Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes Jan-Jun 1989 CITE' OF RANCHO CCAMCNCA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regulars Meeting June 28, 1989 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho 'Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at :CC P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161. Base 'Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the Pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL. COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT': David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitioa, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel ASSENT: Peter Tblstoy STAFF PRESENT: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner, Brad Buller, City Planner; On Coleman, Senior Planner; Tony Orahn, Assistant Planner, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes, ' Assistant: Planner, Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer, Russ Maguire, City Engineer, Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner, Gall Sanchez, Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that staff had received a telephone call from the applicant for items F and G, requesting a one month 'continuance to July 26, 1989. Mr. Buller announced that the applicant for Item H had requested a continuance to July 12, 1988. Mr. Buller announced that Carlton Lightfoot, Superintendent of Ctianda School District, had telephoned staff and requested a continuance of Item N to July 12 1989, because of illness. Chairman McNiel announced that Commissioner Emerick was leaving the Commission because he was moving from ;the area. Chairman McNiel presented a Resolution of Commendation to Commissioner 'Emerick to thank him for his service to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Emerick thanked the Planning Commission and stated he felt the Commission was a good Commission and that staff exhibited a lot of dedication and worked many extra hours in support of the Planning Commission. Chairman McNiel announced that Betsy Weinberger had been selected as the new Planning Commissioner. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Chitiea, approved with Emerick abstaining, to adopt the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of May 31, 1989, as amended. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously approved, to adopt the minutes of June 14, 1989, as amended. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 89-02 -BLACUM-N-10MES, INC. - A- request'I I to pre-zone approi-imaidly 75--aFre—s-57 vacant land I­66&te'd at the northeast corner of Highland and Rochester Avenues to a density of Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) - APN: 225-152-01, 02, 03, 04, & 18. (Continued from June 14, 1989.) G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 89-03 BLACKMON HOMES, approve a-0-e- T_ --A 6 t 'Ppr t r­&­q­u_6st a ve opmen greement or appr x1ma matey acres, consisting of 78 lots at approximately 3.2 dwelling units per acre, located on the northeast corner of Highland and Rochester Avenues - APN: 225-152-01, 02, 03, 04, & 18. (Continued from June 14, 1989.) Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendment 89-02 and Environmental Assessment and Development Agreement 89-03 to July 26, 1989. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT J 1< LEWIS HOMES - A div i si ew-- --of 118 co 0 um-----g re--s-i-d-e--n-t-iat-l'--suib----"—on a ign rev mi nT on lots and 8 single family lots on 9.07 acres of land in the Medium Density Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) within the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southwest corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Milliken Avenue - APN: 1077-091-34. (Continued from June 14, 1989. ) Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13351 to July 12, 1989. N. ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT'S REQUEST TO ABANDON PROPOSED ACCESS BETWEEN THE w—YR-TUEMERMY SCHOOL AND­TffEGREEN9n-T-?WM, Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to continue Etiwanda School District's Request to Abandon Proposed Access between the Caryn Elementary School and the Greenbelt Paseo to July 12, 1989. Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 28, 1989 CONSENT CALENDAR A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13662 LEWIS HOMES The design review of building evations an etai e site p an' or T portion of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map consisting of 26 'single family lots on 3.4 acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned Community in the Medium Density Residential District ( -14 dwelling units per acre) , located on the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Baseline Read - APN: 1077-101-5 . B. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 1 664 LEWIS HOMES - The design review of bui ing e evations and etai e site pan cr a previously approved Tentative Tract Map consisting of 24 single family lots on 2.26 acres of land within the Terra Vista Planned Community in the Medium Density Residential District ( -14 dwelling units per acre) , located on the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street - APN: 1077-091-15. C. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE' TRACT 13566 - CARYN DEVELOPMENT -' A request or an extension a previous y approvea Te55Mt Fact ap consisting of 154 single family ;lots on 67.8 acres of land in the Low Density Residential District ( -4 dwelling units per acre) within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Summit and Almond' Avenues - APN 6-1110 . .` TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13304 - LEWIS HOMES - The total eve opm nt o a Fesiaential s55diMi6n of 59 lots on 11.13 acres located in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units ;per acre) within the Terra Vista Planned Community, located on the northwest corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Mountain View Drive - APN: 7-151-13. E. VARIANCE g-C1 - LAND - A request o construct a trellis structure in the fro nt yar , al encroaches six feet into the front :yard setback at 6465 Jasper Street - APN: 106 -61-6 . Commissioner Emerick requested that Item E be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Motion. Moved by Blakesly, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adopt items A through 0 of the Consent Calendar. VARIANCE 89-01 - LAN Commissioner Emerick asked that the Planning Commission reconsider their decision on granting the Variance. He did not feel the Planning Commission could make the necessary findings to ,justify granting a Variance. He felt the main justification was that the Commissioners liked the architectural feature. He did not feel there were any distinguishing features from other houses in the neighborhood. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Planning Commission Minutes' -3- June 28, 1989 Julie lung, 6465 Jasper Street, Rancho Cucamonga, asked the Commissioners to grant the Variance. There were no further public comments. Chairman McNiel stated he supported the Variance request because the house was basically unattractive among a number of like homes. He felt that strict interpretation of the law would not afford the City the opportunity to allow residents to dress up their houses. He felt the addition would improve the neighborhood because it would draw attention away from the four-car garage ' doors. Commissioner Cmerick asked how the Commission would distinguish if another applicant proposed an addition that would also encroach but was not so attractive. He felt that if the Commission wanted to allow the trellis, the Development Code should be amended to allow encroachment into front yard setbacks by 6 feet. Commissioner Chitiea felt the Variance process was in place to protect neighborhoods from unsightly additions and buildings built up to the street. She felt the trellis mould improve not only the tang's house, but also the streetscape, She ;felt so long as there were not any undesirable elements, the Planning Commission should approve the Variance: Commissioner Emerick felt that if architecture was the criteria for granting the Variance, then all other houses in the neighborhood had the same architecture. He did not feel the home was unique enough to provide for granting the Variance. Chairman McNiel stated he did not feel; there were that many houses in the City that were unsightly. Commissioner Blakesley concurred with Commissioner Emerick in not being able to make the necessary findings to support the Variance. He felt that part of the problem was that the Commission was looking at a structure that was partially completed, and if the City had looked at the structure prior to construction, they would probably have asked the applicant to move the structure behind the setback.. He felt that granting the Variance might encourage others to build first and apply later. He indicated he would prefer to abstain from voting. