
lIand Lake Elsinore High School Districtll; adding condition number 35, which will
read: IIAll conditions shall be met prior to occupancy or use"; amending condition
number 31, by addi ng the fo 11 owi ng verbi age II Recommend to Ci ty Council that con-
sideration of the school fees be considered under any agreement that is brought
forth as noted in condition number 1111.
Further discussion ensued on the school fees, pertaining to the manner, time and
amount in which they are to be paid.
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Approval shall be for a period of three (3) years, with yearly reviews.
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4, 1984
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-11 - O.A. CHILDRESS CONTINUED
2. Issuance of a Categorical Exemption.
3. Meet all County Health Department requirements.
4. Meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
5. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
6. All internal streets and alleys, beginning with the entrance to the
site, shall be paved with asphaltic concrete at least 2-1/2 inches
in thickness and shall be approved by the City Engineer. In addition,
a base shall be provided as required by the City Engineer.
--'
7. Streets shall be a minimum of 25' in width, with an additional 5' if
parking is allowed on one (1) side and 10' if parking is allowed on
both sides.
8. Applicant shall submit a landscaping and irrigation plan which will
show the proposed location of all ground cover, shrubbery and trees.
Plans shall be approved by the Planning Department.
9. All RV's shall have hitches and wheels intact when occupying applicant's
park.
10. No individual structures are to be constructed. However, accessory
structures for use by the park as a whole are allowed if above the
1270.' MSL mark.
11. Applicant must enter into a School Impact Mitigation Agreement with
the Lake Elsinore School District AND LAKE ELSINORE HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT.
12. Fees for the park to be collected on a week to week basis.
--
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
13. No addi tional ri ght-of-way dedication for Corydon Road across the frontage
of applicant's property is required. A 50-foot wide one-half street
complying with the General Plan requirement for a 100-foot major corridor
classification exists.
14. Concrete curb and gutter exists across the frontage of applicant's pro-
perty at the required distance of 38-feet from centerline. Paving exists
and will be accepted as conforming to City Standards.
15. Provide a left turn lane in Corydon Road, as approved by the City Engineer,
for improved traffic safety. This is subject to Riverside County approval.
16. Construct a 6-foot wide sidewalk across the total frontage of applicant's
property adjacent to the curb. Appl i cant can reques t deferral 0 f these
public improvements by lien agreement.
17. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
18. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance
District.
-
ORAl NAGE
19. Record a "Notice of lOO-Year Flood Hazard; Waiver of Liability Claims; and
Agreement to Noti fy Future Purchasers of Encumbrancers II .
20.. The lower portion of applicant1s property is within the 100-Year Flood
Plain or within the area of Special Flood Hazard. Applicant is advised
of Ordinance 603, Section 2.1 and Section 2.3-1; 1, 2, and 3.
2.1 ESTABLISHMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PERMIT:
..
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4, 1984
Page 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-11 - O.A. CHILDRESS CONTINUED
A Development Permit shall be obtained before construction
or development begins within any area of special flood
hazard established in Section 1.3. Application for a
Development Permit shall be made on forms furnished by the
Building Department.
-
2.3-1 PERMIT REVIEW
1. Review of all development permits to determine that the
permit requirements of this ordinance have been satisfied.
2. Review all permits to determine that the site is reason-
abl y sa fe from floodi ng.
3. Review all development permits to determine if the pro-
posed development adversely affects the flood carrying
capacity of the area of special flood hazard. For pur-
poses of this ordinance, lIadversely affectsll means that
the cumulative effect of the proposed development when
combined with all other existing and anticipated develop-
ment will not increase the water surface elevation of the
base flood more than one foot (1') at any point in the
City of Lake Elsinore Flood Plain.
21. A grading plan shall show that storm drainage sheet flows from the rear
of applicant's property onto adjacent property.
22. The development plan shall be submitted to the Flood Control District
for drainage recommendations. Applicant to pay required fee.
-
SEWERAGE
23. Sewage disposal service must be approved by the City Engineer, the
County Health Department, the Regional Water Quality Control Board and
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District.
24. Applicant shall sign an agreement with Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District for participation in the cost of regional collection, treatment
and disposal of sewage from the site. Future connection to public sewer
shall include a cleanout at the property line and applicant or Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District responsibility for maintenance of sewer
1 ate ra 1 s .
WATER
25. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee.
GRADI NG
26. Applicant is advised of Ordinance No. 711, Section 4:
SECTION FOUR:
No person, firm or corporation shall construct any additions,
alterations or repairs, nor conduct any rehabilitation or
restoration activities upon existing structures within the
City of Lake Elsinore with the foundation or basement lower
than the elevation of 1270' mean sea level within the peri-
meter streets of Lake Elsinore consisting of Grand Avenue,
Riverside Drive, Lakeshore Drive, Mission Trail and Corydon
Road, except as speCifically permitted by the City Council
on a case-by-case review.
27. Submit a grading plan by a Civil Engineer. Conform to Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70. Drainage shall be shown on this plan and conform to
the requirements of the City Engineer. Show watershed adjacent to the
site and how storm water flows from the total watershed area directed
to the lake, together with quantities of flow. Provide final grade
Minutes of Planning Commission
Decembe r 4, 1 984
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-11 - O.A. CHILDRESS CONTINUED
certification. Provide certificate of survey.
28. Provide Landcaping and Irrigation Plan to be reviewed by the City
Engineer, including street trees.
FEES
29. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fund fees per Ordinance No. 572.
30. Pay Public Safety fees (police and fire) as required by Resolution 83-87.
31. Pay requi~ed School fees. RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT CONSIDERATION
OF THE SCHOOL FEES BE CONSI DERED UNDER ANY AGREEMENT THAT IS BROUGHT
FORTH AS NOTED IN CONDITION NUMBER 11.
....,
32. Consent to sign an agreement to pay a Traffic Safety Mitigation fee in
the amount of $3,500 for future traffic signalization.
33. Consent to sign an agreement to pay a Drainage Impact Mitigation fee
in the amount of $4,000.
34. Consent to sign an agreement to pay a Street Sweeping Mitigation fee
in the amount of $500.
35. ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR USE.
2. Cancellation of Agricultural Preserve - Charl es Pease - Staff presented proposal
for diminishment from the West Elsinore Agricultural Preserve Number 1, in order
to develop subject site as Low Density Residential, approximately 115t acres
located westerly of the intersection of Mountain Street and Robb Road.
During the Fiscal Year 1983-'84, the County of Riverside initiated the original
proceedings concerning the Cancellation of West Elsinore Agricultural Preserve
No.1. The applicant expressed a desire to annex his property into the City of
Lake Elsinore, thereby causing the County to stop all Cancellation proceedings.
It is now the City's responsibility to initiate any further proceedings since
the land was officially approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO)
for annexation (Annexation No. 34) into the City of Lake Elsinore.
Pursuant to Assembly Bill 2074, an Alternative Land Use must be submitted in
conjunction with the application to cancel the land conservation contract. The
findings which must be made pursuant to Section 15282.1 are as follows:
1. That the cancellation and alternative use will not result in
discontiguous patterns of urban development;
...."
2. That the alternative use is consistent with the applicable
provisions of the City of Lake Elsinore's General Plan
which was adopted in December 1982, and was amended by
General Plan Amendment 84-4 to reflect the compatibility
with the prezoning, Zone Change 84-3, involving the annexa-
tion proceeding and submittal of Tract Map 18719 to the
City Planning Division.
For the purpose of this application, the "Alternative Land Use" is Tentative Tract
Map 18719 which was approved for 312 lots (lot size consisting of 7,200 square
feet), and a prezoning designation of R-l (0-6.0 d.u./acre).
..."
This proceeding represents what is called the Final Certificate of Cancellation.
The reason why staff is pursuing this avenue is that the applicant has met the
majority of conditions usually placed upon a Tentative Certificate of Cancellation
such as payment of fees and providing the alternative land use.
The aforementioned actions are necessary functions in all Agricultural Preserve
Cancellation proceedings that will effectively cancel the Agricultural Preserve
designation on Mr. Pease's property, and formally submit an Alternative Land Use
designation of R-l (0-6.0 d.u./acre) to the County Board of Supervisors who will
review and forward the entire application packet to the State Department of
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4, 1985
Page 5
CANCELLATION OF AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE - CHARLES PEASE CONTINUED
-
Agricul ture.
Staff recommends approval of Final Certificate of Cancellation of West Elsinore
Agricultural Preserve No.1.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Cancellation of Agricultural Preserve.
Mr. Bob Kipper, representing the applicant, spoke in favor of the Cancellation
of Agricultural Preserve.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:48 p.m.
Chairman asked for discussion at the table. There being no discussion at the
table, the Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Cancellation of Agricultural Preserve
No.1 on Mr. Pease1s property, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
3.
Title 17, Zoning Ordinance - Staff presented the completed version of Title 17,
Zoning Ordinance; with the adoption of this new ordinance, a substantial number
of properties within the City of Lake Elsinore will be in need of rezoning to
accommodate this new Zoning Ordinance, this process is expected to be completed
in fourteen months.
-
Staff recommended the following changes to Chapter 17.12:
Change title from "Planned Residential District" to "Planned District"
Section 17.12.020:
"Uses permitted in the PO Planned Residential
District shall be as follows:" changed to "Uses
permitted in the PO Planned District shall be
as follows:"
Section 17.12.020 A:
add the fo 1l0wi ng verbi age: "Two-family and
multiple-family dwellings, limited commercial
and light industrial uses provided existing
zoning allows such uses."
Chairman asked for discussion at the table.
Commissioner Saathoff recommended the following changes:
Section 17.02.330: Recreational Vehicles - change "300 square feeC
to "220 square feet" to conform wi th Ti tl e 25.
Section 17.08.060 F: Parking - after the words spaces per add the
wo rd II dwell i ngs" .
-
Section 17.21.020 A:
should read: "Wholesale businesses, maximum
25% incidental retail business"
Section 17.24.020 A:
shaul d read: "Manufacture and/or whol esal i ng,
maximum 25% incidental retail business"
"Wholesale businesses, maximum 25% incidental
retail business"
Section 17.50.010 0: after the word properties add the following
words IICommunity Design Element"
Section 17.50.050 B: after the word signs add the following words
II tha t projectll
Commissioner Washburn recommended the following changes:
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4, 1984
Page 6
TITLE 17, ZONING ORDINANCE CONTINUED
Section 17.15.030 C: add the word IIchemical"
Section 17.24.030 D: include the following lIauto storage yards,
auto dismantling yardsll
Section 17.24.060:
include clause lIindicating that all previously
subdivided M-1 lots which are legally existing
lots or recorded prior to the adoption and
effective date of this documentll
--
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Title 17, Zoning Ordinance with
corrections as mentioned and forward to City Council, second by Commissioner
Barnhart.
Appro ved 5-0
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Move-on Single-Family Residence - 30121 Palm Drive - Roger Grace - Staff pre-
sented proposal to move a single-family residence consisting of 935 square feet
with a 676 square foot detached garage, onto a lot .42f acres, located at 30121
Palm Drive. Staff showed slides on the area of subject proposal.
Commissioner Barnhart asked if the applicant was present and if there were
any problems with the conditions? Mr. Grace answered in the negative.
A brief discussion was held on condition number 26, regarding lot merger
requi rement .
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Move-on Single-Family Residence at
30121 Palm Drive with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
-
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All items depicted on plot plan shall be provided as indicated on the
site plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission and/or
Design Review Board.
2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
3. Meet County Fire Department requirements, for fire protection.
4. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater dis-
posa 1 .
5. Applicant is to meet all conditions of approval prior to the issuance
of Certificate of Use and Occupancy.
6. Applicant is to indicate on plot plan the specific location of paved
driveway approach to adequately service residential unit, to be ap-
proved by Planning Division. .
ENGINEERING DEPARTt1ENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
7. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
-
8. Dedicate 13-feet of right-of-way on Strickland Avenue per General Plan
Amendment 84-13.
9. Construct curb and gutter 22-feet from street centerline along total
property frontage on Strickland Avenue. Construct curb and gutter
18-feet from street centerline along total property frontage of
Mountain View Street.
10. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter along
total property frontage 0 f Stri ckl and Avenue and Mountain Vi ew Street.
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4, 1984
Page 7
MOVE-ON SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 30121 PALM DRIVE - ROGER GRACE CONTINUED
11. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built streets,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
- 12. Pub1 i c improvements are to conform wi th City Code requi rements and
City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
13. a}_ Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer, if
required.
b} Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Land-
scaping Maintenance District.
NOTE: Staff recommends that condition numbers 9, 10, 11, and 13.a.
be deferred by standard lien agreement due to existence of no
street improvements in the area.
GRADING
14. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
15. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Provide
final grade certification of pad elevation per approved grading plan
and final compaction report to City Engineer for approval.
-
16. Provide Grading Plan, Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of construction
slopes and with the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
17. Applicant's property lies within a low flow area. Applicant's Engineer
to provide the City Engineer with hydrology study to identify the total
tributary areas and flows using Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District manual. The Grading Plan shall incorporate any
mitigating measures needed for approval by the City Engineer.
18. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by the
City Engineer, including street tree locations.
SEWER
19. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal.
WATER
20. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water availability from Elsinore
Water District.
21. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake E1s~nore or its
assignees.
- 22.
FEES
23.
24.
25.
26.
Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire pro-
tection, including hydrant installation and up-sizing, if required.
Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's.
schedule, if required.
Pay all School fees.
Appl icant to process a lot merger for the three (3) lots.
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4. 1984
Page a
2. Residential Project 84-9 - Harold Kempe/Dane Hillyard - Staff presented proposal
to construct an aO-unit apartment complex on 3.53I acres. located approximately
900 feet southwesterly of the intersection of Lincoln Street and Riverside Drive.
In review of subject proposal. staff has identified serious concerns that have
been determined to adversely affect project integrity to the extent that both
aesthetic quality and personal well-being are jeopardized.
Staff is recommending that the proposed density of subject property be reduced
to 18 dwelling units per acre and that the proposal be revised to reflect an ..-
internal circulation system that will not create potential safety problems for
pedestrians and motorists.
At this time, the Chairman asked if there was any written communications. The
Planning Commission Secretary stated that a letter was received from Dr. Larry
A. Koeneke, Dr. Catherine L. Wilkerson and Mr. Robert Mc Donald stating opposition
to Residential Project 84-9.
Commissioner Barnhart stated that she received a letter from Fr. Williams stating
concern on Residential Project 84-9.
Chairman Dominguez stated that the Commission has received a letter from the
applicant addressing the concerns identified by staff.
Mr. Hillyard expressed his views on various aspects of this proposal.
Discussion was held on design of project, with the number of units it could be
conducive to 50-80 children, and there is inadequate green space for that number
of children; health and safety for residents; parking; access and turn around
space for fire trucks; density; condition number 11, pertaining to on-street
parking on Lincoln Street being prohibited; traffic that will be generated on
Lincoln Street; eliminating RV stalls at the rear to provide for open space;
applying CC & R's to resolve some of the concerns; existing Walnut trees being
removed; location of trash areas, and; providing a fence or barricade to protect ~
the open space.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to Deny without Prejudice Residential Project
84-9, for reasons of the design; basically the circulation design for health
and safety reasons, second by Commissioner Saathoff with discussion.
Commissioner Saathoff requested that it be included in the motion, that the Fire
Department be shown and approve plot plan. Chairman Dominguez asked staff if
this was not already procedure. Mr. Corcoran answered in the affirmative.
Approved 5-0
3. Industrial Project 84-4 - Charles Morris - Staff presented proposal to construct
a 5,525 square foot office building and place a 2,535 square foot metal structure
for the purpose of storing construction materials on 2t acres, located at 29400
Industrial Center Way. Staff showed slides on the area of subject proposal.
Chairman Dominguez asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he had
any problems with the conditions? Mr. Morris stated that he was .in agreement
with the conditions.
A brief discussion was held on increased surface run-off with a meaSUre to be taken
to protect adjacent property owners when reviewing the grading plan.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Industrial Project 84-4 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
~
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Finding of no significant impact.
2. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
3. All items depicted on the site plan shall be provided as indicated on the
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4, 1984
Page 9
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-4 - CHARLES MORRIS CONTINUED
site plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission/Design
Review Board's conditions.
-
4. Meet all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
5. Applicant shall meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
6. Meet all County Health Department requirements.
7. Applicant shall relocate handicap stall on site plan to southwest area
of parking facility (perpendicular to proposed building), to be ap-
proved by Planning Division.
8. Recordation of City Council/Redevelopment Agency CC & R's prior to
transfer of plans to the City's Building Division.
9. Meet all County Fire Department requirements, for fire protection.
10. Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division a document that verifies
Riverside County Health Department approval for wastewater disposal
system, i.e., written clearance.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
11. All street improvements are to be installed per approved plans on file
in the City Engineer's Office.
-
GRADING
12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70. Provide grading plan prepared by a registered Civil
Engi neer for Ci ty approval.
13. Provide soils report, grade certification of final pad elevation and
final compaction report to City Engineer for acceptance and approval.
14. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed by the City Engineer,
including street trees.
15. Comply with the requirements of the City Engineer for drainage on-site.
SEWER
16. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board for
subsurface sewer disposal.
WATER
17. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water service from.Elsinore Valley
Municipal Water District.
-
18. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire pro-
tection to include fire hydrant locations and size.
FEES
19. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572.
20. Pay all sewer and water fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedule.
4. Industrial Project 84-5 - Larry Hasty - Staff presented applicant's request to
have Industrial Project 84-5 continued to the meeting of December 18, 1984, in
order to resolve certain issues of mutual concern.
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 4, 1984
Pa ge 10
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-5 - LARRY HASTY CONTINUED
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Industrial Project 84-5 to the
meeting of December 18, 1984, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Appro ved 5-0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran stated that he had nothing to report, except that he is happy that Title
17 has finally reached this Honorable Body, and hoping to proceed on it and start the
rezonings in the early part of next year.
Mr. Culp stated that we have an active street striping program under way. Main Street
centerline striping and turn pockets completed thus far; have additional striping
which will be done the remainder of this week on Main Street, which will be the legends,
advance street markings, turn pocket arrows things of that nature. We are also working
on Lakeshore Drive, providing all of the street striping out there; the street striping
will be completed very soon on Lakeshore Drive from Mountain all the way out to San
Jacinto River. Additional projects which are on the line for street striping are:
Railroad Canyon Road and some of the major corridors within the City. Also, on the
outflow channel, would like to report that we are slightly behind schedule. It is
taking the contractors a 1 ittle longer than we had anticipated to perform the work we
have specified in their contracts. We have one contractor who has not made it to the
site, he has reported equipment problems; he has also reported that he will be on site
this Friday, December 7th, that would be for the second project area -- this is the
area from Pottery Street out to Chaney. We anticipate him to be completed within 10-14
working days.
...,
Commissioner Washburn asked about the paving of the parking lot. Mr. Culp stated that
they are doing the design on Sulphur Street, Spring Street and that will be a part of
that design.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Barnhart - Question for the City Engineer. When did you move the stop
sign from Poe Street to Lindsay Street, request that you inform the Commissioners of
future placement or movement of stop signs. Mr. Culp stated that they would be sure
to send the Commissioners a copy of the Resolutions.
....,.
