Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout120501 PC MinutesCALL TO ORDER MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 5, 2001 The City of Temecula Planning Commission convened in a regular meeting at 6:00 P.M., on Wednesday, December 5, 2001, in the City Council Chambers of Temecula City Hall, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula, California. ALLEGIANCE The audience was led in the Flag salute by Commissioner Mathewson. ROLL CALL Present: Absent: Also Present: PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. CONSENT CALENDAR 1 A,qenda RECOMMENDATION: Commissioners Mathewson, Olhasso, Telesio, and Chairman Chiniaeff. Commissioner Guerriero. Director of Planning Ubnoske, City Attorney Thorson, Deputy Director of Public Works Parks, Senior Planner Hogan, and Minute Clerk Hansen. 1.1 Approve the Agenda of December 5, 2001. MOTION: Commissioner Mathewson moved to approve Consent Calendar Item No. 1. The motion was seconded by Commissioner OIhasso and voice vote reflected approval with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero who was absent. R:PlanCommJminutes/120501 COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS Plannincl Application No. PA01-0566 (Development Code Amendment) Dave Hoqan, , Senior Planner RECOMMENDATION: 2.1 Adopt a Resolution Entitled: RESOLUTION NO. 2001-042 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DENY AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMECULA AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE TEMECULA MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY THE STANDARDS FOR SECOND DWELLING UNITS (PLANNING APPLICATION 01-0566) Senior Planner Hogan provided an overview of the proposed Development Code Amendment (of record), noting that legislature has indicated that secondary dwelling units are an integral part of the State's housing market, and that the State has set maximum size standards for these units which are applicable unless the local jurisdiction adopts its own ordinance, which the City of Temecula has adopted; relayed that the State standard, as well as the City's current Ordinance limits the maximum size at 1200 square feet, regardless of the size of the lot; advised that over the past year, staff has had requests from residents with larger parcels, desiring to build a larger second unit; specified the current proposal for amendment which was to keep the current maximum standard (of 1200 square feet) for lots one acre in size, and for lots larger than one acre, the maximum size permitted would be 2,000 square feet. Answering the questions of the Planning Commission, for Commissioner Mathewson, Senior Planner Hogan confirmed that the second dwelling would still be subject to applicable development standards, such as setbacks, and lot coverage; and for Commissioner Telesio, relayed that the secondary units could be for rental use but could not be sold (as a separate unit), per State legislated mandate. At this time the public was invited to speak Mr. Ron Knowles, 39675 Cantrell, noted his opposition to revising the City's Code to allow for a larger second unit, relalying his preference for the standard to be consistent with the State at a maximum size of 1200 square feet; opined that for provision of a second unit for the purpose of housing elderly parents the 1200 square feet would be adequate; and noted his concern with noise, traffic impacts, and the opportunity to use the unit as a rental if the unit was permitted to be larger. R;Pla n Comrn~min ut es/120501 2 The Planninq Commission deliberates In response to Chairman Chiniaeff's comments, Senior Planner Hogan confirmed that State law stated that if the local jurisdiction did not adopt its own standard regarding this issue, then the State law would be applicable; advised that a jurisdiction could not set a ~imit under 1200 square feet without specific findings regarding the health, safety, and welfare of the public while, confirming that the size limitation could be more than 1200 square feet; for Commissioner Olhasso, noted that this revision would not affect the majority of tracts, but only the larger lot areas within the City; and advised that if an individua~ had a 2.5 acre lot and constructed an 1800-2,000 square foot second dwelling unit, there would be ample open area remaining. Via overheads, Senior Planner Hogan provided examples of the building envelopes on various lots with the revised standards, noting the requirement to still adhere to the setback, and maximum lot coverage standards, specifying the substantial area remaining without building coverage; and clarified that staff did not expect to see more than approximately two of these units built per year in the City of Temecula due to the Iow demand. Noting his concurrence with Mr. Knowles' comments, Commissioner Telesio opined that the proposed revision would create a second unit benefit for added income; and relayed his reluctance to support amending ordinances for special interests. Offering clarification, Chairman Chiniaeff noted that the issue before the Planning Commission was not regarding whether or not a resident could have a second dwelling unit, or whether it could be utilized as a rental, which is permitted via State law, but what the maximum size of this unit should be. In response, Commissioner Telesio opined that it was the