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that an abstention would be counted with the majority vote, and would therefore count as an aye. Brad Buller, City, Planner, stated that if the vote was 2-2, there would be no action and the floor would be open for another action, perhaps to continue the item. Commissioner Chitiea felt the Code should he amended to allow greater flexibility. Planning Commission Minutes -4- dune 28, 1989 Chairman McNiel felt the Code already had sufficient flexibility and he did not wish to amend the code. I Commissioner Emerick asked Mr. Hanson if the City had enough factual findings to sustain the Variance. Mr. Hanson Mated that he was not the weigher of facts. He said that when a Variance is adopted without the findings of uniqueness and hardship, it becomes a precedent; but where uniqueness is found, the Variance does not set` precedent.' i Chairman McNiel stated that if the 'Development Cone were amended to allow encroachment within 6 feet,; then that right would be granted to all under the Code. He stated that since the setback on the subject property was 32 feet, the structure would still be 26 feet from the curb. Commissioner Emerick stated he was not in favor of the Variance because he did not think necessary legal findings could be made with respect to hardship and uniqueness. Commissioner Chitiea felt a;point of record should be made that the ;setback is ouch duper than on many other properties and an encroachment of B feet would' still be back farther than many other houses in the City. Motion. Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blakeley, to deny Variance 89-01. Motion Failed by the following vote® AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EMERICK NOES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MOIL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: TOL TOY -failed Motion: Moved by Chiie , seconded by McNiel, to continue Variance 89-01 to July 12, 18 . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLA ESLEY, CHITIEA MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: TOLTOY carried PUBLIC HEARINGS I . OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DESIGN REVIEW - - UN V R L n env irdn nta ,na y is o' the. proposed deve op nt _oT 38 apartment units i on 3.15 acres of land in the Medium Residential District 8-14 'dwelling units per, acre) , located on the the north side of Arrow Highway opposite Ramona, avenue - ARN: 08- 11-0 , 0 , 21, & 24. Associated with this is Tree Removal Permit 9-28. (Continued from June 14, 1989.) Planning Commission Minutes - - June 28, 198 Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, a letter from applicant John Liao, a letter from residents Mike and Linda Cutillo, and a letter from Elma St. John, on behalf of Village Park Homeowners' Association. Mr. Liao's letter stated they would be willing to build condominium units and requested that the requirement for an E1R be waived. He also agreed to reduce the density to 36 units and allow 9874 Arrow Route to be designated as a Landmark. The Cutillo letter agreed that condominiums for individual sale would reduce neighborhood opposition to the project and requested that only single family homes be allowed in the area in the future. The letter from the Homeowners' Association objected to the project on the grounds of increased Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Michael Cutillo,; 988 Alpine, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that at the neighborhood meeting on June 1.9 the developer spoke about apartments and at the end of the meeting finally said he would consider condominiums. He stated that the residents did not feel the developer intended to build condominiums' and he requested that the project not be allowed to proceed until the request for the revised parcel map for condominium subdivision was processed. Chairman McNiel stated that the designation was for 814 dwelling units and the City could not guarantee that condominiums would remain condominiums and would not be used as rentals; Mr. Cutillo - stated that the number of rentals could be controlled by a Homeowners ' Association. Joe Monelongo, 9718 Placer Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he works for the post office. He said that he drives down Arrow ;four times per day and traffic is bad. He wanted to know how to rezone the area for single family residential . ` Kathy Griset 9869 Placer Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she had spoken with the developer after the last planning Commission Meeting and it was her impression he was fluctuating between condominiums and apartments because of the extra expense required to turn the project into condominiums. She said he build condominium project and told her that if he went to the expense to �l p J still had the extra expense of the E1R, it would be a hardship. He told her n E1R he would build him in not.. requiringa_ _ t t f the residents supported_ condominiums. Gail Petty, 8547' Clubhouse, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she represented the Village Park Homeowners' Association, and that they were opposed to apartments because' they felt the recent addition' of apartments in the area had; contributed to an increase in crime and increased traffic. She stated they wanted condominiums with a Homeowners' Association to govern them. Lester Keefman, 9859 Alpine, Rancho Cucamonga, felt that traffic corning from Ramona to Arrow is excessive and that apartments would 'decrease surrounding property values. He wanted the area rezoned and stated a traffic 'signal was needed. Planning Commission Minutes - - June 28, 1989 Russ Burroughs, 9722 Placer Street, Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned that would I t t Archibald.1 apartme�rts pu b built e way,. ch d. wanted to know how to have the area designated as a park and asked how the City decides where parks are placed. Chairman McNiel stated the City attempts to place parks' wher they will be able to best serve the community, but the location is also constrained by where the City can economically purchase the land. He said that since City; incorporation over 300 acres of park land have been designated. Mr. Burroughs wanted to know if that was enough to keep up with City growth. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the General Plan does designate park sites sufficient to meet the growth; however, the Planning Commission is not the Commission that is charged with the responsibility of actual location and design of park sites. He said the Parks and Recreation Commission designates all locations for parks, John Liao, applicant, stated he was willing to work with the neighbors for a solution. He said he was swilling to build condominiums,: but to do so would take money and time. He said if he also had to prepare an CIR, it would be a hardship; and if he did not have the expense of preparing an CIR, he .would definitely build condominiums. Mr. Cutillo stated that at the neighborhood meeting Mr. Liao said he would send a letter to the City stating he would build condominiums, and he asked if that letter had been received. Ms Norris responded that it had been received. ; Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel stated that the community was growing and as a result there would be more traffic on Arrow Route; but that Arrow Route was going to be widened, and that would mitigate the traffic concerns. He asked when the widening would occur. Buss Maguire, City Engineer, stated it would be widened to 4 lanes with signals at Hermosa and upgraded signals at Archibald and Haven, with construction probably complete within 10-12 months. Chairman McNiel stated that it would appear that this project and the street widening would be constructed in the same time frame. He felt came in apartments is largely related to open carports; and as this project proposed enclosed garages, it should alleviate some of those problems. Commissioner