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Mellinger - During the Business Items,
hearings, that if there is a recommendation or even
ance that the applicant does get a chance to speak.
practi ce.
even though they are not public
a possibility of denial or continu-
I think it should be a common
In the rezonings, I think one of the priorities should be to look at our Specific Plan
Designations in the General Plan, and take a look at those and probably just zone those
Specific Plan Zoning since we have that classification. Those larger areas will prob-
ably have a larger impact on the way the City develops than probably anywhere else, so
if it is clear that a Specific Plan will be required and it definately is if it is
classified, in that way, I think it will be easier for the developer to know what they
are getting into.
Commissioner Washburn - Seeing as the Planning Commission has worked many hours with
staff on the new Title 17, it would be my recommendation that the next normal schedulec
joint study session be with City Council, ourselves and staff to go over some of the
changes made or field questions that they may have. It could be a select one or two
and the Chairman, so they thoroughly understand why we made some of the changes. ~
Chairman Dominguez - None
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Commissioner
Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
4TH
DAY
OF
DECEMBER
1984
MI NUTE ACTION
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of November 20, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Appro ved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Move-on Single-Family Residence - 30121 Palm Drive - Roger Grace - Staff pre-
sented proposal to move a single-family residence, consisting of 935 square feet
wi th a 676 square foot detached garage, onto a lot .42!" acres, located at 30121
Pa 1 m Dri ve .
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Applicant was not present.
Chairman then asked for discussion at the table.
A brief discussion was held on existing landscaping and if landscaping would be
required in the front yard.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Move-on Single-Family Residence at
30121 Palm Drive with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevational plan shall remain unchanged as depicted in said
plans, any proposed modifications will require resubmittal to the Design
Review Board.
3. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant street trees outside of public right-of-way, to
be approved by Planning Division.
5. Street trees shall be planted a maximum of 30-feet apart.
6. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting areas.
7. Applicant shall submit landscaping/irrigation plan to be reviewed and ap-
proved by Planning Division.
2. Residential Project 84-9 - Harold Kempe/Dane Hillyard - Staff presented proposal
to construct an 80-unit apartment complex on 3.53~ acres, located approximately
900 feet southwesterly of the intersection of Lincoln Street and Riverside Drive.
Proposal consists of eleven building divisions to include: eight, one bedroom unit~,
with two units designed for handicap utilization (565 square feet, 632 square feet);
forty-ei ght, two bedroom units (840 square feet); twenty-four, three bedroom units
(J ,183 square feet).
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to Deny without Prejudice Residential Project 84-9,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
3. Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED - Carl's Junior - Staff presented applicant1s re-
quest to have Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED continued to the meeting of December
18, 1984, due to the fact that a second phase of that project is scheduled as a
business item on that date.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED to the
meeting of December 18, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Design Review Board
December 4, 1984
Page 2
4. Industrial Project 84-4 - Charles Morris - Staff presented proposal to construct
a 5,525 square foot office building and place a 2,535 square foot metal structure
for the purpose of storing construction materials on 2:1- acres, located at 29400
Industrial Center Way.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he had any problems
with the conditions. Mr. Morris stated that he was in agreement with the condi-
ti 0 ns .
Discussion was held on roof material to be used, it was suggested that an alter-
native Class "A" roofing material be used for reasons of fire protection.
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Industrial Project 84-4 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-1 (Commissioner Mellinger opposed).
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All roof mounted equipment, ground support equipment, shall be provided
with 360 degree screening from public view, and subject to approval
from the Planning Division.
2. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler systems.
3. Applicant shall provide a landscaping and decorative block wall plan for
subject site, to be approved by Planning Division.
4. The applicant is to provide safety and security lighting for the entire
site and shall be shielded from adjacent streets and properties so as
not to create a hazard or nuisance.
5. Storage yard area not designated on site plan to receive paving, treat-
ment shall utilize D.G. composition to provide for dust control.
6. If applicable, applicant shall provide trash enclosure on-site and shall
be screened from public view.
....",
7. The appl icant is to incorporate earth tone hues for the exterior design
of the metal building being placed on the site.
8. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six inch
L6" 1 hi gh concrete curb.
9. All signs shall be approved by the Planning Division, prior to the
issuance of a sign permit.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:Q8 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
Approved, .
~~~
Chairman
.....
....",
;;:;:: ly;x.:ed.
Linda Grindstaff ~
Planning Commission
Secreta ry
MI NUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON THE
18TH
DAY
OF
DE CEMBE R
1984
-
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Saathoff.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Cu1p,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of December 4, 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1 . Conditional Use Permit 84-9 - A1 Hertz
Commissioner Washburn stated that he has had communications with the Engineer
and he has asked verbia11y, with communications to be sent, for an extension
of this Conditional Use Permit. The Focused Environmental Impact Report is
yet incomplete, it will require approximately five weeks to complete, therefore
I would recommend that we continue this item for six weeks.
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Conditional Use Permit 84-9 for six
weeks, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Appro ved 5-0
2.
Conditional Use Permit 84-12 - Dave Vosburgh/California Property Exchange - Staff
presented proposal for Conditional Use Permit to allow the use of a trailer as a
temporary Real Estate Sales and Construction office (trailer to be placed on the
site of proposed Commercial Project 83-11), located approximately 300 feet north
of 1-15 and Railroad Canyon Road.
Mr. Cu1p stated that the Engineering Department wished to change condition number
7, to read: "All conditions of approval for Commercial Project 83-11 approved on
December 10,1983 shall prevaillt, and add a condition "That the applicant .consent
to participate in an assessment district for the San Jacinto River Bridge'~.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m., asking if anyone wished to speak
in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-12.
Mr. Dave Vosburgh spoke in favor of Condi tiona 1 Use Permi t 84-12, and ques tioned
the added condition to participate in an assessment district for the San Jacinto
Bridge.
-
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:38 p.m.
Discussion was held on the temporary trailer, regarding the type and age; ap-
plicant participation in the assessment district for the San Jacinto Bridge;
elevation of sales office coming back to Design Review Board for approval; time
limit, and; when engineering conditions would have to be completed, referencing
the conditions placed on Commercial Project 83-11.
Discussion ensued on participation in an assessment district being added as a
condition but not without a dollar figure being provided by the time this project
is heard by City Council.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-12 with staff
recommendations, amending condition number 7, to read: ItAll conditions of approval
for Commercial Project 83-11 approved on December 10, 1983 shall prevaillt; adding
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 18, 1984
Page 2 .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-12 - DAVE VOSBURGH/CALIFORNIA PROPERTY EXCHANGE CONTINUED
condition number 8, which will read: "Applicant shall participate in an assess-
ment di s tri ct for the cons truction of the La keshore Dri ve San Jaci nto Bri dge,
providing a ceiling dollar amount can be established prior to the City Council
a~pra i sa 1 of the project; ~ddi ng condition number 9, whi ch wi 11 read: IIA11 condi-
tlons stated under Commerclal Project 83-11, under BUSINESS ITEMS on December
20, 1983 be included at the building stage, and; adding condition number 10,
which will read: "Prior to the placement of the temporary trailer, elevations
and a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for ap-
proval, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Appro ved 5-0
.....,
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Approval shall be for a period of one (1) year.
2. Issuance of a Categorical Exemption.
3. Trailers are to be fully skirted.
4. Meet County Health Department requfrements.
5. Meet County Fi re Department requi rementson the number 0 f fi re
extinguishers needed.
6. If approved, trailer shall be removed from site when Building Depart-
ment finals Commercial Project 83-11.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. All conditions of approval for COMMERICAL PROJECT 83-11 APPROVED ON
DECEMBER 10, 1983 SHALL PREVAIL.
8. APPLICANT SHALL PARTICIPATE IN AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF THE LAKESHORE DRIVE SAN JACINTO BRIDGE, PROVIDING A CEILING DOLLAR
AMOUNT CAN BE ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPRAISAL OF THE PRO-
JECT.
9. ALL CONDITIONS STATED UNDER COMMERCIAL PROJECT 83-11, UNDER BUSINESS ITEMS
ON DECEMBER 20, 1983 BE INCLUDED AT THE BUILDING STAGE.
10. PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE TEMPORARY TRAILER, ELEVATIONS AND A LAND-
SCAPING PLAN SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
....."
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED - Howard Palmer/Carl's Jr. - Staff presented pro-
posal to construct one building containing four (4) commercial retail businesses
consisting of 2,400;2,290; 3,280 and 2,800 square feet respectively. Also to
construct a 3,400 square foot Carl's Jr. fast food restaurant, located northwest-
erly of the intersection of Railroad Canyon Road and Casino Drive.
Mr. Culp stated that he would like to bring to the attention of the Commission,
under Engineering Department Conditions, that currently street improvement plans
have been approved and plan checked, and that there is an outstanding payment of
$3,476.04 which is payable at this point in time, would suggest that this be paid
immediately. Also, would suggest that a condition be added, that the applicant ___
participate in an assessment district for the reconstruction of the San Jacinto
Bridge.
Commissioner Mellinger asked if the applicant was present, and if they knew about
the assessment district?
Mr. Fred Crowe, representing the applicant, stated that Mr. Lee Olsen from Carl's
Jr. and Mr. Howard Palmer were present and will try to answer any questions that
you might have, but our concern is the dollar amount for participating in the.
assessment district for the reconstruction of the San Jacinto Bridge.
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 18, 1984
Page 3
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 83-8 REVISED - HOWARD PALMER/CARL IS JR. CONTINUED
Mr. Palmer gave a brief presentation on proposed project.
Discussion was held on condition- number 2, regarding utility services to be
placed underground; condition number 10, including verbiage "this pro~ect,
if built prior to the sewer line proceeding that area, that they put 1n a
holding tank"; providing a dollar figure or estimate for participation in
assessment district for San Jacinto Bridge.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED
with staff recommendations, amending condition number 2, to read: "All
utility services that service the facility from the pole shall be underground";
adding condition number 10.a., which will read: "Sewage via holding tank and/or
with City Engineering approval of pits allowing for pumping to be installed
and located"; amending condition number 13, by adding the following verbiage:
"That all outstanding plan check fees shall be paid prior to hearing by City
Council"; adding condition number 15, which will read: "The applicant shall
participate with the San Jacinto Bridge assessment district proceedings and
pay his fair and, equitable share with the ceiling amount established prior to
City Council review, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
-
l.
2.
3.
-
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated, unless
otherwise modified by Planning Commission/Design Review Board.
ALL UTILITY SERVICES THAT SERVICE THE FACILITY FROM THE POLE SHALL BE
UNDERGROUND.
Reciprocal parking agreement for the entire project to be implemented
within the CC & Rls.
Staff recordation of CC & Rls as required by City Council/Redevelopment
Agency.
All signs to be approved by Planning Division prior to issuance of
permi ts .
Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
Meet County H.ealth Department requirements for wastewater disposal.
Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
Proposal must meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
Applicant is to provide an agreement to the City that project proposal
will connect to the regional sewer system within a two (2) year period,
or agree to participate in an area wide assessment district.
a. SEWAGE VIA HOLDING TANK AND/OR WITH CITY ENGINEERING
APPROVAL OF PITS ALLOWING FOR PUMPING TO BE INSTALLED
AND LOCATED.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
-
11. Dedication requirement for Casino Drive, Railroad Canyon Road intersection
to be completed with regards to property owner(s), signature on final
document for recordation.
12. Revised Grading Plan to be submitted to City Engineer for approval due to
changes in building location and addition of additional buildings.
13. Construction of street improvements per approved plans on file in the City
Engineer1s office. Any changes to approved plans must be approved by the
City Engineer, to include the revision of the 27" RCP to 33" RCP storm
drain system due to additional flows generated per Tentative Parcel Map
20268. THAT ALL OUTSTANDING PLAN CHECK FEES SHALL BE PAID PRIOR TO
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 18, 1984
Page 4
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 83-8 REVISED - HOWARD PALMER/CARL IS JR. CONTINUED
HEARING BY CITY COUNCIL.
14. All conditions of approval per October 11, 1983 shall prevail, to
include the above three items.
15. THE APPLICANT SHALL PARTICIPATE WITH THE SAN JACINTO BRIDGE ASSESSMENT
DISTRICT PROCEEDINGS AND PAY HIS FAIR AND EQUITABLE SHARE WITH THE
CEILING AMOUNT ESTABLISHED PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL REVIEW.
-
2. Industrial Project 84-5 - Larry Hasty - Staff presented proposal to locate
and operate a Truss Manufacturing faCility on 3.39:t acres, located approxi-
mately 380 feet northeast of the intersection of Riverside Drive and Collier
Avenue (29150 Riverside Drive).
Chairman asked if the applicant was present, and if he has any problems with
the conditions? Mr. Hasty stated that he had no problems with the conditions,
and that he would be utilizing only one lot for manufacturing purposes.
Discussion was held on conditions 24, 25 and 26, pertaining to the word volunteer
and the fees imposed; change in acreage, reduced to one lot, and; maintenance of
the historical drainage that goes through the back portion of the property.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Industrial Project 84-5 with staff
recommendations, amending conditions 24, 25 and 26 by deleting the words Volun-
teer to; and adding condition number 30, which will read: liThe historically de-
fined drainage area, as defined by the City Engineer, shall remain clear of any
and all equipment, storage materials and lesser itemsll, second by Commissioner
Barnhart. -
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Meet County Fire Department requirements, for fire protection.
2. Meet County Health Department requirements.
-
3. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Trash receptacles should be architecturally screened.
5. Applicant shall provide a fence around the entire parcel, to be approved
by Planning Division.
6. Applicant shall provide an on-site restroom of a permanent nature.
7. All signs are to be approved by City Permit.
8. Applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping plan subject to Planning
Division approval.
9. There shall be no scrap wood piles kept on subject property.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
10.
Record a lien agreement against the one parcel with a 162.5 foot frontage
on Riverside Drive. The lien agreement shall authorize the City of Lake
Elsinore to require off-site improvements as required by Ordinance 572
upon demand for the total 162.5 foot frontage.
11. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
-
GRADING
12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636, the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, if applicable.
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 18, 1984
Page 5
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-5 - LARRY HASTY CONTINUED
-
13. Provide Soils and Geology Report, including street design recommenda-
tions. Provide final grade certification of pad(s) elevation per
approved grading plan and a final compaction report to the City
Engineer for approval, only if structure is to be built.
14. Provide Grading Plan and Certificate of Survey if substantial grading
is to be done per Grading Code (Ordinancel.
15. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved
by the City Engineer.
16. Provi de Hydro logy Study and necessary Hydrau1 i cs cal cul ations for
identification of tributary drainage flows, both upstream and down-
stream, and for determi nation of adequate measures for flood protection
and handling of those flows as identified and as approved by the City
Engineer. Pay the required fee for the Flood Control District review
of the development plan.
SEWER
17. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for sewage disposal.
WATER
l8. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water availability from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
-
19. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
2Q. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire pro-
tection to include fire hydrant installation and/or upsizing of existing
hydrants.
FEES
21. Pay all app1 icab1e Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572 and
Resolution 77-39, at building permit stage.
22. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule,
if requi red.
23. Pay Public Safety fees as required by 'Resolution No. 83-4, at building
permit stage.
24. Ve+t.lRteef'te sign an agreement to pay a Traffic Safety Mitigation fee for
traffic signalization of $3,000, at building permit stage.
25. Ve~t.lRteef' te sign an agreement to pay a Street Sweeping Mitigation fee of
$200.00.
-
26. Ve+~Rteef' te sign an agreement to pay an equitable drainage impact mitiga-
tion fee in the amount of $6,306 for the one lot (A.P. # 377-050-062) pro-
posed to be utilized under Industrial Project 84-5. Fee to be paid in
three installments, one-third prior to issuance of Business License, one-
third after one year and the final one-third after two years.
27. Provide irrevocable offer of dedication for right-of-way for a future
storm drainage facility along the total southeasterly boundary of ap-
plicant's ownership C147.5' + 162.5' or 310').
28. Record a lien agreement which would require applicant to participate in
one-half the cost of the future drainage facility along the total south-
easterly boundary of applicant's ownership (147.5' + 162.5' or 310 feet).
Minutes of Planning Commission
December 18, 1984
Page 6
INDUSTRIAL PROJECT 84-5 - LARRY HASTY CONTINUED
DRAI NAGE
29. Record an indemnification and hold harmless agreement, approved by the
City Attorney, to protect the City against drainage liabilities.
30. THE HISTORICALLY DEFINED DRAINAGE AREA, AS DEFINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER,
SHALL REMAIN CLEAR OF ANY AND ALL EQUIPMENT, STORAGE MATERIALS AND
LESSER ITEMS.
....,
3. Request to Annex - (Annexation No. 39--Wal nut Hills) City of Lake Elsinore _
Staff presented request to annex approximately 183r acres, located west of
Machado Street between Lincoln Street and Lakeshore Drive into the City of
Lake El si nore.
Mr. Corcoran stated that the City of Lake Elsinore has been directed by the
Local Agency Formation Commission to annex 183t acres into the corporate City
boundaries to eliminate an island of unincorporated territory.
A brief discussion was held on zoning designation for the area, and the cost
of City services.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Request to Annex (Annexation No. 39
--Walnut Hills), second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
At this point in time, Chairman recognized City Manager, Ron Molendyk in the audience.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran informed the Commission that the City Council has set a date for the
Title 17 review, it will be at 6:30 p.m. on January 7, 1985.
A Joint Study Session between City Council and Planning Commission has been scheduled
for January 14,1985, at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Corcoran stated that staff will be making up
an agenda, and woul d appreciate any input.
A reminder, the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting is on January 2, 1985,
which is a Wednesday, since January 1st is New Year's Day.
....,
Mr. Culp stated that he had nothing to report.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Mellinger - Lakeshore near Terra Cotta, the Northshore Homes, every
time I drive up there it is rather dark, do they have a condition to put street lights
in? Mr. Culp stated that the developer has recently requested a release of bonds for
that development. I think the only outstanding improvements at this time are the
street lights. We have contacted Edison Company and asked them if the securities have
been posted for the street lighting, and indeed they have,so we will be releasing the
improvement bond for that tract.
Would like to thank staff for looking into my concerns over roofing materials in the
Valley and will continue on that. ....,
Commissioner Washburn - Would like to commend engineering staff on their prompt paint-
ing project, for striping, for downtown.
Also, I believe it is nearly completed, the outflow channel widening and deepening it
was none too soon, so I think the action on behalf of Council and staff if commendable.
Commissioner Barnhart - Would like to thank Mr. Corcoran for his participation and I
help in the parade.
Minutes of Planning Commlssion
Oecember 18, 1984
Page 7
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
I would like to comment on how beautiful I think the new seal is, out on the front
of City Hall.
Chairman Dominguez - None
~
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
~
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
18TH
DAY
OF
DECEMBER
1984
MI NUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve minutes of December 4~ 1984, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
B.USINESS ITEMS
.."
1. Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED - Howard Palmer/Carl's Jr. - Staff presented
proposal to construct one building containing four (4) commercial retail
businesses consisting of 2,400; 2,290; 3~280 and 2~800 square feet respectively.
Also to construct a 3,400 square foot Carl's Jr. fast food restaurant, located
northwesterly of the intersection of Railroad Canyon Road and Casino Drive.