permitted larger size that created a greater opportunity for an income- producing unit, rather that a granny flat type use. Chairman Chiniaeff specified the few areas in the City with large enough lots that this amendment to the Code would have any impact. In response to Chairman Chiniaeff, City Attorney Thorson confirmed that the City was preempted by State law which mandated the allowance of second units, along with the permission to use the unit as a rental, clarifying that local jurisdictions could regulate the maximum size (as long as it was 1200 square feet, or larger). While relaying his support of property rights, Commissioner Mathewson advised that to permit a 2,000 square foot second dwelling unit would create significant negative impacts with respect to traffic, aesthetics, and noise; relayed that the need for a 2,000 square foot unit had not been clearly demonstrated; advised that the intent of State law was to provide housing oppodunities for the elderly, the disabled, family members, and students, relaying that for these types of housing uses a 2,000 square foot home would not be necessitated. For clarification, City Attorney Thorson and Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that if the Planning Commission took action recommending denial of the recommendation to amend the Development Code, that the matter would still go to the City Council for final action, City Attorney Thorson advising that if the Planning Commission took no action, the item would go forward to the City Council in 40 days. R:PlanComm/minutes/120501 3 MOTION: Commissioner Telesio moved to close the public hearing; and to recommend that the City Council deny approval of the proposed Development Code Amendment, as reflected in Resolution No. 2001-042, specifying the rationale for recommending denial, as follows: 1 ) no sufficient need has been demonstrated to justify the proposed change, 2) the proposed revision, allowing a larger second unit, would provide a greater opportunity for rental income which was not the intent of the State legislature, and 3) the resulting negative impacts on the surrounding community, specifically as it relates to traffic, public safety, noise, and law enforcement. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Mathewson. (Ultimately this motion passed; see below.) Commissioner Telesio clarified that the Planning Commission's rationale for recommending denial of the amendment was not solely based on the greater opportunities provided for rental uses, but additionally due to the associated negative impacts in the community. In concurrence, Commissioner Mathewson noted that with larger units, the impacts would be more significant with respect to viewscapes, traffic, and noise. Commissioner Olhasso relayed that there could additionally be law enforcement issues, citing the potential for a drug dealer to rent one of these back lot units, advising that it would be her preference to see units of this size confined to the more rural areas in the County. For informational purposes, Director of Planning Ubnoske noted that in past years, the City has received a total of approximately four applications for the larger sized units, relaying that the resident's intent was generally to build a larger home for elderly parents. Commissioner Mathewson advised that he was specifically opposed to the vast differential between the current allowable second unit, at a maximum size of 1200 square feet, and the proposed maximum size of 2,000 square feet, reiterating the potential for significant impacts, Commissioner Telesio specifying the negative impact for the adjacent neighboring residents. At this time voice vote was taken reflecting approval of the motion to recommend that the City Council deny approval of the proposed Development Code Amendment with the exception of Commissioner Guerriero who was absent. COMMISSIONER'S REPORTS A. With respect to the recent new development that closed escrow on new homes without gas meters, for Commissioner Olhasso, Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that this was a Building and Safety Department issue, noting that the matter had been forwarded to this department. Regarding the new legislation with respect to provision of water, for Commissioner Mathewson, City Attorney Thorson concurred with the concept of having a Water District representative attend a Planning Commission meeting to provide detailed information regarding the local impacts, advising that if there was additional information available from the State agencies, that staff would provide this data to the Commissioners, as well. R;PIanComm/minutes]120501 4 C. Chairman Chiniaeff announced that the first General Plan Update Community Workshop would be held on December 6, 2001 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall; and invited all to attend. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Ubnoske relayed that the December 19, 2001 Planning Commission meeting will be cancelled, and that the next meeting would be held on January 16, 2002. ADJOURNMENT At 6:46 P.M. Chairman Chiniaeff formally adjourned this meeting to the next re~lular meetinR to be held on Wednesday, Janua~ 16, 2002 at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 43200 Business Park Drive, Temecula. iniaeff, --~ v Chairman Debbie Ubnoske, Director of Planning R:PlanComm/minutes/120501 5