Emerick stated the issue before the Commission this evening was whether the Commission thought there would' be a significant enough impact to require an EIR. He said than if there was substantial public outcry, a focused 'CIR should be required, but he did not feel a focused CIR would answer any questions, as the items have already been addressed. Planning Commission Minutes -7- dune 28, 1989 Commissioner Chitiea asked what areas would be addressed in a focused EIR. Commissioner Emerick stated it could address aesthetics,' crime, and traffic impact, ' Commissioner Chitiea stated that traffic as it exists today is a problem, but that the process was underway to alleviate the problem, and the project as presented with a reduction to 36 units should not require a focused EIR. She felt the aesthetic issue should be handled at Design Review. She stated that if the surrounding residents were comfortable with condominiums, she did not feel a focused EIR should be required regarding crime. She did not feel the school impaction would be changed whether the project was condominiums or apartments. She felt the residents' concerns would be alleviated by charging to condominiums. Commissioner Blakosley stated he ;had not heard anything that would lead him to believe that an EIR would cause him to consider the project any differently. Chairman Mc Niel concurred that an EIR should not be required because` mitigation measures were already being taken. Ralph Manson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the Commission could find that there would' be no significant environmental, impacts that could not be Declaration would be appropriate ' mitigated and that Negative ec ppriate for the p project. MrBuller suggested that the applicant withdraw the application for apartments and resubmit it with the condominium map. Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Chitiea, to find that there would be no; significant environmental impacts that could not be mitigated, and therefore a 'Negative Declaration would be appropriate for consideration with the submission and review of the condominium project. Motion carried by the following vote: G AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CMITIEA, E ERICA., MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. TOLSTOY -carried B: O P.M. Manning Commission recessed. 8. 6 P.M. - Planning Commission reconvened. Planning Commission Minutes` -8- dune 28, 1989 J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL ;USE PERMIT 89-=12 - VICTORY BAPTIST CHURCH - A request to establish a church in two eilll ting ' ui dings totaling 5,1r6 square feet on 1.08 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4;dwelling units per acre) , located at the northwest corner of Bowen Street and Baker Avenue - AP : 207-531- 1 & 50. Tour Crahn, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing; and hearing no testimony, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Chitiea stated she agreed with the staff that the use would not impact the neighborhood, and she supported the use. Chairman McNiel agreed that it was a good use for the community. Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerck, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit ' 9-1 . Motion carried by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS. RLAKESLEY, CNITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY -carried K. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 11934 - L. A. CRANCO - A request to c a ge Tentative Parcil R 11914 to entati e Parcel Map 12573, a subdivision of 2.72 acres into 2 parcels, located on the east side of Archibald. Avenue, , approximately 150 feet south of Lemon Avenue - APN: 201-252-0 . Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. She also presented a letter from Pfeiler & Associates Engineers, original project engineers, requesting that the change not be approved, because they maintained they had not been paid by L. A. 'Chanco for work performed. Ms. Krall stated she had spoken to the City Attorneys, who felt it would not he a problem to change the number and that the matter between Pfeiler and the applicant was a civil natter in which the City should not get involved. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Tom Orahn, Assistant Planner, stated he had spoken with the applicant earlier in the day and the applicant was in agreement with the staff 'report and the Resolution, as the Resolution included the original conditions. Hearing no furthers testimony, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes -9- June 28, 1989 Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the ratter between Pfeiler and the applicant was a private matter of debt collection. Commissioner Chitiea stated that as there were no adverse impacts to the City, she supported the change. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Modification to Parcel Map 11934. Motion carried by the following vote; AYES: COMMISSIONERS: GLAKESLEY, C ITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: TULST Y carried L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88a-41 - RYUER TRUCK NT L, INC. - he eve opment o a truck renta ,' easing, an maintenance facility with' retail sales of moving supplies, consisting of 4 buildings totaling 23,296 square feet on 8.2 acres of land in the General Industrial ' District (Subarea 14) , located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Santa Anita - APN. 229- 1- 6 & 07. Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and suggested revision of the conditions to provide that the canopy for the gas island be constructed with a stucco finish to match the buildings, allow' a delay in the- utilities undergrounding until 90 days after completion of the 4th Street bridge with security posted, and add additional standard conditions'. He also advised that the actual square footage was 27,428 instead of 23,396. Commissioner Blakesley' asked why the landscaping was being deferred on 4th Street. ` Mr. Abbott explained that Day Creek Channel is currently, subject to overflow to the north of the site and Phase I of the landscaping has fewer trees to allow water and debris to flog through the property; unimpeded. In Phase II, after the flood control improvements, additional landscaping would be installed because water would no'longer be directed across the site in a flood_ situation. Chairman McNiel asked the time frame on the completion of Geer Creek Channel . Russ Maguire, City Engineer, stated the second phase should be completed by December 1990. Chairman McNel opened the public hearing. Paul Kalvaitis, Project Engineer, stated he was responsible for the design and construction. He introduced Ty Thompson, District Manager for Ryder Truck in Planning Commission Minutes - G- dune 2 , 199 N,.� r ""... w, i `f ! i. ,.: �. � ,. .. � r `is � «,. r �. +. � r ,. : • r r. t �.. � � �..r; r'�` i it # « "` r y r IM i "� i ! dl ® i r r . . !' #. r r. r. � r. i ` i � i M' • r �r � r "• 1 *r• `i' Commissioner Chitiea stated that because the three service bays face the street, she would prefer the gate at the central drive area on Santa Anita be electronically opened and closed as trucks enter instead of having the gate remain open throughout the day. She felt the balance of the project was well done and appreciated the administrative office having been 'located on the corner at 4th Street. Commissioner Emerick stated he was in favor of requiring textured driveways and the additional trees because of the elevated freeway corridor. Commissioner Blakesley felt the 'trees would break up the pavement and soften the building. He had concerns regarding the textured pavement and was willing to eliminate the textured paving on Santa Anita. Chairman McNiel felt that a broom finish with tint would be acceptable for the textured paving. Commissioner Emerick concurred. Commissioner Chitiea concurred and felt that additional trees' in the parking lot were necessary. Commissioner Blakesley agreed that the bays on Santa Anita should be screened. Commissioner Emerick concurred that a mechanized' sliding gate ' would be appropriate. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Mr. Dalmau stated that a mechanized gate` takes several 'minutes to open and felt there might be a safety hazard as trucks queued up on the street, Chairman McNiel asked how many large trucks would, use the` facility per day, G Mr. Thompson stated probably 50 trucks per day, up to 60 feet long, would. arrive for fuel and maintenance, 'but the trucks would be entering the northern gate and exiting the gate across from the bays. Chairman McNiel felt that as the gate was to be an exit gate there was no reason it could not be normally closed, and opened only to allow' trucks to exit. Mr. Calmau stated that the original design of the building did not call for split face blocks, but they were added -because the building would be visible through the open gate. ' He asked if split face block 'could be deleted with the installation 'of a sliding gate. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea felt that architecturally the building needs to be pulled together and split face block should be utilized. She supported the project Planning Commission Minutes= - - June 28, 1989 with the addition of a sliding gate and was willing to allow the enriched paving to be approved by the City Planner, Motion; Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 8-41 with modifications to require a mechanized sliding gate at the southerly Santa Anita exit, provide that the canopy for the gas island be constructed with a stucco finish to match the buildings, allow a delay in the ' utilities undergrounding until 90 days after completion of the 4tb Street bridge with security posted, and add the additional standard conditions proposed by staff. Motion carried by the following vote; AYES. COMMISSIONERS. 6LAESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY -carried NEW BUSINESS M. MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-60 - BARTON - A request to utilize corrugated stee ox roof screening material on a previously approved and constructed industrial building 'totaling 13,812 square feet within an approved industrial complex, comprising 11 buildings totaling 125,260 square feet on 8.43 acres of land in the General ' Indutrial District (Subarea; 8) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at 10723 Bell Court - APN 209-14 - 5. Steve Hayes,; Assistant Planner, presented the staff report* Commissioner Blakesley asked why the applicant objected to using "mineret" cement board. Mr. Hayes responded the applicant objected because of the weight. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that "mineret" was ' originally approved because' it could be painted to match buildings and it was felt that the heavier material would have more stability. Commissioner Emerick asked to be shown where the roof screen would be located on the footprint of the building. Mr. Hayes responded that it would be located on the west side of the building, approximately 3-4 feet above the parapet. Chairman McNiel asked why no roof screen was approved at the time the building design was approved. Planning Commission Minutes -13- June 28, 1989 Mr. Hayes responded that originally the architect felt the roof mounted equipment weld be screened by the parapet. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Roger Jaska, Martin J. Jaska, Inc., Mated the building was to be their new corporate office. He stated site studies were done of the roof during the design stage` and they felt that the roof mounted equipment could only be seen past the cul -de-sac. He stated it was an industrial building in an industrial area and people ' would be 200-300 feet array before they could see' the material . He stated they proposed using steelox because if is a product they distribute throughout Southern California and 'they have the material . He stated the product is lighter weight and only needs; to be supported every 14 feet. He said they wanted to demonstrate that it is a good product. He stated they oppose "minaret" board because it is a proprietary product. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Emerick stated he had been at Design Review and he remained neutral. Commissioner Chitiea felt that aesthetically the material should be compatible with the design of the building. She did not think- a color change would be appropriate. She felt roof' equipment should be screened from all sides. She felt that a ;support structure every 1.4 feet would not be adequate with the winds in the area and thought "minaret" board would be a more appropriate material. Commissioner Blakesley concurred. Chairman McNiel stated that the purpose of screening roof-mounted equipment is to have it blend in with the building. He felt the screening material should be similar to "minaret"' cement board. Commissioner Emerick stated he concurred. Chairman McNiel invited Mr. Jaska to comment. r. Jaska stated that they had always intended to paint the screening material to 'match the building. He said he was certainly aware of the wind 'factor, as he had built' $ 0,000, 00 worth of buildings in Rancho Cucamonga. He stated his other alternative was to go out and buy plaster board to satisfy the architectural requirements. There were no further public comments. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the requirement was to screen the equipment. He stated that since the Commission denied the use of the steelo , it was up to the applicant to return to Design Review with an acceptable` material'. Planning Commission Minutes -14- June 28, 1989 COMMISSION BUSINESS U. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Commissioner Chitiea suggested that if Commissioner Blakesley returned to the Residential Committee, it would allow Commissioner Weinberger an opportunity to work on both committees as an alternate. It was the consensus of the Commission that Commissioners Chi iea and Tdlstoy would remain on the Commercial/Industrial Committee and Commissioners Blakesley and McNiel would serve on the Residential Committee, with Commissioner Weinberger serving as the Alternate, and that appointments should return ,for consideration in August 1989. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried to adjourn'. g;'SU P.M. - Planning Commission Adjourned to a duly 6, 1989 workshop at Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center following Design Review to review plans for Montgomery Wards. Respectfully submitted, Bred Buller City Planner Planning Commission Minutes` 5- June 28, 1989 CITY CE RANCHO C CAMON A PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting June 22, 1989 Hillside Development Ordinance Workshop; Chairman Larry McNiel called the special workshop to order at 8 3C P.M. at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga. Roll Call COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT. David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry Mciel , Peter Tolstoy TAPE PRESENT, Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner* Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman,, Senior Planner; Jeff Gravel , Assistant Planner;; 3arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Larry Henderson, Senior Planner, Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner' Cindy Norris gave an oral presentation describing the proposed Hillside Development Ordinance. The presentation outlined the purpose for the ordinance, proposed review 'methods, and proposed guidelines and standards, including architecture, roadway design, fencing, density restrictions and transfer of development rights. The general response by the Planning Commission was favorable. They indicated that the Ordinance as resented was comprehensive; however, the Commission P p recommended that the following be revised. . The development should be restricted from any prominent ridgeline and the term "prominent ridgeline" be clearly defined. 2. All development should be prohibited from slopes which are 30 percent or greater. 3. Wording should be added to slope zone 2, (S to 7.99 percent., to state ' padding of a let may be limited, ; split level architecture may be required subject to design review, and the criteria for 18 inch maximum split be eliminated. a The design criteria and graphics in Section '1 .06.100 O.8 should be revised to insure that an improved, concrete channel be provided in any open drainage system along with any, naturalizing treatment. It was also suggested that provisions may be added to allow for consideration of cross lot drainage on a larger scale if necessary to reduce on-site grading. 5. Language should be added to the document in reference to graphic number 10, to insure that pole foundations will not be visually disruptive where used. 6. The section on the amount of window area for a structure facing a downhill slope contained in Section 17.06.100 4.f.2 should be eliminated. 