A lengthy discussion was held on architectural theme proposed for project;
returning to staff in order for applicant and staff to meet and make appropriate
changes regarding the architectural theme, and landscaping. '
Mr. Palmer gave a brief presentation on proposed project addressing landscaping,
parking and architectural theme.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to continue Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED to
the second meeting in January~ in order for staff and applicant to meet and make
revisions to proposed plan, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
8:46 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
.."
,
-~~
Fred D minguez?
Chairman
Respe~tful~ed.
~indstaff ~
P1 anni ng Commiss ion
Secreta ry
-
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON THE
2ND
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1985
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
~ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Mellinger.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner
Washburn, Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Directgr Corcoran, City Engineer Cu1p,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of December 18, 1984, as
submitted, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Tentative Tract Map 19344 and Revised Environmental Impact Report - Lakeside
Estates - Ken Buchanan - Assistant Planner Coleman presented request by
applicant, Ken Buchanan, and staff to continue this item to the meeting of
February 5,1985, to allow time for circulation of the Draft Environmental
Impact Report to the appropriate agencies and for staff review.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to continue Tentative Tract Map 19344 and
Draft Environmental Impact Report to the meeting of February 5,1985, second
by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Industrial Project 84-6 - Ernest Gi bson - Assi stant Pl anner Coleman presented
proposal to construct a 90' x 35' concrete block building for use as a cabi-
net shop on .201- acres located 600 feet northeast of the corner of Flint
Street and Poe Street (adjacent to City Yard).
Discussion was held on parking requirements and its sufficiency if additional
employees were hi red.
The Chairman asked if the applicant was present and upon recelvlng an affirm-
ative response, asked Mr. Gibson to come forward for input on the parking
concerns.
-
Mr. Ernest Gibson, upon being asked as to whether he could furnish addition-
al parking space as he hired more people, replied that they thought that the
loading area would suffice for parallel parking in the back corner if neces-
sary. They are a family-owned business - just himself and his wife - no one
works for them, and they have been functioning in this manner for the past
three years and, prior to that, just himself for eight years. They have no
plans to expand the size of their business. They have no retail business.
Discussion returned to the table with questions on drainage facilities and
easement the City will be providing for sewer and utilities, and considering
the fact of allowing for a sewer "V" outlet to be installed at the rear of
the property so that the other properties on that block could be sewered;
possibly asking applicant to stripe areas along northern boundary of approx-
imately 12 feet in case they need additional parking; requiring condition
for easement if other property owners hook up to sewer "T" outlet so it coul d
be serviced and maintained.
The Chairman asked Mr. Gibson if he had any problems with the conditions and
Mr. Gi bson repl i ed that he had none.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Industrial Project 84-6 with staff
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 2, 1985
Page 2
recommendations, amending Condition #19 by adding the follo\'iing verbiage,
"Applicant to provide a "VII hook up sewer connection and easement as
required by the City Engineer for extension of sewer line to service adja-
cent properties to the south," second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
--
1. Meet County Health Department requirements.
2. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
3. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
4. Provide a five foot (5'.) wide landscaping area between the public
right-of-way on Poe Street and subject parking area.
5. All signs are to be approved by City Permit.
6. All on-site lighting shall be shielded to avoid glare onto neighbor-
ing streets and property.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
7. Meet all requirements of Ordinance No. 572, at building permit stage.
8. Construct curb, gutter and sidewalk along total property frontage of
Poe Street. No additional dedication required.
9. Construct asphalt paving from street centerl ine to 1 ip of gutter on ...,
Poe St reet.
10. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
11. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
12. a. Install street lights as approved by the City Engineer.
b. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Land-
scaping Maintenance District.
Staff would recommend deferral agreement for Conditions #8, #9, #10,
#11 and #12.a., due to non-existent street improvements in this area.
13. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636, the Uniform Build-
ing Code, Chapter 70, if applicable.
14. Provide Soils and Geology Report, including street design recommenda-
tions. Provide final grade certification of pad 5 elevation per
approved grading plan and provide a final compaction report to the
City Engineer for approval.
.-
15. Provide Grading Plan and Certificate of Survey prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer for approval by the City Engineer.
16. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer, including street trees.
17. Comply with the requirements of the City Engineer for off-site drainage.
18. Provide the City Engineer with all necessary legal descriptions and
exhibits required for drainage easement and public utilities easement
(through City Yard property) for recordation.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Ja nu a ry 2, 1 985
Page 3
--
19. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
for sewer line construction. APPLICANT TO PROVIDE A "Y" HOOK UP SEWER
CONNECTION AND EASEMENT AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY ENGINEER FOR EXTENSION
OF SEWER lINE TO SERVICE ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE SOUTH.
20. Provide will serve letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
guaranteeing sewer availability.
21. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
22. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection to include fire hydrant installation and/or upsizing of
existing hydrants, if required.
23. Appl icant shall extend existing 6-inch waterline in Poe Street 60 feet
across his total property frontage per Ordinance. The existing water-
line ends at the northerly end of applicant's property.
24. Pay applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572 and
Resolution No. 77-39, at building permit stage.
25. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
schedule.
26. Pay all City water connection fees for water service to property, per
Resolution No. 83-18.
-
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Barnhart - Asked if there were plans to demolish building on East
Gra'ham Avenue, probably 209 East Graham Avenue, and put in apartments. Have any
plans or word of anything come to the attention of the Planning Division?
Assistant Planner Coleman responded in the negative.
Commissioner Washburn - None.
Commissioner Saathoff - None.
Commi ssioner Me" inger - Canmented that where the 01 d "STOP" si gn was by the
Post Office, the marking on the street still says "STOP" and he forgets sometimes
and hits his brakes. Also, on Gunnerson, north of lakeshore Drive, he thinks it's
becoming a canyon and there are some unsecured vacant buildings with open door and
such and that is against the Fire and Building Codes. Could County Code Enforce-
ment be contacted regarding this?
~
Chairman Dominguez - None.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by
Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
2ND
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1985
MINUTES ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of December 18, 1984, as
submitted, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
BUSINESS ITEMS
-"
1. Industrial Project 84-6 - Ernest Gibson - Staff presented proposal to con-
struct a 3,105 square foot concrete block building for use as a cabinet
making shop, located approximately 600 feet northeast of the corner of
Fl int Street and Poe St reet.
Before taking up discussion at the table, and with the consent of the Board
members, Chairman Dominguez asked the applicant if he had any comments.
Mr. Gibson, applicant, commented on the perimeter striping - that it would
be masonry along the top side of the building and questioned the landscap-
ing requirement of trees in the back (east side) as he doesn't feel there
is sufficient room.
Discussion then ensued at the table regarding moving the trees from the back
(east side) to the north side toward Poe Street; landscaping to screen build-
ing from view of motorists on freeway; sufficiency of parking, signage; irri-
gation not to be included in deferred items; and type of concrete block to
be used in construction to be painted or to be textured split block rather
then plain, unpainted concrete block.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Industrial Project 84-6 with staff
recommendations, amending Condition #3 to.read, "Applicant shall submit a """"
Landscaping/Irrigation Plan, including landscaping on Poe Street, to be
approved by the Planning Division;" amending Condition #4 by adding the word
"automatic" between the words "permanent" and "sprinkler;" and amending Con-
dition #7 by adding the verbiage,~ "or a textured block to be approved by
the Planning Division," to end of this Condition, second by Commissioner
Wa s hbu rn.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so they are not visible from neighbor-
ing property or public streets.
2. Building plans shall be constructed as depicted on plans. Any proposed
changes wi 11 requi re resubmittal to the Des i gn Revi ew Board.
3. Applicant shall submit a Landscaping/Irrigation Plan, INCLUDING LAND-
SCAPING ON POE STREET, to be approved by the Planning Division.
4. All planting areas shall have permanent AUTOMATIC sprinkler systems.
5. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way to be
approved by Planning Director.
6. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30 feet apart and shall be a
minimum of 15 gallons.
7. Building shall be painted with a color scheme that is approved by Planning
Division OR A TEXTURED BLOCK TO BE APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DIVISION.
...,
8. Trash receptacle shall be architecturally screened.
9. Block wall to be approved by Planning Division.
~
t.;#
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 2, 1985
Page 2
There being no further businesS, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 8:09 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Saathoff, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
-
Approved,
~~
Fred Domingu;.r:=-'~
Chai rman
Respectfully su~tted,
~~~
Ruth Edwards
Acting Pl ann in 9
Commission Secretary
.""
-
\
-
MINUTES OF
HELD ON THE 15TH
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1985
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:28 P.M.
-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Saathoff.
ROL'L CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve minutes of January 2, 1985, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn, with discussion. On Page 2, first paragraph, the
"T" hook up for sewer connection; the "rs' should be a "Y" hook up for sewer.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
NONE
BUS INESS ITEMS
1.
Residential Project 84-9 REVISED - Harold Kempe/Dane Hillyard - Staff presented
proposal to construct 80 apartment units on 3.53r acres, located approximately
900 feet southwesterly of the intersection of Lincoln Street and Riverside Drive.
Staff stated this proposal was denied witho,ut prejudice on December 4, 1984, due
to concerns on inadequate amount of open space, conflicts between pedestrian and
vehicular uses and whether an adequate amount of turn around area was being pro-
vided for emergency vehicles.
-
Staff stated that with the revised plans; both the removal of a building and the
use of perpendicular parking spurs have provided more open space while shielding
a number of those parking spaces from the main entrance. In addition, the revised
layout of the driveway will improve the abil ity of fire trucks and other emergency
vehicles to turn around, and the proposed alignment of the entrance with the
interior driveway will provide an adequate visual buffer between Lincoln Street
and the interior parking area.
Chairman asked if the applicant was present, if he had received a copy of the
conditions and if there were any questions.
Mr. Hillyard questioned condition number 8, regarding the six-foot block wall
around the perimeter of the project; condition number 13, regarding the Class I
Bike Lane.
Discussion was held on condition number 8, regarding the block wall; condition
number 13, regarding the bike lane--providing a Class II instead of a Class I or
deferring with a lien agreement; installing speed bumps; installing 5 m.p.h. speed
limit sign; fencing off play area; condition number 3, regarding Fire Department
requirements; provide teeter-tot facility (balance beam, 3 or 4 teeter-totter
systems within or near the club house/pool area.
-
Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this matter, they
would receive their input.
Mr. Larry Koeneke spoke on Residential Project 84-9 stating concern on unaccept-
able invasion of family.s right to privacy; possibility of trespassing and crime;
increase in noise and lighting; drop in property value.
A petition was received from persons living in the neighborhood near the proposed
project stating that they did not want the project in their neighborhood.
Discussion ensued on General Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning for this pro-
ject, and providing additional landscaping to mitigate some of the impacts.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Residential Project 84-9 REVISED
with staff recommendations, and the following changes: amending condition number
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 15, 1985
Page 2
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-9 REVISED - HAROLD KEMPE/DANE HILLYARD CONTINUED
8, by adding the following verbiage "six-foot (61) high decorative pillar wall
intermixed with wrought iron on the north and west perimeters, to the well";
condition number 13, to be deferred under 1 ien agreement; adding condition
number 27, which will read: "Speed bumps shall be installed in the interior
central thoroughfare"; adding condition number 28, which will read: "Traffic
signs shall be installed near the access of Lincoln Street indicating a 5
m.p.h. speed limit and warning concerning children at playll; adding condition
number 29, which will read: "Play areas adjacent to any interior thoroughfare
should be fenced"; and adding condition number 30, which will read: "Recrea-
tional facilities for children shall be installed, as approved by the Planning
Division", second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
..."
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
2. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicates, unless
otherwise modified by the Planning Commission and/or Design Review Board.
3. Meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
4. Meet County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater disposal.
5. Applicant shall meet all setback requirements.
6. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
7. All signage shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance
of permi t.
8.
According to proposed site security design theme, applicant shall provide
a six':foot (61l high decorative pillar wall intermixed with wrought iron
ON THE NORTH. AND WEST PERIMETERS, TO THE WELL; earthen mounding shall pro-
vide fountain for this construction with landscaping in the front portion
of this perimeter wall that should encompass all sides of the project site.
9. Issuance of a migiated Negative Declaration.
'-
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
10. Cons.truct 6-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to curb across the total frontage
of the property and standard driveway approach. Curb and gutter and pav-
ing exists and will be accepted as conforming to City Standards.
11. Install street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
12. Sign a document agreeing to cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting
and Landscaping District.
13. Provide Class I Bike Trail to be installed behind six-foot sidewalk along
total property frontage as approved by the City Engineer. TO BE DEFERRED
UNDER LIEN AGREEMENT.
WATER AND SEWER
L
14. Applicant shall extend water mains and install or upsize existing fire
hydrants as required by the Riverside County Fire Department and the
City Engineer for domestic and fire protection purposes.
15. Provide will serve letter for water and sewer service from serving agency.
16. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignee.
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 15, 1985
Page 3
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-9 REVISED - HAROLD KEMPE/DANE HILLYARD CONTINUED
-
17. Provide sewer service as required by the City of Lake Elsinore,
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, the County Health
Department and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Place
sewer cleanout at property line on all service lines. Applicant
must acknowledge that the sewer service line from property line
to the sewer main is the responsibility of property owner or
sewer service agency.
GRADI NG
18. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
19. Provide Soils Report, to include on-site street design recommenda-
tions. Provide Final Grade Certification of pad(s) elevation per
approved grading plan and a final compaction report to the City
Engi neer for approval.
20. Provide landscape and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer, including street trees.
21. Provide Grading Plan and Certificate of Survey prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of the con-
struction slope with the required Uniform Building Code setback re-
qui rements .
DRAI NAGE
-
22. Drainage from the site shall be collected and directed to the surface
drainage system at the southerly corner of the property. Storm water
run-off shall not be allowed to discharge onto the developed property
to the southwest. Applicant to provide Hydrology and Hydraulic Study.
FEES
23. A report on drainage of site shall be obtained from the Riverside
County Flood Control District at applicant's expense.
24. Applicant to pay Public Safety fees as required by Resolution 83-4.
25. Applicant to pay Capital Improvement fees, as required by Ordinance
572 and Resolution 77-39.
26. Pay a 11 school fees.
27. S.PEED BUMPS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN THE INTERIOR CENTRAL THOROUGHFARE.
28. TRAFFIC SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED NEAR THE ACCESS OF LINCOLN STREET
INDICATING A 5 MPH SPEED LIMIT AND WARNING CONCERNING CHILDREN AT
PLAY.
29. PLAY AREAS ADJACENT TO ANY INTERIOR THOROUGHFARE SHOULD BE FENCED.
-
30. RECREATIONAL FACILITIES FOR CHILDREN SHALL BE INSTALLED, AS APPROVED
BY THE PLANNING DIVISION.
2. Residential Project 84-10 - Preston-Barrett Corporation - Staff presented pro-
posal to construct a 16 unit apartment complex on .82r acres, located on the
southeast corner of Graham Avenue and Lewis Street. Mr. Corcoran showed
slides on proposed project.
Chairman asked if the applicant was present, if he received a copy of the
conditions and if there were any questions.
Mr. John Hall questioned condition number 19, regarding the requirement of
processing a lot merger. Mr. Hall stated that they made certain that the
carports and four-plexes were within their own lot line and will give ingress/
egress easement to all people concerned, but did not want to merger the pro-
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 15, 1985
Page 4
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-10 PRESTON-BARRETT CORPORATION CONTINUED
ject into one single lot.
Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this matter, they
would receive their input.
Mr. Peter Lehr had concerns regarding drainage and how it would be handled.
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak on this matter. Receiving no
response, the Chairman asked for discussion at the table. __
Discussion was held on Mr. Lehr's concern on drainage being handled by condi-
tion number 18; condition number 19, pertaining to lot merger requirement
and the possibility of deleting this condition; Fire Department requirements;
location of covered parking spaces, and adding verbiage "on each parcel" to
condition number 26.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Residential Project 84-10 with
staff recommendations, deleting condition number 19; adding verbiage "on
each parcel" to condi tion number 26, second by Commiss ioner Mell i nger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
2. All items depicted on Site Plans shall be provided as indicated, unless
otherwise modified by the Planning Commission and/or Design Review
Board.
3. Meet all County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater
d i s po s a 1 .
4. Applicant shall meet all setback requirements.
5. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
6. All signage shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to
issuance of permit.
--
7. Meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS:
STREETS
8. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
9. Applicant shall dedicate street right-of-way to provide for standard
corner cutback for standard pedestrian access.
10. Construct curb, gutter and six-foot (6') sidewalk along total property
frontage of Graham Avenue and Lewis Street. Curbline on Graham Avenue
shall be at 32-feet from street centerline. Curbline on Lewis Street
shall be located at 20-feet from street centerline.
11. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
-
12. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Standard Specifications
for publ ic works.
13. All street monumentation must be reset if disturbed during construction,
and documentation submitted to the City Engineer to include centerline
tie notes for approval and acceptance.
14. Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 15, 1985
Page 5
RES I DENTIAL PROJECT 84-10 PRESTON-BARRETT CORPORATION CONTI NUED
GRADING
15. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Build-
ing Code, Chapter 70.
-
16.
Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Pro-
vide final grade certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and a final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
17. Provide Grading Plan and Certificate of Survey prepared by a register-
ed Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of con-
struction slope with the required Uniform Building Code setback require-
me n ts .
19.
SEWER
20.
WATER
-
21.
22.
18. Applicant's engineer shall provide Hydrology Study for subject pro-
perty and upstream tributary areas. Provide Hydraulic calculations
for any storm drain system that may be needed. All surface run-off
from subject site shall be directed to the surrounding public streets,
and conveyed in a manner acceptable and approved by the City Engineer.
A~~+~6aRt-te-~re€ess-+et-ffier~er-te-e+~ffi~Rate-eK4st4R~-+et-+4ReS-aRG-
te-€effiB~Re-tRe-fe~r-t41-eK~st4R~-+ets-4Rte-eRe-t+1~ DELETED.
Provide City with a will serve letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal
Water District, guaranteeing sewer availability.
Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
Applicant shall extend water mains and install or upsize existing fire
hydrants as required by the Riverside County Fire Department and the
City Engineer for domestic and fire protection purposes.
FEES
23. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
24. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's fee
schedul e.
25. Pay all school fees.
26. Applicant shall, ON EACH PARCEL, record within CC & R's provision for
reciprocal parking, access and drainage agreement for all buildings
located on subject property, subject to approval by Planning Division
and Engineering Department.
-
3. Review of Conditional Use Permit 83-9 - Ed Snyder - Staff presented report on
first annual review of subject Conditional Use Permit. A lengthy discussion
was held on said matter covering continuing review for two weeks; this being an
enforcement problem; and input from Mr. Snyder address i ng hi s non-compl i ance
with conditions (written report submitted by Mr. Snyder on January 15, 1985).
The Commission fel t recommendations on the non-discretionary items (primarily
concerning monetary renumeration to the City) does not come under their pur-
view.
Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this matter, they
would receive their input, and informed the audience that this matter will go
before City Council on February 12, 1985, as a public hearing. Receiving no
response from the audience, the Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to review and refer to Council, second by Com-
missioner &arnhart.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
January 15, 1985
Page 6
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran informed the Commission that the Planning Commissioners Institute
Conference, sponsored by the League of California Cities, will be held February
28th through March 2, 1985, in Santa Clara, California, and we should be receiv-
ing information shortly regarding this conference.