7. Section 17-06.1001 on Transf er of Development Rights should be significantly revised to add further standards and restrictions to the procedure. If possible, the City may want to designate appropriate donor or receiver parcels, or both, through a Development Agreement and/or Specific Plan process. 8. The idea or word "scar" should be added to the purpose, and intent section and a definition for the term should be provided. 9. The idea or terms "wildlife conservation" and "water conservation"" should be added to the purpose and intent section. The Planning Commission decided to continue the workshop to a future date. ADJOURNMENT The workshop adjourned at 10:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 22, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting June 14, 1989 Chairman McNiel called the ;Regular Meeting of :the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at ':DD P.M. The meeting was held at Lions +Park Community Center, 9161 Base sine Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blake ley, Suzanne Ohitiea, Bruce. Emrick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT* Node STAFF PRESENT: Laura Bonaccorsi ,, Landscape Designer; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Barryo Hanson, Senior ' Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, Brett Horner, Assistant Planner; Barbara Kr•all , Assistant Civil Engineer, Dave Leonard, Park Project ' Coordinator; Russ Maguire, City Engineer; Beverly Nissen, ' Associate Planner; Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner; Gail Sanchez, Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS' Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that staff was recommending continuance on Items G, H;, and; 1, and that both applicants had agreed to the continuance, Mr. Buller announced that Dicker Warmington Properties, developers of Terra Vista Village Shopping Center, received an award from the International Council of Stropping Centers for Innovative Design and Construction l of a New Center, In turn, Dicker Warmington presented a plague to the City in appreciation of the C'i ty's` efforts in making the center an award winning project. APPROVAL {1F MINUTES Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, approved with Blakesley abstaining, to approve the minutes of May 24, 1989. PUBLIC HEARINGS F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 89-02 - 5LA MON 'HOMES INC. - A request to pre-zone approximate Ty_- 25 aci:eT of Auk vacant land 1:ftciie'dat the northeast corner of Highland and Rochester Avenues to a density of Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) APN: 225 152-01, 02, 03, 04, & 18® (Continued from May 24, 1989. ) G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 9-03 - BLAC MON HOMES INC. - Areuest to approve a Dev opment greement dr approximately 25 acres, consisting of 78 lots at approximately 3.2 dwelling units ;per acre, located on the northeast corner of Highland and Rochester Avenues - APN: 225- 52-01, 02, 03, 04, & 18. (Continued from May 24, s1989. ) I H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1351 LEWIS HOMES - A resi entia subdivision and design review o D condominiums on 5 lots and 8 single family lots on 9.07 acres of land in the Medium Density Residential District ( -14 dwelling units per acre) within the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southwest corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Milliken Avenue'' - APN: 1077-091- 4 (Continued from May 24 1989. ) Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental ,Assessment and Development District Amendment D -02, Environmental Assessment and Development Agreement 9-03, and Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13351 to June 28, 1989. CONSENT CALENDAR A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13613 - BERRY - The Design Review of 6511ai6g elevations -a-n'-d--d—e-tfi-T6-d--Sft—i- p-l-a-n- --fo—r a previously approved Tentative Tract Map consisting of 6 single family lots on 1.69 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Hellman Avenue, 900 feet south of 19th Street - APN: 22-01-65. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8 -09 - SHARI - The eve o exit o an office and warehouse building tote i ng 4, 60 square feet on 0.53 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) o the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the west side of Maple Place between Elm Avenue and Arrow Route - APN: 200-351-64$ C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 13542 AND 13542-3 - GRIGSBY DEVELOPMENT he es�gn review o buy ding ev- ons and detai e site p an for a previously approved Tentative Tract consisting of 80 single family lots on 26.76 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units ` per acre) , located north of Banyan; Avenue, west of Deer Creek Channel - APN. 201-191- 1 and 22. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by 3akesley, unanimously carried, to adopt the Consent Calendar. Planning Commission Minutes -2- dune 14, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-07 - A AME -' The request to esta is a sown dwelling unit on a M55 fiffi­17-y-To—t in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located at 5254 Galloway Strut - APN: 1061-061- 0. (Continued from May 10, 1989. ) E. VARIANCE 89-0 - ADAME - A request to satisfy the Development Code requirement an enc oed garage space by constructing a carport for a second dwelling unit on a single family lot in the Very Low Density Residential District (less than 2 dwelling ; units per acre), located at 5 54+ Galloway Street - APN. 1061-061-10. Commissioner Chitiea excused herself from hearing the item because her house is located within 300 feet of the property. Brett Horner, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. George Gulick, 50 Galloway, Rancho' Cucamonga, stated he represented Joe Ad " e. He stated it ;would be difficult to put in a permanent structure because of the slope. Hearing no further' testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner issioner Tolstoy stated that after viewing the project site he agreed it would be difficult to erect a building because of the terrain. He supported the Variance. Commissioner dlakeley felt the carport could provide the same function as a garage. Chairman McNiel Mated he had visited the site and spoken with the applicant. He felt a carport would be acceptable and said the applicant had indicated they would be using the 'same material on the carport as the house. Commissioner Blakesley stated thecul-de-sac street served only three properties and afforded more curbside space than found on most cul-de-sacs. Motion. Moved by Emer°ic , seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolutions appro,ving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use at 9- O7 and Variance 9-0 , Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEV, EME ICK, MCNIEL, TCLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ; ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS; CHITIEA -carried Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 14, 1989 I. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE EN IRINMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DESIGN REVIEW - 7 - N R R PERT E - An nvirbnmenta ana yss o the proposed dev06pr nt o X apartment units on 3.15 acres of land in the Medium Residential District -14 dwelling units per acre) , located on the the north side of Arrow Highway opposite Ramona Avenue - APN: l - 11-0 , 04, 21, & 24. Associated with this is Free Removal Permit g- . Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and reviewed CEA guidelines. She presented a letter from John Liao of Universal Properties contesting the need for a separate >Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and stating that the General Plan EIR should be sufficient. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steve Falk, project architect, felt the public should not be 'able to invoke the demand for an EIR just because of a petition with 1.10 signatures.