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - None
~
Commissioner Me11ing~r - None
Commissioner Washburn - There is a pickup truck right across from Park Plaza, that
has been under repair for probably a month and more than enough time has lapsed
for repairs, this should be cited.
Commissioner Barnhart - The alley between Prospect and Graham has bad chuckholes
keeping property owners from using their garages. Needs to be repaired--asked the
City Engineer if he could take care of this.
Chairman Dominguez - Across from Stater Brothers, on Mission Trail, the vacant pro-
perty--there was ten (10) cars for sale last Sunday; is that a legal sales lot?
Mr. Corcoran stated that this is a private parking area and Code Enforcement, has
in the past, been directing people away from using that lot. We are trying to in-
corporate in Title 17, Zoning Ordinance, that no car shall be placed for sale in a
commercial area unless it is in a used car lot. Commissioner Mellinger stated that
since it is not a permitted use on that lot, for enforcement purposes, you could
issue a citation for being "not a permitted use".
Motion by Commis~ ioner Washburn to adjourn to Des i gn Revi ew Board, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
....,
--
MI NUTES 0 F
HELD ON THE
MINUTE ACTION
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
15TH
DAY
OF
JANUARY
1985
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of January 2, 1985, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
-
BUS INESS ITEMS
1. Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED - Howard Pa1mer/Car1.s Jr. - Staff requested
this item be continued to the meeting of February 5, 1985, to allow time for
architectural changes to be incorporated within plan specifications.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED
to the meeting of February 5, 1985, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
2. Single-Family Residence - 16388 McPherson Avenue REVISED - P.J. Fenton - Staff
presented report and revised elevations for proposed single-family residence
to be located at 16388 McPherson Avenue, which will consist of a two-story
unit that has approximately 1,592 square feet for dwelling area, which includes
one Ot bedroom, bedroom/den, living room, dining room, kitchen and two (2)
ba th rooms.
Staff pointed out the revised e1evationa1 designs, which included roof line
variations with recommendation for increased variation of wood trim and a
partial intermixing of brick veneer within the stucco siding, and use of
a lterna ti ve roo fi ng ma teri a 1 s .
-
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 16388
McPherson Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
1. B.uilding elevations shall be resubmitted to Planning Division reflect-
ing Planning Division and/or Design Review Board's architectural
modifications, which will be subject to be reviewed and approved by
the Planning Division.
-
2. Applicant shall incorporate in addition to submitted building eleva-
tions designs, the following exterior materials: variations of wood
trim and intermixing of brick veneer.
3. Applicant shall utilize, in substitution of proposed shake roofing,
the use of alternative roofing to be approved by Planning Division.
4. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets.
5. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
6. Applicant shall plant trees at 30-foot intervals outside of public
right-of-way, to be approved by the City Engineer.
7. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
8. Landscaping/irrigation plans shall be subject to approval by the
Planning Division and shall implement plans prior to the issuance of
Certificate of Occupancy.
9. If applicable, all slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegeta-
tion, to be approved by the Planning Division.
3. Residential Project 84-9 REVISED - Harold Kempe/Dane Hillyard - Staff presented
proposal to construct 80 apartment units on 3.53t acres, located approximately
900 feet southwesterly of the intersection of Lincoln Street and Riverside Drive.
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 15, 1985
Page 2
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-9 REVISED - HAROLD KEMPE/DANE HILLYARD CONTINUED
Proposal consists of ten (10) two-story buildings that will include: eight
(8) one bedroom units, with two (2) units designed for handicapped (565
square feet, 632 square feet); fifty-six (56) two bedroom units (840 square
feet); and sixteen (16) three bedroom units (1,183 square feet). All floor
plans consist of similar variations of living room, kitchen, dining and bed-
room designs with first floor units having a porch and second floor apart-
ments incorporating a balcony feature (except three bedroom units).
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he has any concerns? ~
Mr. Hillyard answered in the negative.
Discussion was held on landscaping plan; applicant providing additional land-
scaping along the west border; condition number 13, deleting the words "if
applicable"; and condition number 9, pertaining to trash enclosures.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Residential Project 84-9 REVISED
with staff recommendations, adding condition number 14, which will read: liTo
effectively screen the west boundary wall with J.C. Spartans"; and deleting
the words "if applicable" in condition number 13, second by Commissioner
Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
2. Applicant shall place trees outside the public right-of-way, to be
approved by the Planning Division.
3. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets. ...
4. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
5. Street trees shall be planted a maximum of 30-feet apart.
6. Applicant is to provide permanent automatic sprinkler system for all
planting areas.
7. Landscaping/irrigation plan to be approved by Design Review Board.
8. Landscaping theme should be established along perimeter area of decora-
tive wall which is to enclose apartment complex. Additionally, land-
scaping should be incorporated along both sides of the main entryway
to the compl ex.
9. All trash enclosures are to be effectively screened from public view.
10. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six-inch
(.6") hi gh concrete curb.
11. Applicant to provide security lighting to be directed on-site with
effective shields to prevent the emission of glare.
12.
Two (2) ornamental street lamps shall be provided at the two (2) corners
of the entry driveway approach.
..."
13. 1.:f-a~~f.:i€aB+e, a central landscaping "park" design should replace the
proposed parking corridor to create visual interest associated with
overall development, to be approved by Planning Division.
14. TO EFFECTIVELY SCREEN THE WEST BOUNDARY WALL WITH J.C. SPARTANS.
Minutes of Des,tgn Revi.ew B.oard
January 15, 1985
Page 3
4.
Residential Project 84-10 - Preston-Barrett Corporation - Staff presented pro-
posal to construct a 16 unit apartment complex on .82:r acres, located on the
southeast corner of Graham Avenue and Lewis Street.
Proposal consists of four (4) building divisions consisting of six~een (16~
two-story/two bedroom units. Each unit will have 950 square feet 1n dwell1ng
area. Floor plan designs will consist of two bedrooms, living room, kitchen,
and two bathrooms.
-
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had a copy of the
conditions and if there were any questions.
Mr. John Hall questioned condition number 13, pertaining to Spanish white
plaster wall intermixed with wrought iron, subject wall being erected around
the entire parameter; condition number 16, pertaining to conceptual plans for
open beam rafter--Mr. Hall-submitted rendering; condition number 17, pertain-
ing to the decorative fountain; and condition number 20, pertaining to the
expansion of internal circulation from 24 feet to 28 feet.
A lengthy discussion ensued on the above mentioned conditions; condition number
15, pertaining to paved textured surface; and from staff's report adding Roman
Numerals I, II, III and IV as conditions.
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Residential Project 84-10 with staff
recommendations, adding Roman Numerals I, II, III (with the deletion of the
word IIfountain in III) and IV to be added as condition number 21; amending
condition number 13, to read: liThe six-foot (6') Spanish plaster wall along
Lewis Street be parallel to the patio areas and appear as a Spanish style; vary-
ing 5 to 6 feet with a brick topping and gate entrance to each patio area; with
similar fence type on Graham Street, as shown on plot plan and as staff recom-
mendations on the other two perimeter areas; on condition number 15, delete the
word IIBomanitell and add the following verbiage IIcolor stamped concrete paved
texture to be as shown on plot plan, except for the interface with the sidewalk
which could be smooth concrete; condition number 17, delete the words "Mission
style fountainll; condition number 16, add the following verbiage lithe alteration
of the enclosed parking shall be satisfactory; and condition number 20, amend to
read: IIcentral internal circulation will go to 28 feetll, second by Commissioner
Saathoff with discussion.
Commissioner Saathoff stated that he wished to discuss condition number 20, and
asked if Planning or Engineering would consider to accept the 24 feet i'f the
Fire Department would approve? Staff stated that there would be no problem if
the Fire Department would give the recommendation.
Commissioner Washburn amended his motion to include in condition number 20, after
28 feet, if required by Fire Department, Commissioner Saathoff seconded the amend-
ment to motion.
Chairman asked if there was any further discussion. Commissioner Mellinger asked
if the rendering submitted by Mr. Hall was for the open beam rafter carport, and
was informed in the affirmative.
-
Discussion ensued on existing fence located at the southerly border and whether
the applicant proposed to leave in place. Staff stated that this has not been
addressed, as we were requiring applicant to put up the wall .
Commissioner Washburn amended his motion to include proper landscaping along the
southerly boundary and to allow the existing fence to remain, but to properly
screen it with vegetation, planted along the perimeter, as approved by Planning
Division, added to condition number 13, Commissioner Saathoff seconded the amend-
ment to motion.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. Applicant shall place trees outside the public right-of-way, to be ap-
proved by the Planning Division.
2. All roof mounted or ground support equipment ,incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or pub1 ic streets.
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 15, 1985
Page 4
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-10 - PRESTON-BARRETT CORPORATION CONTINUED
3. Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
4. Street trees shall be placed a maximum of 30-feet apart.
5. Applicant is to provide permanent and automatic sprinkler system for
all planting areas.
6. Landscaping/irrigation plan to be approved by Design Review Board.
7. Landscaping theme shall be along entire perimeter of decorative wall
exposed to public view. Additionally, landscaping shall be incorpor-
ated along both sides of the main entryway to the complex.
8. Trash enclosure identified on plot plan shall be relocated to an area
within site that is less exposed to public view, subject to approval
by Planning Division.
9. Two (2). Spanish style ornamental street lamps shall be provided at
the two (2) corners of the entry dri veway approach.
lQ. All security lighting shall be directed on-site with effective shields
to prevent the emission of glare.
11. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six-inch
(6") high concrete curb.
12. Building elevations shall include white plaster siding, Spanish red
tile roofing and wood trim.
-"
13. THE SI X- FOOT (61) SPANISH PLASTER WALL ALONG LEWIS STREET BE PARALLEL
TO THE PATIO AREAS AND APPEAR AS A SPANISH STYLE: VARYING 5 TO 6 FEET
WITH A BRICK TOPPING AND GATE ENTRANCE TO EACH PATIO AREA: WITH SIMILAR
FENCE TYPE ON GRAHAM STREET, AS SHOWN ON PLOT PLAN AND AS STAFF RECOM- ~
MENDATIONS ON THE OTHER TWO PERIMETER AREAS. INCLUDE PROPER LANDSCAP-
ING ALONG THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY AND TO ALLOW THE EXISTING FENCE TO
REMAIN, BUT TO PROPERLY SCREEN IT WITH VEGETATION, PLANTED ALONG THE
PERIMETER, AS APPROVED BY PLANNING DIVISION.
14. All building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
15. ~gemaA4te~ COLOR STAMPED CONCRETE PAVED TEXTURE TO BE AS SHOWN ON PLOT
PLAN, EXCEPT FOR THE INTERFACE WITH THE SIDEWALK WHICH COULD BE SMOOTH
CONCRETE shall be utilized to highlight sectional areas of driveway
thoroughfare and the entire central parking facility that is designated
on plot plan to receive pavement treatment.
16. Applicant is to provide conceptual plans for open beam rafter carport
designs with security lighting, to be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Division. THE ALTERATION OF THE ENCLOSED PARKING SHALL BE
SATISFACTORY.
17. Applicant to provide conceptual plan for "Park" area to include such
features as a ae€e~at4Ye-M4554eR-5ty+e-fe~Ata4A-w4tR garden theme
landscaping, Mission benches and wrought iron frontage (40 feet in
length) associated with decorative wall enclosure along project boun-
dary, subject to review and approval by Planning Division.
18. Applicant shall provide a four-foot (41) wide internal walkway to adjoin
units that are located adjacent to Lewis Street. A four-foot (41) wide
sidewalk shall also be provided on east side of project for the purpose
of access to subject units, to be reviewed and approved by Planning
Division.
19. Applicant is to clearly designate "Visitor" parking with pavement paint-
ing on the required eight (8) open parking spaces within apartment
comp 1 ex .
20. Applicant is to expand central internal circulation travel way (from
-
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 15,1985
Page 5
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-10 - PRESTON-BARRETT CORPORATION CONTINUED
Graham Avenue to rear east and west parking area) from 24 feet to
28 feet, IF REQUIRED BY FIRE DEPARTMENT for purposes of adequate
and effici ent fi re protection (vehi c1 e access to all structures
on sHe).
21 . ( 1)
PAVED TEXTURED SURFACE SHOULD BE UTILIZED TO HIGHLIGHT
SECTIONAL AREAS OF DRIVEWAY THOROUGHFARE AND THE ENTIRE
CENTRAL PARKING FACILITY BEING DESIGNATED ON PLOT PLAN
TO RECEIVE TEXTURED PAVEMENT TREATMENT.
(II) OPEN BEAM RAFTER CARPORT DESIGNS WITH SECURITY LIGHTING
SHOULD BE INCORORATED WITHIN PROJECT PARAMETERS SO AS
TO AVOID THE CONVEYANCE OF A "BOXY" AND MONOTONOUS
STRUCTURAL IMPRESSION.
(III) THE "PARK" AREA, BEING THE MOST PREVALENT AND VISIBLE
OFF-SITE IMPRESSION SUPPORTING THE SPANISH ARCHITECTURAL
THEME ALONG GRAHAM AVENUE, SHOULD EMPHASIZE STREET VIEW
FEATURES THAT WILL READILY BE IDENTIFIABLE WITH THE
GENERAL SPANISH OVERTONES OF THE SUBJECT PROJECT. AC-
CORDLINGLY, AMENITIES THAT ARE ENVISIONED TO ACCENTUATE
THIS STYLISH IMPRESSION WITHIN THE IIPARKII AREA ARE BEING
SUGGESTED TO INCLUDE A DECORATIVE ~~~~~QW-~+~bE-~QYW+A~W
W~+14 INNOVATIVE GARDEN THEME/LANDSCAPING, MISSION BENCHES,
AND A LENGTHY WROUGHT IRON INTERMIXING ASSOCIATED WITH
THE PROPOSED WALL ENCLOSURE SO AS TO PROVIDE A COMMANDING
OFF-SITE VIEW OF THIS SPANISH IIPARK" ARCHITECTURAL STATE-
MENT.
(IV) A FOUR-FOOT (4') WIDE INTERNAL WALKWAY TO ADJOINING UNITS
LOCATED ALONG LEWIS STREET, COMPLETE WITH LOW-LEVEL LIGHT-
ING ALONG SIDEWALK AND TO THE REAR OF APARTMENTS, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF SAFETY AND SITE SECURITY.
5. Residential Project 84-11 - Thompson Investment/Jim Thompson - Staff presented
architectural elevations for the construction of thirty-five single-family
residences on lots ranging from 6.324t to 12,000t square feet, located approxi-
mately 700 feet south of Grant Drive on the east side of Machado Street. Staff
informed the Board that the Tract Map (19389) on thi s project was fi na 1 i zed on
November 27, 1984.
Proposal is to construct thirty-five single-family residences which will include
three separate floor plans with six exterior variations. Plan One has 1,283
square feet of dwelling area with a 483 square foot garage; Plan Two has 1,493
square feet of dwelling area with a 440 square foot garage; and Plan Three has
1,675 square feet of dwelling area with a 587 square foot garage.
Staff stated that on condition number 8, would like this condition amended to
read a "six-foot high decorative block wall II instead of an "eight-foot high
decorative block wall", and additionally, staff would like to mention that a
condition that was placed on Tract Map 19389 was to save as many Walnut Trees
as possible on site.
-
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a copy
of the conditions and if there were any concerns.
Mr. Jim Thompson questioned condition number 8, pertaining to the requirement
of a block wall on the western line of Lot 35.
Chairman asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak on this matter, they
would receive their input.
The following persons spoke on Residential Project 84-11, stating concerns on
grading Ce1evation of pads), drainage, retaining wall, streets, and removal of
the Walnut Trees.
Mr. Jack Maloney, 672 Highlands Road, Lake Elsinore;
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 15,1985
Page 6
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-11 - THOMPSON INVESTMENT/JIM THOMPSON CONTINUED
Mr. Kevin Corcoran, 680 Highlands Road, Lake Elsinore;
Mr. Phillip A. Taylor, 567 Highlands Road, Lake Elsinore;
Mr. Mark Murphy, 576 Highlands Road, Lake Elsinore;
Ms. Maggie Shaw, 32306 Machado Street, Lake Elsinore;
Mr. Pete Mullin, 560 Highlands Road, Lake Elsinore
Mr. Taylor presented petition opposing junction of Lake Vista and Cherbourg
Avenue from neighborhood residents to the Board.
-
Mr. Thompson commented on some of the concerns brought up by neighborhood
residents.
Chairman stated that the project was before the Design Review Board for archi-
tectural review and that is what we should be addressing.
Discussion returned to the tabl e on Focused Environmental Impact Report, wi th
explanation given to the audience why this could not be addressed at this time,
but could have been addressed at the Tentative Tract Map stage and as it stands,
we have a finalized map; condition number 4, regarding grading plan; roofing
material to be used; with recommendation that Class "A" roofing material be
used; and Walnut Trees, condition from Tract Map--was saving as many trees as
possible and coordinate with City Planning Department, since these trees were.
removed, a condi tion shall be added for, repl acement of as many trees as pos-
sible, but not necessarily Walnut Trees.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Residential Project 84-11 with staff
recommendations, amending condition number 4, to read: "Grading plan to be ap-
proved by the Engineering Department with special consideration to those few
lots which abut the proposed tract, so that there isn't a problem with soil
slippage, run-off and etc."; amend condition number 8, to read: "A six-foot
C61). high decorative block wall, and on Lot 35 provide a wood fence, not a
decorative block wallll; adding condition number 9, which will read: "Provide a _
Class "A" roof protective material, whatever it may be"; adding condi tion number
10, which will read: "Staff to work with the applicant to provide replacement
trees, as many as possible", second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS:
1. All building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
2. Applicant shall place trees outside the public right-of-way, to be
approved by the Planning Division.
3. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or publ ic streets.
4. Grading Plan to be approved by the Engineering Department WITH SPECIAL
CONSIDERATION TO THOSE FEW LOTS WHICH ABUT THE PROPOSED TRACT, SO THAT
THERE ISNIT A PROBLEM WITH SOIL SLIPPAGE, RUN-OFF AND ETC.
5. Street trees shall be planted a maximum of 30-feet apart.
6. Applicant is to provide permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas. _
7. Landscaping/irrigation plan to be approved by Community Development
Director, showing existing walnut trees and enumerating those to be
saved and those proposed for removal.
8. A six-foot (61) high decorative block wall is to be provided along the
west property 1 ines of lot one (1), and on lot thirty-five (35) PROVIDE
A WOOD FENCE, NOT A DECORATIVE BLOCK WALL. Materials proposed for use
are to be approved by the Planning Division.
9. PROVI DE A CLASS "A" ROOF PROTECTIVE MATERIAL, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
Minutes of Design Review Board
January 15, 1985
Page 7
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT 84-11 - THOMPSON INVESTMENT/JIM THOMPSON CONTINUED
10. STAFF TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO PROVIDE REPLACEMENT TREES, AS
MANY AS POSSIBLE.
-
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned
at 9:44 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
Approved, _
~' :.-./,' :ff!-:'<;c~'- ~
/ ~::- ..-l jI/
. Fred Domi~~---/.--
Chairman
Respectfully s~!tted,
cfZ~ ~d'1f
Linda Gri nds ta ff
Planning Commission
Secretary
-
-
MI NUTES 0 F
HELD ON THE
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
5TH
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1985
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Washburn.