` He; stated the applicant had discussed the situation with the Sheriff' s substation and been told there had been no increase in crime in the area caused by smaller projects. He felt ; than as Arrow Route had been designed to handle 45,000 ears per day, this project of only 38 apartment units would have a' minuscule effect. He felt the project far exceeded the City' s development standards and would cater to upper-end tenants. Commissioner 'Emeri'ck asked the size of the units. Mr. Falk stated they would be 1,000 to 1,100 square foot units with P and bedrooms, -1/2 baths, and enclosed two-car garages. Commissioner Emerick asked the proposed rental rates and if a market study had been conducted to identify income groups of prospective tenants. John Liao, Universal Properties, stated some research had been done. He stated rents were projected to be in $N -$S5U range and income should be $ ,4U;lonth. Chairman McNiel stated `that 'the City had previously requested EIR' s on smaller projects. He asked if the applicant had considered making the project condominium units instead of apartments. Mr. Falk stated they had considered condos, but presently were proposing apartments. Chairman McNiel asked if the applicant had considered lowering the density from the proposed '12*0 dwelling 'units per acre.' Mr.i Falk stated that the original proposal was for 42 units, and they had lowered the number to '38. He said they were considering eliminating one to two additional units because of the 'arboists report and efforts to save a tree. Planning Commission Minutes - - dune 14, 1989' Chairman McHiel suggested the applicant should consider an additional 10 reduction. t f M City had design standards � t nit if they r* Falk asked why the � u _ 14 u_ y y would not approve that density. it Chairman McHiel responded that specific site or neighborhood issues are taken into consideration when determining density, and added that a 10 reduction in 'I units would still 'be within the approved density range. The following residents spine in opposition' to the project: Russ Burroughs, 9 Placer Street, Rancho Cucamonga Michael Cutillo, 9868 Alpine, Rancho Cucamonga Joe Montelongo, 9713 Placer Street, Rancho Cucamonga Clay Hossie, 8604 Willow Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Herman Santos, 8672 Oak Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Fred Hunt 8616 Ramona Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga Wayne Schreib, 8598 Willow Drive,' Rancho Cucamonga Brett Granfield, 8533 Willow Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Kathy Griset, 9869 Placer Street, Rancho Cucamonga Cicero Holland, 806 Ramona Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga Alvin Washington, `9839 Placer Street, Rancho Cucamonga Their concerns included increased traffic, the potential 'for increased crime (drug dealers, burglaries, graffiti), additional children moving into the area, overcrowded classrooms, low-income transients moving into the apartments, the need for pans in the area, and loss of privacy and breeze. Several people stated they would be willing to support the project if it was changed to condominiums because they felt owners would take better care of the property than tenants and it would afford an opportunity for people to build equity in a home. In addition two realtors from Tarbell Realtors, Pam Kinsey and Tom Tulley, stated they felt the $`860 rental rate would not be ,justified in the area and that apartments would create a lowering of property values. They both supported condominiums. Chairman McN el stated that the responsibility for development of schools is with the local school districts and the state of California. He stated the City has no control over when and hoar schools are developed. In response to the comment on inadequate park sites in this area, he stated that pans were planned at Bear Gulch and at Feron and Hermosa. He also stated that parks are more prevalent in the planned communities because the developer is required to build parks in order to develop the hundreds of 'acres. He said in other areas developers pay money to a park development fund and when there is enough; money, parrs are built Mr. Liao stated ;he had heard the comments from the surrounding; neighbors requesting condominiums instead of apartments. He felt an apartment project would be easier to develop than a condominium. He indicated the whole Planning Commission Minutes - - June 14, 1989 M IF ,"M � � a �� i •,, y M � . •' ! f • � r� i . i,�; • � ,i� w •�. Mr. Maguire stated it was addressed in a combination 1986/1987 report and was being updated in a current computerized master transportation/traffic modeling program. Commissioner Chitiea asked if the, numbers had changed to his knowledge. Mr. Maguire responded that he foresaw no chance. He indicated that an apartment generates approximately 8-11 trips per day, so the units would generate 880-`400 person trips per: day, but those' numbers were already included in the previous study. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, reiterated that the Commission was not currently considering a project approval , nor compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood, but was merely to determine if the project. as proposed may have a significant 'effect on the environment. If based on the information and the testimony heard there was substantial evidence that, the project may have a significant effect on the environment, then an EIR would be required under the law. If the Commission felt there would not be a significant effect, the recommendation should be for a Negative Declaration or a Mitigated Negative Declaration. CEQA guidelines encourage full participation in the process with full information being disclosed' and encourage an EIR when there is a toss up. He stated that CEA guidelines ' recommend preparation of an EIR when there is substantial public controversy. He stated the Commissioners needed to 'ascertain if there might potentially be significant impacts created from this project. Commissioner lolstoy felt that since so many people came out to raise issues with the proposed apartment project, a focused EIR should be required. Commissioner ;Chitiea concurred. Chairman McNiel stated that since the residents and developer had expressed willingness to cooperate on a condominium project, it might be appropriate to continue the item to allow; the developer to hold a neighborhood meeting to discuss the issue further. He felt the developer might then change the application. Ralph Hanson stated it was up to the applicant to submit the project to the City and it was the responsibility of the Commission to analyze the project as proposed. He said that if the developer would like to change the application, that would be cogent to the analysis. He stated that if the Commission felt there would be a difference in the impact on the; environment if the units were owner-occupied as opposed to renter-occupied and the applicant indicated he would change his project to condominium, then a continuance might be in order. r.' Buller suggested that if the applicant consented and the Commission wished to continue this matter, another neighborhood meeting could occur to discuss the potential change to condominiums. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -7- dune 14, 1989 Mr. Liao stated that if the residents wanted a condominium project and were willing ;to landscape the outside of their houses, he would propose changing to condominiums. He therefore felt a continuance would be in order. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Buller stated that if the applicant decided to propose a condominium project, he would have to process a map to subdivide the land for sale of ownership of the separate parcels. He said that would delay processing the project in order to allow the processing of the map to catch up with the current submittal . Motion: Moved by Toltoy, ; seconded by Chitiea to continue Opportunity for ; Public Comment on the Environmental Assessment for Design Review 88-17 to June ' 8, 196. Motion carried by the following vote; AYE'S: COMMISSIONERS: BLA .ESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL, TCLSTCY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried Mr.; Buller stated that the City would work with homeowners groups which wished to be proactive in cleaning up or upgrading neighborhoods. Chairman McNiel stated that housing rehabilitation funds were available through the Community Development Block Grant program for low interest loans. Commissioner 'Blakesley stated that concerns regarding crime and density had been raised which` had to do with the land use issue. He stated; he would rather drake the mistake of requiring an EIR when It may not shed any new information than make the mistake.; of not requiring one when it would have been appropriate® He indicated he was sensitive to the need for lower-priced' housing. Commissioner Chitlea stated this project was only a small part of a larger issue. She felt the Commission may wish to consider transitional density. 