-
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Culp,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
MI NUTE ACT! ON
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve minutes of January 15, 1985, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 84-9 - Al Hertz - Staff presented proposal for a Condi-
tional Use Permit to construct an interim marina facility; consisting of: con-
struction of a permanent mooring for fifty boats with a limitation of twenty-six
feet in length, a boat house, temporary parking area and restrooms, located on
the south side of Lakeshore Drive, between St. John Way and Bushman Avenue.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:33 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 84-9. Receiving no response, the
Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no response,
the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.
-
Discussion was held on sanitary facility; temporary gravel parking lot; ingress/
egress on Lakeshore Drive; fueling (pertaining to spillage); time limit on Condi-
tional Use Permit; condition number 29, 30 and 33.a. (pertaining to deferment--
City Engineer recommended that condition number 29 be broken down into 29.a. and
29.b.); no boat launching shall be permitted on premises being added as a condi-
tion; condition number 45 and 46; condition number 15; condition number 29.a.
(pertaining to deferment of sidewalk only); boat launching being allowed, and;
time limit on parking lot and sewer being provided.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Conditional Use Permit 84-9 with
staff reccimmendations deleting condition ~umberl5, amending condition number
29, this condition shall be compl eted not deferred except for the sidewal k which
shall be deferred; condition number 30 shall be deferred; condition number 33.a.
shall be completed prior to Certificate of Occupancy; add the following verbiage
as condition: "No boat launching shall be permitted on premises other than those
leasing the slips", and; add the following verbiage as condition: "All conditions
shall be met prior to the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy", second by Com-
missioner Saathoff with discussion.
Discussion ensued on condition number 6.
City Engineer stated that if we elect to construct the curb and gutter that we
also require the paving be constructed.(condition number 30).
-
Commissioner Mellinger amended his motion to include the construction of paving,
second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
1. All signs are required to be issued City Permit and be approved by
Planning Division.
2. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
3. Meet County Health Department requirements.
4. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
5. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
6. All open areas on-site that are designated for future development
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-9 - AL HERTZ CONTINUED
expansion shall be covered with D & G to control dust and erosion.
7. Appl icant is to post sign on subject property for the purpose of
providing rules and regulations for the safe use of the facility,
to be approved by the Planning Division.
8. Applicant shall provide appropriate trash receptacles on-site, to
be approved by Planning Division.
9. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
-
10. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
11. Applicant is to provide a permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
12. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated on the
site plan unless otherwise modified by the Planning Commission.
13. Landscaping/irrigation plan shall be implemented and in place, prior
to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy.
14. Conditional Use Permit valid for a~two (2) year period, and subject
to an annual review.
15.
Ne-a+6eRe+4e-BeYeFa~es-te-Be-se+8-eR-s4te~
DELETED.
16. Applicant shall provide temporary security lighting plan to be directed
on-site with effective shields to prevent the emission of glare onto
adjacent streets and property, to be approved by Planning Division.
17. Any changes or intensifications associated with the marina's boating
or related activities shall require written approval by the Community
Development Director.
18-. Applicant is to abide by the established State Park and Recreation
Department hours of operation "regulating the proposed recreation use.
19.. Appl icant is to provi de Buil di ng Department wi th proof of contractual
agreement for the periodically pumping of self contained restroom
facilities by the submission of this contract and monthly receipts.
-
20. Applicant is to incorporate security measures on-site to ensure the
private retention of subject property and related use, to be approved
by the Planning Division.
21. Appl icant is to post bond to guarantee the construction and connection
from subject site to existing sanitary sewer system within a two-year
.period.
22. Applicant is to remove all concrete foundation debris on-site prior to
issuance of building permits.
23.
Applicant is to cooperate in an annual review and evaluation to ensure
the safety and efficiency of the marina operation which is to include
but not limited to off-site traffic problems, wastewater removal, and
boating activities. Review process is to be conducted by both Engineer-
ing and Planning Departments.
24. No portable bathroom facilities.
--
25. Floating docks to be reviewed and approved by Planning Division.
26. Provide Class II Bike Lane along Lakeshore Drive.
27. Meet all requirements of Ordinance 572.
28. Dedicate additional la-feet of right-of-way for Lakeshore Drive along
the total property frontage. Lakeshore Drive is classified per City
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-9 - AL HERTZ CONTINUED
-
General Plan as a Modified Secondary which requires an ultimate right-
of-way of80 feet. The existing right-of-way is now at 60-feet.
29. a. Construct curb and gutter and sidewalk, WITH SIDEWALK ONLY TO BE
DEFERRED WITH STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT, along total property frontage
of Lakeshore Drive.
b. Applicant must agree to "NO PARKING" along the curb line for the
total frontage.
30. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter on
Lakesbore Drive. Tests must be provided to show that existing paving
will support the traffic load represented by the City Engineer's traffic
index of 7.5 for Lakeshore Drive.
31. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include required signing and striping. As built
street, grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
32. Public improvements to conform with City Code requirements and City
approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
33. a.
Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer.
b. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscap-
ing Maintenance District.
34. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636, the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70, Ordinance 711 and Ordinance 603.
-
35. Provide Soils and Geology Report, including street design recommendations.
Provide final Grade Certification of pad(s) elevation per approved grad-
ing [J1an and a final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
36. Provide Grading Plan, Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a registered
Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of construction
slopes with the required Uniform Building Code setback requirements.
37. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by
tb.eCity Engineer; including street trees. To be deferred to permit
stage.
-
38. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing sewer availability from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District, County Health Department and California
Regional Water Quality Control Board for on-site sewage disposal.
39. Provide to City a Surety Bond in the amount of $100,000 to guarantee
construction within two-years, of a sanitary sewer system with pump
station to serve this development. City to approve Surety Company.
40. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water availability from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
41. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
42. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572. At
permit stage.
43. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District schedule.
44. Pay all Public Safety fees (police and fire) per Resolution No. 83-87,
at building permit stage.
45. Applicant to consent to enter into an agreement with the City to pay
traffic safety mitigation fee for future signalization in the amount
of $19,000, at permit stage.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-9 - AL HERTZ CONTINUED
46. Applicant to enter into agreement with the City to pay Street Sweeping
Mitigation fee in the amount of $200.00, at permit stage.
47. NO BOAT LAUNCHING SHALL BE PERMITTED ON PREMISES OTHER THAN THOSE
LEASING THE SLIPS.
48. ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY.
BUS I NESS ITEMS
-
1. Lot Line Adjustment 84-6 - Olimpiu Apahidean/Vese - Staff presented proposal
for a Lot Line Adjustment to create two lots (7,750t square feet) out of
three existing parcels of 5,300t square feet, located on lash Avenue, approxi-
mately 250 feet northeast of the corner of Lash Avenue and Smith Street.
Staff requested that applicant process a lot merger be added as condition
number 3.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a
copy of the conditions and if there were any questions. Mr. Apahidean
answered in the negative.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Lot Line Adjustment 84-6 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1. City Engineer verification of legal description as accurate.
2. Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
3. APPLICANT TO PROCESS A LOT MERGER.
-
2. Single-Family Residences - 16440 and 16450 Lash Avenue - Olimpiu Apahidean/Vese _
Staff presented proposal to construct two single-family residences on two adja-
cent lots. Both parcels will take access off of Lash Avenue via two separate
181 x 30' concrete driveways.
Cbairman asked the appl icant if he had received a copy of the conditions and
if l'Le had any problems. Mr. Apahidean asked for clarification on condition
number 10 and 14, and how long it would take to pull the permit. Mr. Apahidean
received clarification from the City Engineer on conditions 10 and 14.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residences at 16440
and 16450 Lash Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner
Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
1. Meet all County of Riverside Fire Department requirements for fire pro-
tection.
2. Meet all Riverside County Health Department requirements.
3. Applicant shall meet all Planning Division requirements and City Codes
and Ordi nances .
4. Applicant shall use Class "A" fire rated roofing materials.
....-
5. Erosion shall be controlled through the use of plastic tarps during
construction and plantings after construction.
6. Approval of the two (2) single-family residences shall be contingent on
finalization of Lot Line Adjustment 84-6 with the Riverside County
Recorder.
7. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
8. No dedication requirement needed.
9. Construct curb and gutter along the total property frontage to be
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 5
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES 16440 AND 16450 LASH AVENUE - APAHIDEAN/VESE CONTINUED
located 20-feet from street centerline.
-
10. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter
along total property frontage of Lash Avenue.
11. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading and drainage improvement plans are required.
12. Public improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and
City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
13. Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer, if required.
a. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and
Landscaping Maintenance District.
14. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
15. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Pro-
vide final frade certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
16. Provide Grading Plan, Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top
of construction slopes and with the required Uniform Building Code
setback requirements.
-
17. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District, County Health Department and California Regional Water
Quality Control Board for on-site sewage disposal.
18. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing water availability from Elsinore
Water District.
19_. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass ignees .
2Q. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection, including hydrant installation and upsizing, if required.
Applicant shall install City approved fire hydrant and all appurtenances
if structure is 250' or greater distance from existing fire hydrant.
21. Applicant shall upgrade existing fire hydrant and all appurtenances if
hydrant is not City approved.
22. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
23. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's
schedule, if required.
24. Pay all School fees.
-
3. Single-Family Residence - 339 Avenue 6 - Richard S. Shoemaker - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residence, located at the corner of Park-
way and Avenue 6. Access will be taken off of Avenue 6 via a 20 foot x 15 foot
concrete driveway.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked for discussion at the table.
A brief discussion was held on the size of the garage and the width of the
driveway.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 339
Avenue 6 with staff recommendations and the width of the driveway to be 20
feet adjacent to the garage, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 5, 1985
Page 6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 339 AVENUE 6 - RICHARD S. SHOEMAKER CONTINUED
1. Applicant shall meet all setback requirements.
2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
3. Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements for
fi re protection.
4. Applicant shall meet all Riverside County Health Department require-
ments.
-
5. Comply with the requirements of Ordinance 572.
6. No street dedication is required.
7. Construct standard sidewalk to match existing sidewalks on both sides
of this lot. Construct standard driveway approach and any pavement
replacement needed due to driveway installation.
8. The site is a well-defined lot with existing single-family residences
on both sides. The grading plan requirement has been waived, but the
site plan must be conditioned that all drainage be directed toward
Avenue 6 by standard one percent (1%) minimum drainage swales. A
Certificate of Survey has been provided to the City Engineer's Office
for acceptance. Provide a final grading certification to the City
Engineer for approval.
9. All street improvements shall be in accordance with the City approved
Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
1Q. A watermain exists in Avenue 6 and water service is available to
applicant, upon payment of fees.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572.
Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and California Regional Water Quality Control
Board for on-site sewage disposal.
Comply with the County Fire Department protection requirements to
include installation or upsizing of fire hydrant, if required by City
Engineer.
-
Install street light as approved by the City Engineer, if required.
Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance
District.
Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
-assignees.
Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District1s
schedule, if required.
Pay all School fees.
4. Single-Family Residence - 1830 Bromley Avenue - Andrew Moffat - Staff presented
applicant's request for a continuance to the meeting of February 19, 1985. _
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to continue Single-Family Residence to the
meeting of February 19, 1985, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
5. Commercial Project 85-1 - Art Nelson - Staff presented proposal to construct a
shopping center consisting of five buildings on approximately 4.72 acres,
located on the northwest corner of Riverside Drive and Lincoln Street.
The proposed commercial shopping center will consist of a restaurant and four
retail stores,and will be serviced by five driveway approaches taken off River-
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 7
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 85-1 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
side Drive, and one ingress/egress approach onto Lincoln Street.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a copy
of the conditions and if there were any problems.
-
Mr. Fred Crowe of Butterfield Surveys, representing the applicant stated that
they had concerns over several of the conditions. First, under STAFF DISCUSSION,
second page--first sentence, IIAll forementioned recommendations are suggested to
be subject to comments and directives made by the California Department of Trans-
portationll--would 1 ike the wordllconsiderationll inserted, making it read: IIAll
forementioned recommendations are suggested to be subject to consideration of
comments and directives made by Cal ifornia Department of Transportationll.
Mr. Crowe questioned the following conditions:
Condition number 9, pertaining to the stop signage, stating that in some
centers this is painted on the pavement, and wanted to know what staff
envisioned for these signs. Mr. Corcoran stated that with the painted
signs on the pavement, these were sometime ignored; and they were look-
ing for small octagonal signs. Discussion ensued on this condition.
Condition number 20, pertaining to the no parking along Lincoln Street.
Discussion ensued on this condition.
-
Condition number 25, pertaining to the curb, gutter, curb return and
spandrel. Mr. Crowe stated that after meeting with the City Engineer
they felt they had reached an agreement that was agreeable to all parties;
in.that, Mr. Nelson would continue the paving improvements on the other
side of Lincoln Street from his project to improve the paving portion,
and the City had budgeted earlier to build the spandrel and sidewalk for
that return under a pervious project, which has not been built yet. We
were hoping that the City would build the spandrel, curb return and side-
walk on the adjoining property and Mr. Nelson would do the paving. Mr.
Culp stated that Mr. Crowe, Mr. Nelson and himself agreed upon Mr. Nelson
providing the paving, the construction surveying, as well as providing
the concrete crew,and the City would pay for the labor and the materials
for the completion of the spandrel, curb return and a portion of the walk.
Mr. Culp stated that the wording of the condition should be changed to
reflect. their agreement.
Mr. Culp stated that there was another condition that requires Mr. Nelson
to provide the final paving course along Riverside Drive, and he has agreed
to the final paving course (condition number 26).
Condition number 29, would 1 ike to delete the word lIoverlayll; and after the
word pavement, would like to add the words lito centerlinell. Mr. Culp stated
that he had no problem with this request.
-
Condition number 30, pertaining to storm water run-off and the providing of
a drainage system design for discharge to existing Leach Canyon. Applicant
shall construct drainage facilities as required by City Engineer or pay an
equitable drainage fee as determined by the City Engineer. Mr. Crowe stated
that what they would like to do with this item, is offer a $20,000.00 cash
amount to go toward the ultimate drainage solution of the area, and sufficient
monies to be an equitable part of the design. We feel that this project only
being approximately four acre project,of maybe a two or three-hundred acrea
area,should not attempt at this time to evaluate and do a complete drainage
plan not knowing how the other areas would like to develop. As proposed was
a $20,000.00 cash amount for improvements and another $3,600.00 (which is 18%
of $20,000.00) for engineering, to be deposited with the City and leave the
design and improvements to a later time. Mr. Culp stated that in their meet-
ing they discussed and calculated an estimated cost for facilities, and we
feel that what Mr. Nelson proposed for drainage fee, as well as design is an
equitable fee for the amount of drainage he will be contributing to the street.
Condition number 16, pertaining to the driveway on Lincoln Street. Mr. Crowe
stated that what they would like to propose is closing one of those driveways--
the driveway on Riverside Drive, and in the area where we close the one drive
there would be additional planter area. We would like to have the condition
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 8
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 85-1 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
on Lincoln Street to read 150 feet instead of 200 feet, to leave the
driveway where it is to line up with the main drive through the pro-
ject, rather than having a jog as we go out onto Lincoln. Mr. Cu1p
stated that there was not a problem with this. Discussion ensued on
this condition pertaining to Ca1 Trans requirements.
/'
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Commercial Project 85-1 with staff
recommendations with the following changes: on page two of staff report, add
the word "considerationsll making the sentence read: IIAll forementioned recom- _
mendations are suggested to be subject to consideration of comments and
directives made by the Ca1 ifornia Department of Transportationll; ameridcondi-
tion number 9, by adding the following verbiage IISmall decorative signage and
striping to be approved by Planning Divisionll; amend condition number 16, by
reducing the 11200 feetll to 11150 feetll; amend condition number 25, to read:
IIDeve10per to provide construction survey for the curb return, spandrel and
concrete crew. The City will pay for the labor and materials for the comp1e~
tion of the spandrel, curb return and a portion of the wa1 k as per agreement
with the City Engineerll; amend condition number 26, by adding the following
verbiage lias per agreement with the City Engineerll; amend condition number 29,
by deleting the word lIover1ayll and after the words lIexisting pavementll insert
the words lito center1inell; amend condition number 30, by adding the following
verbiage 11 as per the agreement with the City Engineer and the applicant per-
taining to the $20,000.00 cash amount to the City for drainage facilities, and
$3,600.00 for design fee (engineering), to be deposited with the City, second
by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
1. Applicant shall meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
2. Meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
3. All items depicted on site plan shall be provided as indicated unless
otherwise modified by the Planning Commission and/or Design Review
Board.
-
4~ Meet County Health Department requirements concerning wastewater dis-
posa 1 .
5. Meet Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements.
6. All signage shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to
issuance of permit.
7. Applicant shall delete northeast most driveway approach and restrict
driveway approach north of Building #3 to ingress only, and approach
south of Building to egress only.
8. All ingress/egress and one-way driveway approaches shall indicate
-deletion of parking space nearest entrance openings (total of 5 spaces).
Parking areas designated to be eradicated from site plan layout shall
he replaced with low-lying shrubbery, subject to the approval of
Planning Division.
IISTOPII signage shall be placed at perpendicular drives (three (3)) to
central throughway (southwest to northeast) traversing entire site.
SMALL DECORATIVE SIGNAGE AND STRIPING TO BE APPROVED BY PLANNING
DIVISION.
9.
---
10. Speed bumps are to be placed at appropriate intervals along central
throughway that traverses the entire length of site, subject to the
approval of the Planning Division and Engineering Department.
11. Finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
12. Issuance of a Negative Declaration.
13. All lighting to be directed on-site.
14. Dedicate three feet (.311 for widening Lincoln Street right-of-way to
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 9
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 85-1 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
15.
33-foot one-half street right-of-way and to include a standard corner
cut-off dedication.
Construct commercial sidewalk eight-feet (8') wide along Riverside
Drive and Lincoln Street. Repair or replace any damaged curb and
gutters as required by the City Engineer.
16. The driveway on Lincoln Street shall be a minimum of 150 feet from
the centerline of Riverside Drive. Only four (4) driveways shall be
permitted along the Riverside Drive frontage. On Riverside Drive a
driveway shall not be closer than 200 feet from the centerline of
Lincoln Street. The northeasterly driveway on Riverside Drive shall
be a minimum of 50 feet from the site boundary because of the prox-
imity to an adjacent commercial driveway. Comply with Cal Trans
requirements regarding driveways.
-
17. Install street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
18. Provide for bike lanes as required by the City Engineer and Cal Trans.
19. Obtain encroachment permit from Cal Trans for public improvements in
Riverside Drive street right-of-way.
20. Applicant shall provide "NO PARKING" signage and/or "STRIPING" along
the Lincoln Street frontage of applicant's property, to be approved
by the City Engineer.
21. Agree to contribute $31,388 toward the construction of the signals
at Lincoln Street and Riverside Drive.
-
The vehicular traffic generated from this proposed development
will seriously impact traffic safety at the corner of Riverside
Drive and Lincoln Street. A traffic signal will be required at
this intersection and will be constructed when funds are avail-
able. An equitable distribution of costs among undeveloped pro-
perties impacting the traffic s~fety at this intersection has
been determined and is available in the City Engineer's Office.
22. Provide landscaping and irrigation plan, including street trees, to
be approved by the City Engineer.
23. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
24. All on-site utilities shall be underground.
25. DEVELOPER TO PROVI DE CONSTRUCTION SURVEY FOR THE CURB RETURN, SPANDREL
AND CONCRETE CREW. THE CITY WILL PAY FOR THE LABOR AND MATERIALS FOR
THE COMPLETION OF THE SPANDREL, CURB RETURN AND A PORTION OF THE WALK
AS PER AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY ENGINEER.
26. Provide final course of paving along Riverside Drive, Lincoln Street
cross gutter, curb return with paving transition, delineators and
striping, AS PER AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY ENGINEER.
-
27. Repair paving adjacent to cross gutter on Riverside Drive.
28. Replace and strengthen the curb outlet drain diamond plate and steel
channel brace at north edge of property onto Riverside Drive.
29. Qvef'fay, repair, slurry seal and/or fog seal existing pavement TO CENTER-
LINE on Lincoln Street and Riverside Drive as determined necessary by
Cal Trans and/or City Engineer.
30. This commercial development will cause increased storm water run-off.
Applicant shall furnish to City and/or Cal Trans a drainage system
design for discharge to existing Leach Canyon Channel. Applicant shall
construct drainage facilities as required by City Engineer or pay an
equitable drainage fee as determined by the City Engineer. AS PER THE
AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY ENGINEER AND THE APPLICANT, $20,000.00 CASH
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 10
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 85-1 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
AMOUNT TO GO TOWARD THE ULTIMATE DRAINAGE SOLUTION OF THE AREA, AND
$3,600.00 FOR DESIGN FEE (ENGINEERING) TO BE DEPOSITED WITH THE CITY.
31. Provide Soils and Geology Report and Grading Plan, and Final Soils
Report and Grade Certification, and a Certificate of Survey.
32.
Provide will serve letter and connection to sanitary sewer as ap-
proved by Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, City Engineer
and Cal Trans. Provide cleanout at property line. Applicant must
acknowledge that property owner or Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District is to be responsible for sewer lateral maintenance to the
main sewer.
-
33. Dedicate water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its assignee.
34. Provide will serve letter from water service agency, Provide fire
protection in compliance with written requirements of the County
Fire Department.
35. Pay Capital Improvement fee in compliance with Ordinance 572 and
Resolution 77-39.
36. Pay Public Safety fee in compliance with Resolution 83-4.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran informed the Commission of the City-County Planning Commissioners Winter
Conference to be held February 14, 1985, in Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Mr. Corcoran informed the Commission that we now have copies of the Lake Elsinore
Municipal Code available for each of the Commissioners, ,and you can sign out for it
at the Planning Department Office.
Mr. Culp reported on the January 26, 1985, clean-up along Lakeshore, stating that
they had a tremendous turn out by local youths (Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Dasies,
Brownies and Juniors) also, tremendous sponsorship from local businesses, and
wished to thank everyone for their help.
-
PLANNING COMMISSIONER 'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Mellinger - Even though it is County area, there is a building that is
open and vacant and kids are playing in it, just north of Lakeshore Drive on Gunnerson.
This should be referred to the Enforcement Division of the County or the Fire Depart-
ment since it is a violation of the Fire Code.
The tracts; in the area where I live, are undergoing more septic failure. I would
1 i ke to as k for a report,. I woul d 1 i ke to have the County Health Department call ed
or check to see--review the records of their soils tests. I have a suspicion that
they were fraudulent, and I would like to make sure that was not the case. I
would like to see the Health Department check into that report and make sure that
the report was accurate. If not, I would like to see some sort of legal proceedings
initiated by the City. In addition, I think we should consider no more septic tanks
in tlie Ci ty for tracts.
Commi ss ioner Washburn - I waul d 1 i ke to have the Gi rl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and Browni es-
dispurse on the eastern area, east of Main--especially at the end of Main Street along
Peck Street; there are a number of Code Enforcement problems, and 11m sure Code Enforce-
ment is aware of it, 1111 highlight it though--I think the area on Peck Street, be-
cause I did receive a complaint flyer from a citizen on abandoned automobiles on
vacant lots up on the east side of Peck Street.
There is also a burnt out structure at Flint and Langstaff, two-story building down
by the City Yard. 11m sure that you,are picking up on that and asking the applicant
to come and clean off the property of the debris.
Commissioner Barnhart - Just have a question of the City, where the Chamber of Com-
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 5, 1985
Page 11
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION CONTINUED
merce office is, what exactly is the right-of-way? Problem is, we have Chamber
business only parking sign there and with the flyers that I passed out there is
only two hour parking on Graham Avenue, everybody is parking in what I think is
the City parking lot or our parking lot, but I don't know whether or not I can
call to have those cars cited. You can't cite the cars for two hour parking
until the signs are up, and I don't know when that is going into effect.
.....
Mr. Cu1p stated that the parking signs, as he understands has been ordered--if
we are not in receipt of them already. It is my understanding that they have to
be up for approximately 72 hours in advance of enforcement.
Chairman Dominguez - None
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, secon by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
5TH
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1985
MINUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of January 15, 1985, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residences - 16440 and 16450 Lash Avenue - Olimpiu Apahidean/Vese _---
Staff presented proposal to construct two single-family residences on two adja-
cent lots, located on Lash Avenue approximately 250 feet northeast of the inter-
section of Lash Avenue and Smith Street.
Both structures will have the same floor plan. Materials to be used in each
structure include stucco siding, wood trim and composition shingles.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a copy
of the conditions and if there were any problems.
A brief discussion was held on condition number 2, pertaining to the variation
of building elevations.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residences at 16440
and 16450 Lash Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be varied through the use of different color
schemes, roofing materials, and use of wood trim.
---
3. Grading plans are to be approved by Engineering Department.
4~ Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way,
minimum 15 gallons, thirty feet (30') apart.
5. Applicant shall submit a landscaping/irrigation plan to be -approved by
Planning Division.
6. All planting areas shall have permanent sprinkler systems.
2. Single-Family Residence - 339 Avenue 6 - Richard S. Shoemaker - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residence, located at the corner of Park-
way and Avenue 6.
Toe structure will have 1,026 square feet of dwelling area with an attached
garage of 300 square feet. Materials to be used include stucco siding, wood
fascia, wood trim and composition shingles.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked for discussion at the table. There being no discussion at
the table, Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 339
Avenue 6 with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn. ___
Approved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Grading plans are to be approved by the Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way, to
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 5, 1985
Page 2
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 339 AVENUE 6 - RICHARD S. SHOEMAKER CONTINUED
-
be approved by the Planning Division.
5. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30-feet apart.
6. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation, to be
approved by Planning Division.
7. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
3. Single-Family Residence - 1830 Bromley Avenue - Andrew Moffat - Motion by
Commissioner Saathoff to continue Single-Family Residence to the meeting
of February 19, 1985, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
4. Single-Family Residence - 16518 Smith Avenue REVISED - Danny Celeketic - Staff
presented proposal to construct a 1 ,661 square foot two-story residence,
located approximately 80 feet west of the intersection of Ingham Street and
Smith Street.
Materials to be used in the project include cedar siding, cedar trim, brick
veneer and wood shake shingles.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked for discussion at the table. A brief discussion was held
on condition number 8, pertaining to roofing material.
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 16518
Smith Avenue REVISED with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner
Mellinger.
Approved 5-_0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
nei ghbori ng property or publ i c streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Grading plans are to be approved by the Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant trees outside the public right-of-way, to be
approved by the Planning Division.
5. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30-feet apart.
6. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation, to be
approved by Planning Division.
7. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
8. Applicant to utilize Class "A" roofing material.
5. Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED - Howard Palmer/Carl's Jr. - Staff presented
proposal to construct one building containing four (4) commercial retail
businesses consisting of 2,400; 2,290; 3,280 and 2,800 square feet. Also to
construct a 3,400 square foot Carl's Jr. fast food restaurant, located north-
westerly of the intersection of Railroad Canyon Road and Casino Drive.
Materials to be used in the project include Mission Tile roofing, stucco
siding, wood trim, and an intermixing of slumpstone veneer.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience.
Mr. Fred Crowe, of Butterfield Surveys, representing the applicant stated that
he also has with him Mr. Robert Friedman who is the architect for Howard Palmer,
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 5, 1985
Page 3
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 83-8 REVISED - HOWARD PALMER/CARL'S JR. CONTINUED
and Mr. Lee Olsen representing Carl's Jr. Mr. Crowe then stated that they
had concerns on the following conditions:
Condition number 1, pertaining the the screening of the roof mounted
equipment. Mr. Crowe stated that he was not sure that they could
totally screen the roof mounted equipment from the freeway. As the
freeway is higher than the roof, but we can screen it from the ramp
area, once they start down the ramp.
Condition number 6, pertaining the the re-positioning of restaurant
facility twenty-five feet west of existing location, and allow for
fifteen feet of corner landscaping along easterly area of building.
Proposed landscaping is approximately 13-14 feet.
Condition number 7, the two isolated and centrally located parking
configurations shall be modified to reflect a continuous planter
median for landscaping purposes. Not sure where those areas are.
Staff point out on plot plan where they were requesting those to be
located.
-
A lengthy discussion was held on condition number 6, architectural design for
the project, landscaping plan to be submitted, and signage for the project.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 83-8 REVISED with
staff recommendations amending condition number 5, by adding the following
verbiage IIsignage to be reviewedll; deleting condition number 7, and amending
condition number 6, to read: liThe re-position of the restaurant facil ity shall
be relocated to a total of 20 feet to allow for 15 foot of landscaping and 5
foot of s i dewa lkll, second by Commi ss ioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1. All r~of mounted equipment, trash area, and ground support equipment
shall be effectively screened from publ ic view and subject to ap-- _
proval by the Planning Division.
2. All planting areas shall have permanent and automatic sprinkler system.
3. All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six-inch
(6111 high concrete curb.
4. Interior design shall incorporate a recreational motif (Carl's Jr.).
5. Landscaping.and SIGNAGE plans shall be reviewed and approved by Design
Review Roard.
6. THE RE-POSITION OF THE RESTAURANT FACILITY SHALL BE RELOCATED TO A
TOTAL OF 20 FEET TO ALLOW FOR 15 FOOT OF LANDSCAPING AND 5 FOOT OF
SIDEWALK.
7 . :rAe-~we - t3H-4sa h ~e8-a Fl8-eeFlba l ly- laea ~e8- ~a f'k4Fl~-ea FlH ~l:If'a ~4a FlS - sRa ++-
ee-fR9 a4He8-~a -l'le:f+ee~-a-ea flU Fll:la l:lS - ~h Fl~el'l-A'le84a Fl-:fa l'l- +a Flasea~4 Fl~-
~l:If'~eses,; DELETED.
6. Commercial Project 85-1 - Art Nelson - Staff presented proposal to construct a
shopping center consisting of five buildings on approximately 4.72 acres,
located on the northwest corner of Riverside Drive and Lincoln Street.
The complex will consist of four stores with 12,000;6,000; 16,320, and 9,300
square feet, respectively. The fifth structure will house a restaurant which
will have 9,300 square feet of floor area.
The proposed architectural theme will be nautical. The roofing and siding
materials incorporated within the building e1evational designs reflect this
designated style.
-
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a copy
of the conditions and if there were any problems.
Mr. Art Nelson questioned the continuous planter median, in the staff report
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 5, 1985
Page 4
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 85-1 - ART NELSON CONTI NUED
under (I.) Landscaping and stated that it is also listed as condition number
9. Mr. Nelson suggested that this condition be deleted and leave the parking
as shown. Discussion ensued on this condition.
Mr. Nelson also expressed concern over the recommendation, as listed in the
staff report, of deletion of the photo processing facility within the center.
Discussion ensued on the location of proposed photo processing facility and
entry arrows for project. Staff stated that in the same area of the staff
report, recommendations 1 and 3 were not addressed in the conditions, in case
the Board would like to review those for consideration as conditions. Dis-
cussion ensued on these recommendations.
-
Di scuss ion was he1 d on amendi ng condition number 8, to read: "Landscapi ng/i r-
rigation and signage to be approved by Design Review Board"; condition number
14, changing the numbers "4 and 5" to "2 and 4" pertaining to the location of
security lighting, and roofing materials to be used on the project.
Staff stated that if the Board decides to go with the kiosk, staff is request-
ing that the building elevations be submitted to the Planning Division and
then be scheduled for Design Review Board scrutiny.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Commercial Project 85-1 with staff
recommendations amending condition number 8, to read: "Landscaping/irrigation
and signage to be approved by Design Review Board"; amending condition number
14, by changing the numbers "4 and 5" to "2 and 4"; adding condition number 19,
which will read: liThe kiosk, photo processing facility, plans be processed and
presented to the Design Review Board", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-1 Commissioner Mellinger voting no
-
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
-
9.
1. Applicant is to provide street trees outside of public right-of-way at
30-foot intervals along frontage of Lincoln Street and Riverside Drive,
to be approved by Planning Division.
2. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to the develop-
ment shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible
from neighboring property or public streets.
Applicant is to install permanent and automatic sprinkler system for
all planting areas.
Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
All planting areas shall be separated from paved areas with a six-inch
[6"). hi gh concrete curb.
All trash areas and storage shall be screened and approved by the
Planning Division.
Grading plans to be approved by Engineering Department.
Landscaping/irrigation AND SIGNAGE plans to be approved by DESIGN REVIEW
BOARD.
All centrally isolated parking layouts, six (6), on Site Plan shall pro-
vide a continuous planter median of low-lying shrubbery, to be approved
by Planning Division.
10. Building #3, #4, and #5 shall provide landscaping along frontage of
structures and, if applicable, along sides of the commercial buildings.
11. The northwest property boundary shall be treated with appropriate land-
scaping material to provide a buffer and screening effect that will
protect and ensure privacy of adjacent residences.
12. All street ingress/egress points, four (4), to complex shall be pro-
vided with an eight-foot (81) wide stamped concrete band. Additionally,
bands of stamped concrete shall also be provided along the central
throughway at appropriately spaced intervals, to be approved by Planning
Division and Engineering Department.
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 5, 1985
Page 5
COMMERCIAL PROJECT 85-1 - ART NELSON CONTINUED
13. Applicant is to submit master commercial center lighting plan, indicat-
ing type, location, and illumination radius within subject parking
facility, to be approved by Planning Division and Engineering Depart-
ment.
14. Building #2 and #4 shall include, but not limited to, the locating
of security lighting in rear of structures, to be approved by Planning
Division.
-
15. All buildings shall be equipped with outdoor security lighting to be
shielded from public views and adjacent property, to be approved by
Planning Division.
16. Pavement directional arrow striping shall be provided throughout com-
mercial center, to be approved by Planning Division and Engineering
Depa rtment.
17. B.uilding #5 shall be relocated fifteen-feet (151) towards northerly
property line to accommodate more vegetation along subject building's
southwest building elevationa1 line.
18. A landscaping theme along Riverside Drive shall be continued along
proposed driveway approach areas that were previously recommended to
be eradicated (see Planning Commission staff report).
19. THE KIOSK, PHOTO PROCESSING FACILITY, PLANS BE PROCESSED AND PRESENTED
TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD.
7.
Review of Sign for Commercial Project 83-12 - Herbert and Vivian Hall/Daven-
port (Aloha Pools) - Staff presented el eva tion of proposed sign for Aloha
Pools, meeting condition number 3 of the original conditions of approval.
The applicant is proposing to erect a 20-foot high freestanding sign. The
proposed sign will be two sided and illuminated; each face will be 61 x 81
(fl.8 square feet) and will have bl ue copy on a white background.
-
Staff feels that the proposed sign is too large and will be out of scale with
existing structures and signs on Lakeshore Drive, and is requesting a reduction
in height to 15 feet and, in sign area, to 25 square feet.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience and if he had any questions.
Mr. Rick Davenport stated that he did not receive a copy of staff's recommenda-
tion, and as far as in some type of regulation or agreement with signing in the
area, there is no signing in that area. Mr. Davenport stated that because they
had to give the City dedication of property along Lakeshore Drive, their build-
ing sits behind adjacent buildings, making it visually impossible to locate
their retail business until you are right in front or past the store, coming
from tour Corners, and we need to be seen coming from the Four Corners area.
Mr. Davenport stated that any sign smaller than a 6 x 8 would not direct people
adequately to their place of business.
A lengthy discussion was held on the height of the sign, area of the sign, place-
ment of sign Uocation), copy and color scheme of sign, sign requirements per the
ordinance, and addressing each business individually according to the demand of
the sign that they needed.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve sign for Commercial Project 83-12 _
as submitted by applicant, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
8. Review of Elevations and Landscaping Plan for Conditional Use Permit 84-12 _
Dave Vosburgh/Cal i fornia Property Exchange - Staff presented El evations and
Landscaping Plan as required by condition number 10, of the original conditions
of approval.
The trailer proposed for subject site is 141 x 60'. Materials to be used in
its construction include wood siding and composition shingles. The trailer in-
corporates two large decks on the northern and eastern sides of the structure.
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 5, 1985
Pa ge 6
REVIEW OF ELEVATIONS AND LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-12 - DAVE
VOSBURGH/CALIFORNIA PROPERTY EXCHANGE CONTINUED
A brief discussion was held on the landscaping for project.
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Elevations and Landscaping Plan
for Conditional Use Permit 84-12 as submitted, second by Commissioner Barn-
hart.
Approved 5-0
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:44 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Barnhart, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
Approved,
~~b
Fred DOming~~
Chairman-
-
Respectfully su~tt~d,
df~ #n/~
Linda Grindstaff $
Planning Commission
Secretary
-
MINUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD ON THE
19TH
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1985
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:34 P.M.
-
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Commissioner Mellinger.
ROLL CALL found Commissioner Saathoff, Commissioner Mellinger, Commissioner Washburn,
Commissioner Barnhart and Chairman Dominguez.
Also present were Community Development Director Corcoran, City Engineer Cul p,
Assistant Planner Coleman and Assistant Planner Miner.
Chairman introduced Ms. Carol Davis representing the Board of Realtors.
MI NUTE ACTION
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve minutes of February 5, 1985, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Conditional Use Permit 85-1 - Michael J. Maltby - Staff requested that Condi-
tional Use Permit 85-1 be continued to the meeting of March 5, 1985, due to an
inadequate plot plan.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to continue Conditional Use Permit 85-1 to the
meeting of March 5, 1985, second by Commissioner Washburn with discussion.
Commissioner Washburn stated that he would like to submit notice of petition
filed by residents in the area.
-
2. Conditional Use Permit 85-2 - Alfred A. Anderson - Staff presented proposal for
a Conditional Use Permit to allow vehicular storage in conjunction with an exist-
ing mini-storage facility, located approximately 165 feet northwest of the inter-
section of Riverside Drive and Collier Avenue.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 7:37 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Use Permit 85-2.
Mr. Gordon Anderson stated that he distributed a letter addressing a number of
the conditions proposed by staff, but would like to address sections of the
staff report. Under STAFF DISCUSSION, the proposed storage would be located to
the south with the existing mini-storage, and they will have to go through the
mini-storage in order to store their vehicles in the area designated for RV
storage. Under ANALYSIS, it states make arrangements with the propane company
to gain access to their property, which is not the case, we have a gate on El
Toro Road that allows the vehicles to go straight to the back of our property,
and does not involve the propane company at all.
,......
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
Discussion was held on letter submitted by applicant, and the possibility of
eliminating some of the conditions; General Plan Land Use and Zoning of M-2;
all RV's and boats to have current license and registration as required by the
State of California being added as a condition; no inoperable, wrecked or junked
vehicles be stored on site being added as a condition; none of the RV's shall be
occupied nor offered for sale on site being added as a condition; time limit of
two-years with annual review being added as a condition; improvements, pertai.ning
to condition number 1; no repair work to be done on site being added as a condi-
tion; access and control of gate off of El Toro Road; life estate clarification;
existing abandoned vehicles should be cleaned up; fencing around property;
improvements on El Toro Road; DG compared to paving for interior roads; deleting
condition number 20; condition number 14, should consider deferred lien agree-
ment on sidewalk; condition number 5, pertaining to lighting; deleting condition
number 9 and 12; rewording condition number 22 to read: "Applicant to consent to
participate in Storm Drainage and that the mitigation fee shall not exceed
$10,000; condition number 17, pertaining to installation of street light luminaire
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 19, 1985
Page 2
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-2 - ALFRED A. ANDERSON CONTINUED
and paying one year's energy cost; applicant in conjunction with life estate
to remove debris off of 28935 Riverside Drive; condition number 3, pertaining
to landscaping/irrigation plan when submitted include that fencing be screened
with redwood slats--enclose portion from the life estate and down to the drain-
age channel on the western side of the property.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Conditional Use Permit 85-2 with
staff recommendations and the following changes: delete condition number 9;
delete condition number 12; condition number 14, defer the sidewalk improve-
ments through standard lien agreement; condition number 22, changed to read:
"Applicant to sign agreement to participate in a Storm Drainage Impact Mitiga-
tion Program with a fee not to exceed $10,000"; add condition number 30, which
will read: "Storage shall be limited to RV's and boats only no vehicles"; add
condition number 31, which will read: "RV's, boats shall have current license
and registration as required by the State of California"; add condition number
32, which will read: "No inoperable, wrecked or junked vehicles shall be
stored on-site"; add condition number 33, which will read: "No RV.s, boats
shall be occupied at any time nor offered for sale on the premises"; add condi-
tion number 34, which will read: "No repair of RV's or boats shall occur on the
premises at any time"; add condition number 35, which will read: "Applicant
shall remove debris from property"; delete condition number 20; add condition
number 36, which will read: "Conditional Use Permit shall be valid for a period
of two years with an annual review"; condition number 1, delete the word "paving"
and insert the words "DG, as approved by the City Engineer"; add condition
number 37, which will read: "Applicant to screen the fence line midway, the
fence that parallels Riverside Drive, separating the life estate and the portion
of the fence traversing towards the west to the channel, screen it also with
wood slats", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
-
1. All interior roads and parking areas are to be DG, AS APPROVED BY THE
CITY ENGINEER.
.,."
2. All roof mounted or ground support equipment shall be architecturally
screened so as not to be visible from neighboring property or public
streets.
3. Applicant shall submit a landscaping, irrigation and fencing plan which
shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development
Director.
4. Meet County Fire Department requirements for fire protection.
5. Applicant shall submit a lighting plan showing radii and placement of
all lights. Lights should be shielded.
6. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
7. Provisions should be made for centrally located trash receptacles.
8. Appl icant shall provide a fence around the entire parcel.
~~ A,,~46aAt-5ha~~-'FeY4~e-eA-54te-Fe5tFeeffi5-ef-a-,ePffiaAeAt-Aat~pe7 DELETED.
10. Applicant shall prov.ide directional arrows on all roadways for the pur-
pose of directing on-site traffic.
11. All signs are to be approved by City Permit.
....
12. A"l46aAt-5hall-eRtep-~Ate-a-le~al-a~peeffieAt-w4th-~ffi,4pe~a5~-IA67-ef
bake-~l5~Aepe-4R-ep~ep-te-ehta4R-a~~4t4eAal-a66es5-te-the-'Fe,e5e~-
,apk4A~-apea7 DELETED.
13. Issuance of a Categorical Exemption.
14. a. Conditions are applicable if building permit or other permits are
required from the Building Department.
14. Along Riverside Drive, construct asphalt paving to street centerline,
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 19, 1985
Page 3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-2 - ALFRED ANDERSON CONTINUED
--
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
and construct driveway approach and sidewalk. Curb and gutter exists,
and some paving exists and tests must show that it is to City Standards
and will resist traffic wheel loads represented by the City Engineer's
traffic index. Sidewalk shall be six feet (6'). SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT
TO BE DEFERRED BY STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT. Curb and gutter is con-
structed 18 feet from right-of-way centerline. Existing right-of-way
is 60 feet wide. No dedication is necessary.
Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
Plans and specifications for street improvements and grading to be
prepared by a registered Civil Engineer. Public improvements to con-
form with City Code requirements and City approved Riverside County
Standard Drawings and Specifications.
Arrange for Southern California Edi son Company to i nsta 11 street 1 i ght-
ing luminaire on existing power pole and pay one year's energy cost.
Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
Provide Soils and Geology Report including street design recommendations.
Provide Final Soils Report showing compliance with preliminary report
and finish grade certification.
P~ev~ae-+aAasea~e-aAa-~~~~~at~eA-~+aA-te-ee-~ev4ewea-aAa-a~~~evea-ey
tAe-b4tY-~A~4Aee~,-4R6+~a~R~-st~eet-t~ees~ DELETED.
21. A drainage facil ity exists along the rear lot 1 ine of proposed develop-
ment. Grading plans shall show necessary improvements to protect ap-
plicant's property as required by the City Engineer. Applicant shall
indemnify and hold City harmless from drainage liabilities. Documents
shall be recorded and shall be approved by the City Attorney.
--
22. APPLICANT TO SIGN AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A STORM DRAINAGE IMPACT
MITIGATION PROGRAM WITH A FEE NOT TO EXCEED $10,000.
23. Applicant shall consent to sign an agreement to pay a Traffic Safety
Impact Mitigation fee for cost of traffic signalization in the amount
of $2,0.00..
--
24. Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
25. Consent to sign an agreement to pay Public Safety fees as required by
Resolution No. 83-87.
26. Provide for sewage disposal as approved by the City of Lake Elsinore,
Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District, the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and the County Health Department.
27. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
28. Process lot line merger to eliminate existing lot lines.
29. Provide fire protection as approved in writing by the County Fire
Department. A fire hydrant exists 120 feet northeast of northeast
line of applicant's property. Provide will serve letter from water
serving agency stating that required fire flow is available.
3Q. STORAGE SHALL BE LIMITED TO RV'S AND BOATS ONLY NO VEHICLES.
31. RV's, BOATS SHALL HAVE CURRENT LICENSE AND REGISTRATION AS REQUIRED
BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
32. NO INOPERABLE, WRECKED OR JUNKED VEHICLES SHALL BE STORED ON-SITE.
33. NO RV'S, BOATS SHALL BE OCCUPIED AT ANY TIME NOR OFFERED FOR SALE ON
THE PREMISES.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 19, 1985
Page 4
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-2 - ALFRED ANDERSON CONTINUED
34. NO REPAIR OF RV'S OR BOATS SHALL OCCUR ON THE PREMISES AT ANY TIME.
35. APPLICANT SHALL REMOVE DEBRIS FROM THE PROPERTY.
36. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHALL BE VALID FOR A PERIOD OF TWO-YEARS WITH
AN ANNUAL REVIEW.
37. APPLICANT TO SCREEN THE FENCE LINE MIDWAY, THE FENCE THAT PARALLELS
RIVERSIDE DRIVE, SEPARATING THE LIFE ESTATE AND THE PORTION OF THE
FENCE TRAVERSING TOWARDS THE WEST TO THE CHANNEL, SCREEN IT ALSO
WITH WOOD SLATS.
-
3. Conditional Exception Permit 85-1 - H.A. Taylor Awning Company - Staff presented
proposal for a Conditional Exception Permit to allow for the construction of a
patio cover which will encroach three feet within a fifteen foot rear yard set-
back, located at 925 Diane Way.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:14 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Conditional Exception Permit 85-1. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m.
A brief discussion was held on the plot plan, and lighting on patio area, if
any, to be screened and directed away from neighbors.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Conditional Exception Permit 85-1
with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
1. A finding of no significant impact upon the environment.
2. Issuance of a Categorical Exemption.
....
3. The patio construction as depicted on plot plan shall be provided as
indicated on the plot plan.
4. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances with exception to allowances made
by the Planning Commission in association to the development standard
parameters of the subject proposal.
4. Draft Environmental Impact Report for Canyon Creek Specific Plan - Railroad
Canyon, A Joint Venture
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused.
Staff presented for evaluation the Draft Environmental Impact Report for Canyon
Creek for 1 ,493 units on 491 acres, which includes single-family residences,
apartments, commercial and open space areas, located north of the San Jacinto
River, Railroad Canyon Road is to the south and 1-15 Freeway bisects the site.
Chairman opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m., asking if anyone wished to
speak in favor of Draft Environmental Impact Report for Canyon Creek.
Mr. Lawrence Buxton of Courton & Associates, Land Planner and Engineer for the
Canyon Creek project, presented slide presentation with explanations on the
Dra ft Envi ronmenta 1 Impact Report for Canyon Creek. ....
Chairman asked if anyone else wished to speak in favor. Receiving no response,
the Chairman asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Receiving no re-
sponse, the Chairman closed the public hearing at 8:35 p.m.
Discussion was held on staff's comments and agencies comments being included in
the Final Environmental Impact Report, and the San Jacinto River Bridge.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to accept Draft Environmental Impact Report for
the Canyon Creek Specific Plan with the understanding that all the staff comments
and all the comments received from other agencies be responded to in writing
prior to certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report and hearing for
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 19 s 1985
Page 5
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR CANYON CREEK SPECIFIC PLAN - RAILROAD CANYONs
A JOINT VENTURE CONTINUED
the Specific Plan itselfs second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Washburn excused
_.
Commissioner Washburn returned to the table.
B US I NESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 1830 Bromley Avenue - Andrew Moffat - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residences located approximately 100 feet
northwesterly of the intersection of Bromley Avenue and Bunker Street.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a copy
of the conditions, and if he had any probl ems.
Mr. Moffat requested that conditions 6s 7, 8 and 10 be deferred with standard
lien agreements stating that at this time there are no structures on that
street. Mr. Moffat also questioned condition number 14, pertaining to the fire
hydrant.
A lengthy discussion was held on condition number 14, pertaining to the fire
hydrant requirement; deferring conditions 6, 7 and 8 by standard lien agreement
and condition number 10, by adding the words "if required".
-
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 1830
Bromley Avenue with staff recommendations amending condition number 6 and 7, by
adding the following verbiage "defer with standard lien agreement"; condition
l4s delete the last sentence; condition number 10, add the following words "if
required by City Engineer"; amending condition number 8, by adding verbiage
"defer with standard lien agreement", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1. Applicant shall meet all setback requirements.
2. Applicant is to meet all applicable City Codes and Ordinances.
3. Applicant is to meet all County Fire Department requirements for fire
protection.
4. Applicant shall meet all Riverside County Health Department require-
ments.
5. A 40-foot right-of-way exists on Turnbull Avenue and Bromley Avenue.
No additional right-of-way is required. City Council Resolution 77-7
approved 40-foot right-of-way width for all adjacent streetss including
Bromleys but not Turnbull Avenue. Staff is assuming 40-foot right-of-
way is adequate for Turnbull Avenue.
-.
6. Install curb and gutter l6-feet from street centerline on the Turnbull
Avenue and Bromley Avenue frontages of this property. This reduced
roadway was approved for adjacent streets by City Council minute action
on November 22, 1983. Staff is assuming 32-foot roadway (curb-to-curb
width) is adequate for Turnbull Avenue. DEFER WITH STANDARD LIEN AGREE-
MENT.
7. Construct 4-foot wide sidewalk adjacent to curb (measured from curb face)
along both Turnbull and Bromley. DEFER WITH STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT.
8. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards from centerline to curbline
for anticipated traffic loads represented by Traffic Index of 6.0. Con-
struct 10-foot wide access from Bunker Street with compacted subgrade
and 4 inches of Class 3 aggregated base. DEFER WITH STANDARD LIEN AGREE-
MENT.
9. Provide grading plans Certificate of Survey, and Soils Report. Soils
report to include data for street design.
10. Provide street lighting as approved by the City Engineer. Luminaire can
be placed on wood power poles IF REQUIRED BY CITY ENGINEER.
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 19, 1985
Page 6
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 1830 BROMLEY AVENUE - ANDREW MOFFAT CONTINUED
11. Pl ans and specifications for publ ic improvements shall be prepared by
applicant's Civil Engineer for approval by City Engineer.
12. Provide sewage disposal facilities as approved by the City, County
Health Department and Regional Water Quality Control Board.
1 3.
Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
-
14. Provide water service letter with statement that a standard fire hydrant
will be constructed and that the required fire flow will be available
through the hydrant. These conditions shall conform to requirements of
the County Fire Department. MY8~aRt-s~a++-8e-6eR5t~Y6te8-8efe~e-6eR-
5t~Y6t4eR-8e~4R5.
15. Pay Capital Improvement fees, as follows:
Street
S to rm Ora in -
Park
$ .03 per square foot of lot area.
$ .02 per square foot of lot area.
$ .10 per square foot of building area.
16. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
17. Process a lot merger.
18. Pay all School fees.
2. Single-Family Residence - 1304 West Sumner Avenue - Charlie Williams - Staff
presented proposal to construct a single-family residence, located westerly of
the intersection of Mohr Street and Sumner Avenue.
Chairman asked for discussion at the table.
-
Discussion was held on condition number 19, pertaining to fire hydrant require-
ment, and condition number 6, adding verbiage that matching sidewalk be provided
along Sumner Avenue.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 1304 West
Sumner Avenue with staff recommendations amending condition number 6, by adding
the following verbiage "and matching sidewa1k", second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Appro ved 5- O.
1. Meet all County of Riverside Fire Department requirements for fire
protection.
2. Meet all Riverside County Health Department requirements.
3. Applicant shall meet all Planning Division requirements, City Codes
and Ordi nances.
4. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
5. No dedication requirement needed.
6. Construct curb and gutter AND MATCHING SIDEWALK along the total pro-
perty frontage to be located 18 feet from street centerline.
7. Construct asphal t paving from street centerl ine of Sumner Street to
th.e lip of gutter along the total property frontage.
-
8. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
9.. Pub1 ic improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and
City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
lQ. No street lighting will be required.
11. Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 19, 1985
Page 7
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 1304 WEST SUMNER AVENUE - CHARLIE WILLIAMS CONTINUED
Maintenance District.
-
12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
13. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Pro-
vide Final Grade Certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
14. Provide Grading Plan and Certificate of Survey to be prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top
of construction slopes and with the required Uniform Building Code
setback requirements.
15. Provide will serve letter from Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District on sewer availability.
16. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water
District on sewer connection to mainline sewer.
17. There is an existing six-inch water main in Sumner. Applicant shall
make application to the City Water Department for water service.
18. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
19.
Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire
protection, including hydrant installation and upsizing. There is an
existing 4" stand pipe fire hydrant that must be upsized to the City
approved standard fire hydrant, on the northeast corner of Sumner
Avenue and Mohr Street.
-
2Q. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
21. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's
schedule, if required.
22. Pay all School fees.
23. Applicant must perform a lot merger.
3. Single-Family Residence - 1031 Dawes Street - Mr. & Mrs. Werner Russ - Staff pre-
sented proposal to construct a single-family residence, located 200 feet westerly
of the intersection of Pepper and Dawes Street.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if they had received a copy
of th_e conditions, and if there were any problems. Mrs. Russ answered in the
affi.rmative and stated that there were no probl ems with the conditions.
Discussion was held on condition number 5, pertaining to street improvements,
and condition number 14, pertaining to processing a lot merger.
-
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence at 1031 Dawes
Street with staff recommendations amending condition number 5, by adding the
following verbiage "defer curb and gutter with standard lien agreement". second
by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
1. Meet all County of Riverside Fire Department requirements for fire pro-
tection.
2. Meet all Riverside County Health Department requirements.
3. Applicant shall meet all Planning Division requirements and City Codes
and Ordi nances .
4. Grading plans are to be approved by the Engineering Department.
5. Dedicate a 10-foot width of property across the total frontage of
Minutes of Planning Commission
Februa ry 19 t 1985
Page 8
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 1031 DAWES STREET - MR. & MRS. WERNER RUSS CONTINUED
appl icant's property to provide a total 50-foot right-of-way for
Dawes Street.
Construct curb and gutter 18' from centerline DEFER WITH STANDARD LIEN
AGREEMENT and construct a 5' sidewalk. Construct asphalt paving to
City Standards from new gutter to street centerline for traffic loads
represented by a traffic index of 6.5. Provide for disposal of storm
water run-off as required by the City Engineer; additional roadway
grading and a crossgutter may be required. Provide drainage release
if required by the City Engineer.
-
6. Provide grading plant Certificate of SurveYt and Soils Report. Soils
Report to include data for street design. Submit final grade certifica-
tion.
7. Plans and specifications for public improvements shall be prepared by
applicant's Civil Engineer.
8. Arrange with Southern California Edison to place a luminaire on existing
power pole 20 feet east of the east line of this property and on the
south side of Dawes Street. Pay the first year energy charge for this
1 umi na ire.
9. Provide sewage disposal facilities as approved by the CitYt County
Health Department, Regional Water Quality Control Board and Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
10. Dedicate subsurface water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore.
11. Construct standard residential hydrant where the blow-off exists 150
feet west of the west line of the site. If 550 gallons per minute at
20 PSI is not available from this hydrant for fire protectiont applicant _
must deposit with the City the funds required to increase size of, or
supplement the water main in the immediate area as required by the City
Engineer. Water service is available to the site from a 4-inch water
mai n.
Fire protection facilities must conform to requirements of the County
Fire Department.
12. Pay applicable Capital Improvement fees required by Ordinance 572 and
Resolution 77-39.
13. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
14. Process a lot merger.
15. Pay all School fees.
16. Provide street trees if required by the City Engineer and/or Department
of Community Development.
17. Pay Public Safety fees per Resolution 83-87.
4. Single-Family Residence - 16899 Sanne11e Street - James & Rosemary Nolen - Staff
presented proposal to construct a single-family residencet located on the northern
side of Sanne11e Street where Pierrot Avenue intersects with Sannelle Street.
.."
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Receiving no response, the
Chairman asked for discussion at the table.
Discussion was held on applicant processing a lot merger and this being added
as a condition, and condition number 6, pertaining to curb and gutter not being
deferred. Discussion ensued on deferment of condition number 6.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 16899
Sannelle Street with staff recommendations and add condition number 22, which
will read: "Appl icant to process a lot merger", second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 19, 1985
Pa ge 9
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16899 SANNELLE STREET - JAMES & ROSEMARY NOLEN CONTINUED
l.
- 2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Meet all County of Riverside Fire Department requirements for fire
protection.
Meet all County Health Department requirements.
Applicant shall meet all Planning Division requirements, City Codes
and Ordi na nces .
Comply with all requirements of Ordinance 572.
No dedication required.
Construct curb and gutter along the total property frontage to be
located 18 feet from street centerline of Sannelle Street.
Construct asphalt paving from street centerline to lip of gutter
along total property frontage of Sannelle Street.
Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built street,
grading, utility and drainage plans are required.
9.. Publ ic improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and
City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
10.. Install street lighting as approved by the City Engineer, if required.
11.
-
Cooperate with the City in forming a Street Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District.
Staff recommends that ultimate street improvements for this project
(conditions Numbers 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11) be deferred by standard
1 ien agreement.
12. All grading must conform to City Ordinance 636 and the Uniform Building
Code, Chapter 70.
13. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Pro-
vide final Grade Certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and submit final compaction report to the City Engineer for
acceptance and approval.
14. Provide Grading Plan and Certificate of Survey, to be prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be at the top of
construction slopes and with the required Uniform Building Code setback
requirements. Applicant must sign a drainage acceptance letter for
street run-off that drains in its present course. Property is located
in a sump area and should be designed to accommodate those flows. Ap-
plicant's engineer shall provide the City Engineer with a hydrology
study to identify those flows for design parameters.
15. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District,
County Health Department and California Regional Water Quality Control
B"oard.
-
16. Will serve letter from Elsinore Water District has been furnished for
water availability.
17. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
assignees.
18. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire pro-
tection, including hydrant installation and upsizing, if required. Ap-
plicant shall install City approved fire hydrant and all appurtenances
if structure is 250 feet or greater distance from existing fire hydrant.
19.. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement Fees per Ordinance No. 572.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 19, 1985
Pa ge 1 0
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 16899 SANNELLE STREET - JAMES & ROSEMARY NOLEN CONTINUED
20. Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's
schedule, if required.
21. Pay all School fees.
22. APPLICANT TO PROCESS A LOT MERGER.
5. Single-Family Residence - 17445 Sunnyslope Avenue - Gary Bowen - Staff presented-
proposal to construct a single-family residence, located 1,000 feet northeasterly
of the intersection of Skyline Drive and Sunnyslope Avenue.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience. Receiving no response, the
Chairman asked for discussion at the table.
Discussion was held on condition number 6 and 7, pertaining to deferment of
these conditions by standard lien agreement.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Single-Family Residence at 17445
Sunnyslope Avenue with staff recommendations amending condition number 6 and 7
by addi ng the followi ng verbiage "defer with standard 1 i en agreement", second
by Commissioner Washburn.
Approved 5-0
l.
2.
Applicant is to meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
Applicant is to meet a 11 County Fire Department requirements for fire
protectio n.
Applicant is to meet a 11 County H ea 1 th Department requirements.
Applicant is to process a lot merger.
3.
4.
-
5. An existing 40-foot right-of-way exists on Sunnyslope Avenue. No
additional right-of-way dedication is required.
6. Install curb and gutter to City Standards and Specifications 16-feet
from street centerline. A reduced pavement width may be allowed in
the future, once the master planned street sections for the Country
Club Heights area is completed. It is recommended that this be
deferred BY STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT until the City writes the ordinance
for Country Club Heights dealing with public improvements.
7. Construct asphalt paving to City Standards and Specifications from
street centerline to curbline (Traffic index = 6.0). It is recommended
that this be deferred BY STANDARD LIEN AGREEMENT until the City writes
the ordinance for Country Club Heights dealing with public improvements.
8. Provide grading and drainage plan to be approved by the City Engineer.
Provide Certificate of Survey and Soils Report. Soils Report to in-
clude soils data for street design. Submit final grade certification.
Provide drainage release and/or hold harmless agreement for drainage
if required by the City Engineer.
9. Provide sewage disposal as approved by the City, County Health Depart-
ment, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
10. Provide will serve letter for water service agency to include fire pro-
tection as required by the County Fire Department. Show by letter from
servfng agency that flow of 550 gallons per minute at 20 PSI residual
will be available from a fire hydrant located within 250 feet of ap-
plicant's lot.
,
--
11. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and Landscaping District.
12. Plan for public improvements shall be prepared by a Civil Engineer.
13. Pay Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance 572 and Resolution 77-39.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 19, 1985
Page 11
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 17445 SUNNYSLOPE AVENUE - GARY BOWEN CONTINUED
14. Provide street lighting as required by the City Engineer.
15. Plans and specifications for street improvements shall be prepared
by a Civil Engineer.
-
16. Process a lot line merger.
17. Pay Public Safety fees per Resolution 83-87.
6. Single-Family Residence - 416 Ellis Street - Mr. & Mrs. Glen A. Brown c/o Mr.
William Watkins, Watkins Construction -
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused.
Staff presented proposal to construct a single-family residence, located on
the eastern side of Ellis Street approximately 200 feet south of the inter-
section of Flint Street and Ellis Street.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a
copy of the conditions, and if there were any problems. Mr. Watkins answered
in the negative.
Discussion was held on condition number 6, pertaining to construction of curb
along the public alley, and condition number 7, pertaining to ribbon gutter.
City Engineer asked that the following verbiage "if required by City Engineer"
be added to condition number 6.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 416 Ellis
Street with staff recommendations amending condition number 6, by adding the
following verbiage "if required by City Engineer", second by Commissioner
Ba rnha rt .
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Washburn excused
1. Meet all City Codes and Ordinances.
2. Meet all County of Riverside Health Department requirements.
3. Meet all Riverside County Fire Department requirements for fire pro-
tection.
4. Comply with all requirements of Ordinance No. 572.
5. No dedication required on Ellis Street. Dedicate 3-feet of right-of-
way along public alley.
6. Construct curb and gutter along the total property frontage to be
located twenty-feet from street centerline. Construct curb only along
the total property frontage along the public alley area IF REQUIRED
BY THE CITY ENGINEER.
7. Construct asphalt paving from street centerline of Ellis Street to
1 ip of gutter along total property frontage. Construct asphalt paving
and concrete ribbon gutter along total property frontage of alley area.
8. Street plans and specifications to be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and will include signing and striping. As built streets,
grading, utility and drainage improvement plans are required.
9. Publ ic improvements are to conform with City Code requirements and
City approved Riverside County Standard Drawings and Specifications.
lQ. No street light is required for this project.
a. Cooperate with the City in forming a Lighting and
Landscaping District.
11. All grading must conform to City Ordinance No. 636 and the Uniform
Building Code, Chapter 70.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 19, 1985
Page 12
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 416 ELLIS STREET - MR. & MRS. GLEN A. BROWN C/O MR. WILLIAM
WATKINS, WATKINS CONSTRUCTION CONTINUED
12. Provide Soils Report, including street design recommendations. Pro-
vide Final Grade Certification of pad elevation per approved grading
plan and final compaction report to the City Engineer for approval.
13.
Provide Grading Plan and Certificate of Survey which have been pre-
pared by a registered Civil Engineer. All property lines shall be
at the top of construction slopes and with the required Uniform Build-
ing Code setback requirements.
-
14. Comply with the requirements of Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District
for connection and/or extension to sewer system.
15. Provide will serve letter guaranteeing sewer availability from Elsinore
Valley Municipal Water District.
16. There is an existing 6" water main within the public alley. Applicant
shall make necessary application and pay required connection fees
through the City Water Department.
17. Dedicate underground water rights to the City of Lake Elsinore or its
ass i gnees .
18. Meet all requirements of Riverside County Fire Department for fire pro-
tection, including hydrant installation and upsizing. There is an
existing 4" stand pipe fire hydrant on the corner of Flint Street and
Ellis Street that must be upsized to the City's standard fire hydrant,
due to the 250 feet maximum distance from hydrant to structure.
19. Pay all applicable Capital Improvement fees per Ordinance No. 572.
20.
Pay all sewer fees per Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District's
schedule, if required.
-
21 . Pay all Schoo 1 fees.
Commissioner Washburn returned to the table.
7. Lot Line Adjustment 85-1 - Doug Kulberg - Staff presented proposal for a Lot
Line Adjustment to adjust the lot lines on three contiguous lots in Tract 18211,
located on the corner of Laurelwood Lane and Laurelwood Court.
Chairman asked for discussion at the table. There being no discussion at the
table, the Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Lot Line Adjustment 85-1 with staff
recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Saathoff absent from table
1. City Engineer verification of legal description as accurate.
2. Issuance of a Certificate of Compliance.
3. Provide legal descriptions, map and closure calculations to be approved
by the City Engineer.
4. Set new permanent lot corners and conform to the Land Surveyor's Act.
-
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR1S REPORT
Mr. Corcoran stated that he had nothing to report.
Mr. Culp stated that at the last Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner Mellinger
requested information on Kaufman and Broad Tract, would like to report to him that
we are researching that information and pulling the soils report for the original
tract, we will have those to you shortly.
Minutes of Planning Commission
February 19, 1985
Page 13
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT CONTINUED
Commissioner Mellinger stated that he also has concerns on tracts across Lakeshore,
since they have suffered the same type failures and requested that the City ~n~ineer
include the general area, if available. Mr. Cu1p stated that they have pre11mlnary
soils reports for all relatively new tract developments. Commissioner Mellinger
stated that he has concerns not only with the existing tracts, but also future
developments in that area.
-
PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commissioner Saathoff - None
Commissioner Mellinger - None
Commissioner Washburn - Would like to see these two items agendized on the next joint
study session with Council: 1) Clarification of water hydrant fire protection service
dealing with other than City of Lake Elsinore Water District; 2) Would like to see
and review the Resolution dealing with deferred improvements.
Asked Mr. Corcoran how we are coming on that overlay in the eastern part of town?
Mr. Corcoran stated that we are coming right along.
Commissioner Barnhart - None
Chairman Dominguez - Two locations where we had projects that were approved, in fact,
one has already started and its been laying dormant for quite awhi1e--Mohr and Lake-
shore, what is happening? Mr. Cu1p stated that this is out of our hands, and that
he contacted Mr. McCollum sometime ago when the concern was brought forth by the
Commission regarding weed abatement. Mr. McCollum was notified of the nuisance and
we have since abated, but did not have any specific conversation with him in regard
_ to his pro j ec t .
Chairman Dominguez asked how long can we let a project like this stand still? Mr.
Corcoran stated that the usual building permit expires after six months if no in-
spection have been called for within that time period. Chairman asked that this be
looked into.
Also, we had a project at Scrivener and Graham, you had to go in and put some con-
ventional improvements there, what is the status of this project? Mr. Culp stated
that he contacted the owner, Mr. Bill Krouse, after a concern was brought up by the
Commission in regards to the removal of the concrete sidewalk. I specified that it
was Mr. Krouse's responsibility to replace the concrete sidewalk. Mr. Krouse
indicated to me that he was going to be resubmitting a project for that corner parcel
very soon. Nothing materialized, I then contacted Mr. Krouse and told him to put the
improvements in or put a sidewalk in there now--ordering him to put the improvements
tn. Mr. Krouse indicated to me again that the project was only on the order of a
couple weeks away--he was trying to line out his financing. We agreed to have him
construct some temporary sidewalk improvements, just to put down some AC until his
project di.d come on 1 i ne.
Chairman stated that he would like to see that brought out to do whatever we are
going to have to do to have those improvements put in, and stated the reasons for
this is, that we have another project that was proposed right across the street, and
if they go in there and perform everything that they are going to have to do, the
- improvements, and right across the street we are going to have something that has
been torn out and never replaced.
Commissioner Saathoff recommended that staff check with the City Atto.rney to see
what the legal procedure would be to notify the person and get the City to go in
and put in the improvements and put a lien against the property or something.
Commissioner Washburn asked if this wouldn't be a case in point, where we did not
bond for improvements and it went dead and we have no improvements to show. Mr.
Culp answered in the affirmative.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to adjourn to Design Review Board, second by Com-
missioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
MI NUTES OF
LAKE ELSINORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
HELD ON THE
19TH
DAY
OF
FEBRUARY
1985
MI NUTE ACT! ON
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve minutes of February 5, 1985, as submitted,
second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Commissioner Saathoff suggested that since we have a couple of people left in the
audience, out of courtesy to them, go ahead and address their projects first rather
than in order. The Board concurred with Commissioner Saathoff's suggestion.
-
BUSINESS ITEMS
1. Single-Family Residence - 1830 Bromley Avenue - Andrew Moffat - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residence, located approximately 100 feet
northwesterly of the intersection of Bromley Avenue and Bunker Street.
The structure will consist of 1,265 square feet of dwelling area with attached
garage of 460 square feet. Materials to be used include wood trim, wood fascia
on stucco siding and asphaltic shingles.
Chairman asked if the applicant was in the audience, if he had received a copy
of the conditions, and if there were any problems. Mr. Moffat answered in the
negative.
Chairman asked for discussion at the table. There being no discussion at the
table, the Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Barnhart to approve Single-Family Residence at 1830
Bromley Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or publ ic streets.
-
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Grading plans are to be approved by the Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way, to
be approved by the Planning Division.
5. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30-feet apart.
6. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation, to be
approved by Planning Division.
7. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler systems for all planting
areas.
2. Single-Family Residence - 1304 West Sumner - Charley Williams - Staff presented
proposal to construct a single-family residence, located westerly of the inter-
section of Mohr Street and Sumner Avenue.
The structure will have approximately 2,800 square feet of dwelling area, and
an attached garage of approximately 600 feet. Materials to be used include -
stucco siding, wood trim and brick. A sun balconey is proposed for the southern
el evation.
Discussion was held on entrance to project off of Sumner Avenue, whether or not
there would be a problem with this. Mr. Culp stated that there was no problem
with the entrance.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Single-Family Residence at 1304 West
Sumner Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Barnhart absent from table
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 19, 1985
Page 2
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 1304 WEST SUMNER AVENUE - CHARLEY WILLIAMS CONTINUED
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
-
3. Grading plans are to be approved by Engineering Department.
4. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way,
to be approved by the Planning Division.
5. Street trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallon and planted a minimum
of 30-feet apart.
6. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation, to be
approved by Planning Division.
7. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
8. Appl icant to use only Class "A" fire resistant roofing material.
6. Single-Family Residence - 416 Ellis Street - Mr. & Mrs. Glen A. Brown c/o Mr.
William Watkins, Watkins Construction -
Commissioner Washburn asked to be excused.
Staff presented proposal to construct a single-family residence, located on
the eastern side of Ellis Street approximately 200 feet south of the inter-
section of Flint Street and Ellis Street.
The structure will have 1,536 square feet of dwelling area, 480 square feet
of garage area and 288 square feet of workshop and storage area. Materials
to be used include asphaltic shingles, wood siding, wood trim and wood fascia.
Chairman asked if the applicant has any problems with the conditions. Mr.
Watkins answered in the negative.
Chairman asked for discussion at the table. There being no discussion at the
table, the Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Mellinger to approve Single-Family Residence at 416
Ellis Street with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Saathoff.
Approved 4-0 Commissioner Washburn excused
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
3. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way, to
be approved by the Planning Division.
4. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 30-feet apart.
5. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler systems for all planting
areas.
6. Applicant to use Class II A" roofing materials.
Commissioner Washburn returned to the table.
3. Single-Family Residence - 1031 Dawes Street - Mr. & Mrs. Werner Russ - Staff pre-
sented proposal to construct a single-family residence, located 200 feet westerly
of the intersection of Pepper and Dawes Street.
The structure will have approximately 1,160 square feet of dwelling area and an
attached garage of approximately 350 square feet. Materials to be used include
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 19, 1985
Page 3
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE - 1031 DAWES STREET - MR. & MRS. WERNER RUSS CONTINUED
grooved wood siding, wood trim and fascia and Class "A" roofing shingles.
Discussion was held on size of garage; length of driveway; architectural
elevations; existing trees on site, saving as many as possible, and pro-
viding additional landscaping.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 1031
Dawes Street with staff recommendations amending condition number 4, to
read: "A minimum of three (3) fifteen (15) gallon trees to be planted in
the front yard to replace trees that were removed or will be removed",
second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
-
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any
proposed changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
3. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way,
to be approved by Planning Division.
4. A MINIMUM OF THREE (3) FIFTEEN (15) GALLON TREES TO BE PLANTED IN THE
FRONT YARD, TO REPLACE TREES THAT WERE REMOVED OR WILL BE REMOVED.
5. App1 icant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
areas.
6. Applicant to use only Class "A" fire resistant roofing materials.
4.
Single-Family Residence - 16899 Sanne11 Street - James & Rosemary Nolen - Staff
presented proposal to construct a single-family residence, located on the
northern side of Sanne11e Street where Pierrot Avenue intersects with Sanne11e
Street.
-
The structure will have approximately 1,360 square feet of dwelling area and
an attached garage of approximately 440 square feet. Materials to be used
include wood siding, wood trim and fascia and composition shingles.
Chairman asked for discussion at the table. Discussion was held on providing
curb and gutter--protection from sheet flow, and condition number 6, pertain-
ing to erosion control vegetation.
Motion by Commissioner Washburn to approve Single-Family Residence at 16899
Sanne11e Street with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmitta1 to the Design Review Board.
3.
Grading plans are to be approved by Engineering Department.
-
4. Applicant to plant street trees outside of the public right-of-way, to
be approved by Planning Division.
5. Street trees to be a minimum of 15 gallon and planted a minimum of 30-
feet apart.
6. All slopes to be planted with erosion control vegetation, to be approved
by Planning Division.
7. Applicant to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting areas.
8. App1 icant to use only Class "A" fire resistant roofi ng material.
Minutes of Design Review Board
February 19, 1985
Page 4
5.
Single-Family Residence - 17445 Sunnyslope Avenue - Gary Bowen - Staff pre-
sented proposal to construct a single-family residence, located 1,000 feet
northeasterly of the intersection of Skyline Drive and Sunnyslope Avenue.
The structure will have approximately 1,427 square feet of dwelling area
and an attached garage of 832 square feet. Materials to be used include
wood and stucco siding, wood trim, wood planter boxes and concrete shake
shingles.
-
Chairman asked for discussion at the table. There being no discussion at
the table, the Chairman asked for a motion.
Motion by Commissioner Saathoff to approve Single-Family Residence at 17445
Sunnyslope Avenue with staff recommendations, second by Commissioner Mellinger.
Approved 5-0
1. All roof mounted or ground support equipment incidental to development
shall be architecturally screened so that they are not visible from
neighboring property or public streets.
2. Building elevations shall be constructed as depicted on plans, any pro-
posed changes will require resubmittal to the Design Review Board.
3. Applicant shall plant street trees outside the public right-of-way, to
be approved by the Planning Division.
4. Street trees shall be planted a minimum of 3D-feet apart.
5. All slopes shall be planted with erosion control vegetation, to be
approved by Planning Division.
-
6. Applicant is to install permanent sprinkler system for all planting
a rea s .
7. Applicant is to use Class "A" fire retardant roofing material.
There being no further business, the Lake Elsinore Design Review Board adjourned at
9:48 p.m. Motion by Commissioner Washburn, second by Commissioner Barnhart.
Approved 5-0
Ag?o
Fred Domi~~
Chairman
-
ReSR ~tfUl1Y z::
[inda Grindstaff 7
Planning Commission
Secretary