8:58 P.M. - Planning Commission Recessed. g. 0 P.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened. J. VARIANCE 9-01. - LA - A request to construct a` trellis structure in the front yard, which encroaches 'six feet into the front yard setback at 6465 Jasper Street - APN. 10 -E1- 8. Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 1.4, 1989 1 Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Cale Lang, 6465 Jasper Street, Rancho Cucamonga, applicant, stated he began the house improvements with full knowledge of City standards, realizing he needed a Variance. He felt he was exercising his individual right to change his property.' He felt the structure was architecturally, integrated with the neighborhood because the tract behind his had similar ' architectural features. He felt the structure was not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. He said he was a licensed architect in California. He stated that over twenty-four months ago his wife approached the City with a proposed sketch of improvements to the > yard and house. He stated he < contracted a' local contractor to begin the work even though they 'knew they could not complete the framework or 'trellis until the City had approved a Variance. They completed the work as far as legally permitted ' and then submitted plains to the Planning Department. He said he showed the plans to his neighbors and they gave favorable feedback. He presented documents showing drawings of the trellis and color pictures of the hone. He felt that and architect who purchased a house should be encouraged to improve the property. Chairman McNiel stated he felt the architecture: of the house was unattractive because it had two double garage doors and very little house element facing the street. Commissioner Chiti'ea asked the proposed material for the column . Mr. Lang' stated the columns were already in place and they were concrete. He stated they would' remain as is and be planted' with wisteria. He proposed painting the house gray, with the wood trim on the trellis painted to match the trim on the house. He stated he had a petition signed by his neighbors in support of the trellis. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick stated he liked the architecture but didn't think it wasi n architectural question. He felt it was a planning legal question. He agreed with staff' s assessment that there was not enough uniqueness of the property to qualify for a Variance. He felt setbacks were required to give an appearance of openness. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the Code provided for Variances to allow the Planning Commission to make exceptions. He supported the Variance because he felt it would improve the looks of the neighborhood. Commissioner B,lakesley stated the trellis structure would impinge on the streetscape positively. He felt that similar structures could be detrimental to the streetscape and he therefore supported the essence of the Code which' restricted the building of such structures. Although he felt the structure would compliment the house he could not make the findings necessary to grant the Variance. Planning Commission Minutes -9— June 14, 1989 Commissioner Chitiea stated the applicable portion of the Code was in place to prevent unsightly structures from impinging on the streetscape. She felt the proposed structure would enhance the streetscape. She felt front courtyards can be aesthetically pleasing and this one would be an attractive addition which would draw attention away from the Four--car garage. Chairman McNiel concurred. He felt the streetscape was very flat-fronted and the trellis would enhance the streetscape. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the structure would provide shade on a west- facing building. Commissioner Emerick felt it would be more appropriate to consider changing the code and providing design guidelines where structures encroached into the front yard setback. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to direct staff to prepare a` Resolution of approval for Variance 89-0 for the June 28, lg g meeting. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TDLSTDY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BLASLEY, EMERIC ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE; -carried K. MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PARCEL MAP' 11891 - 'DONNELL ARM RONO BR H PARTNERS' - A request to e etc r°ai 1 road spur service to parcel 4, P' increase the amount of 'on-site inundation area, and (3) add an on-site retention' basin for the project located on the south side of Arrow Route at Milliken Avenue - AP : 8-111- 3. OLD' BUSINESS L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT' AND MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8 -3 'D NN LL' N' PARTNERS request` to delete ray roa spun service to parcel '41 Ancrease t e amount of on-site inundation areas, and add an on-site retention basin for the project'located on the south side of Arrow Route and Milliken Avenue - APN: 9-111- 3. Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and four conditions added at the dune D Design Review Committee meeting, including wrought iron fencing to be used in lieu of chain link fencing along the southern perimeter of the basin, dense landscaping to be provided adjacent to the fence on the inside of the basin, benches and picnic tables to be provided' within the basin to provide a usable employee plaza area, and the planting of owable turf within the basin. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -10- dune 14, 1989 Jim Westling, O'Donnell , Armstrong, Brigham, & Partners,; stated they found during plan check that they had used an incorrect assumption of the amount of water that would be corning onto the site, necessitating an expansion of the retention area. As they were required to provide the City with a hold harmless clause regarding injuries in the retention basin, they preferred not to provide furniture which would invite the public to use the area. They preferred to keep the fenced area secure at all times. He indicated they ;were providing patio furniture at the buildings. He also felt it should not be necessary to landscape bath the inside and the outside of the fence. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was dosed. Commissioner Blakesley stated he was 'a proponent of rail service, but since the railroad had advised they could not service parcel 24, it would be necessary to eliminate the requirement. He felt perhaps more drought resistant material's should be considered in lieu of turf in the basin if the area was not to be utilized as a park. Commissioner Chitiea concurred that drought resistant materials should be considered. She preferred to have the basin available to employees for use as a park. She felt vines on the fence would be appropriate and sufficient to screen the chain link fence.' Commissioners Toltoy and Emerick concurred that it would' be an asset to the industrial area to have the basin available to employees. Chairman cNiel stated that it was rare that the Commission allowed chain link fencing and he felt concrete tables would be a good trade off`. He reopened the public hearing to allow Mr. Wostlig to; comment. r. nestling asked if the requirement for a hold harmless agreement could be lifted if they were forced to keep the basin open for a park. He indicated they would not necessarily have someone on the ;property to close the gate if it should start to rain, particularly on a weekend. He felt opening the area as a park would be an attractive nuisance for the neighborhood on non-business days. Commissioner Chitiea asked if it would not be possible to keep the area locked' and provide the employees with keys. r. Westling responded' that: it could be done with the tenant assuming their own liability. Chairman McNiel reclos d the public hearing. He asked if the retention basin was a requirement solely for a iD -year flood. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, stated the basin was an alternative chosen by the applicant, as opposed to building storm drains south of the project. Commissioner Tolsto felt signs should be added behind the buildings to y,. g g prohibit' cars from using the inundation area of the parking lot during storms.' Planning% Commission Minutes _11_ dune 14, 1989 i Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the City could not in good conscience allow removal of the hold harmless agreement. Motion: Moved by Chitiea,; seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolutions approving Modification of Conditions of Approval for Parcel Map 11891 and Environmental Assessment and Modification to Development Review -35 with the understanding that a locked gate would be provided and modifications to provide for wrought iron fencing to be used in lieu of chain link fencing along the southern perimeter of the basin,; dense landscaping to be provided adjacent to the fence on the inside of the basin, benches and picnic tables to e provided within the basin to provide a usable employee plaza area, and the planting of mowabl e turf within the basin. Motion carried by the following vote* AYES* COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMER CK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES* COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: carried NET BUSINESS M. MODIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW B -3 - NELSON - An appeal of the City P56rrePi deETsion 'to deny the request to ete a condition of approval requiring the payment of an in-lieu fee for landscaping within the 'I-15 Freeway right-of-way along the project frontage for 1.55 acres in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14) of the Industrial Specific Flan, located on the east side of Hyssop Drive, north of 4th'Street - APN: 9- 331.- . Brett Horner, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman' McNiel invited public comment. Barry Mason, Young, Henrie, Humphries, & Mason, attorney for applicant, stated they were requesting that the in-lieu fee be waived because of economic hardship: He said the applicant could not utilize the land in the flood catch basin until Day Creek Channel was improved, and as they could not afford to let the land lay fallow;until the channel was improved, they were being forced o build a smaller industrial building than originally planned. He stated that if the in-lieu fee was not waived, the applicant would have to abandon the project as the project would become economically unfeasible, with fees equating 55% of the construction costs. He stated they were only developing along a 300 foot frontage instead of the ;1,000 foot frontage' of the entire parcel . He felt the landscaped area, would not benefit anyone. He 'felt that because the City would not allow the use of the cater basin at this time the applicant was being forced into a reduced use of his property for the benefit of the City. Planning' Commission Minutes -1 - dune 14 1989 Chairman McNiel stated that if the purchaser bought the property without the knowledge that the etch basin was required;, it was not the responsibility of the City to be sure the purchaser knew the constraints of the property. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Chitiea stated the amount of landscaping required at this time appeared to be an unfair burden and felt the Commission should consider requiring the landscaping adjacent to the flood control basin at the time that portion of the property was developed. She felt that freeway landscaping was for the benefit of the community as a whole and would also benefit the property owner by increasing; the value of their land. Commissioners 3lakesley and Tolstoy agreed that the requirement for the entire 1,000 foot frontage was excessive'. Commissioner Emerick asked if the Commission had formerly been confronted with a similar situation where freeway frontage bordered undevelopable land. Barre Hansom, Senior Civil Engineer, stated this property was unique and it was also the first time a freeway on-ramp was involved. Commissioner Emerick agreed that the amount seemed excessive. Chairman McNiel suggested the freeway frontage adjacent to only the buildable ` ground should be landscaped and that the area to the west of the on-ramp should not be required. Can Coleman, Senior planner, stated that all the landscaping area was located within the CalTrans right-of-way and would require in-lieu fees because ` CalTrans has not approved a master landscaping plan. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, suggested the Commission clarify the policy requiring landscaping from the property lino to the first roadway, which would be the on-ramp. He felt the in-lieu fees could be required as the property was developed by having the developer landscape or pay in-lieu fees for the upper portion first and then, following elimination of the basin, the developer could complete development and at that time pay in-lieu fees or landscape the second portion of the parcel.; Commissioner Chitiea questioned if there was a master plan which included the flood control basin to show how that area could be developed with parking and access. Chairman McNiel stated it was merely planned to be an expansion of the parking lot into the flood control basin. Commissioner Chitiea was concerned that if the area was not planned properly it would never develop and the City would never have the landscaping. Planning Commission Minutes -13- dune 1 , 1989 Commissioner Blakesley suggested that the in-lieu fee be proportioned to the area developed, so that an inordinate area would not be left with the retention basin area. Commissioner Chitiea concurred. Mr. Maguire stated that before the applicant could obtain wilding permits for the first phase he would have to provide surety, guaranteeing that once Day Creek Channel was completed, the developer would eliminate and fill the basin. Once the basin was filled, it would be in the developer's economic interest to utilize the land for parking so that he could further expand the use of the building. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that the Planning Commission was reaffirming existing policy to take the landscaping to the first roadway along the freeway right-of'-way, and that in-lied fees should be ' collected proportionate to the land being developed. Ralph Manson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the matter was brought before the Planning Commission to appeal' a City Planner' s decision to deny a complete deletion of the landscaping condition. He suggested the Commission make a' motion to sustain the appeal and direct the City Planner to amend the condition consistent with the Commission's findings* Motion; Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, to sustain the appeal of the City Planner's decision to deny the request for Modification , to Development Review 8 - ` and direct the City Planner to amend the condition consistent with the Commission' s findings. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS. BLAIESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TCLSTCY NOES: COMMISSIONERS. NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: -carried Commissioner Emerick felt the policy should be more clearly delineated to allow the land price to reflect more ` or less burden in the area of landscaping. Commissioner Rlakesley agreed that it should be predictable. Mrs Maguire stated he did not know of any other long retention basins on private property along the freeway corridor. He felt that a clarification of the policy requiring landscaping along the property line up to the first roadway was very ;predictable. He stated this property was unique because o the retention basin and the basin would be removed within a ,year. Chairman McNiel invited Mr. Mason to comment. Mr. Mason stated that his client would only be developing one building and that although some additional parking would be added to the retention basin � 1 - dune I l gg Planning Commission Minutes - �'' 4" ' eM R� M � � f n . � • i M 'i a M • r #N' s N' M� � M M "M • � ►...► f � � .� ,� f • era � ,, Q � • r •,. • _ M regarding Phase 1 of his development, but now had received a lot of support for the ;developed Phase 1. He felt it would be inappropriate to prohibit car washes in the NC District and that the Conditional Use process provided enough opportunity for review. He felt ear washes were an accepted and needed use in the community. He stated he circulated a petition and obtained signatures of 90 of the people he approached regarding his proposed location and use. He said that in many surrounding communities a- car wash is an approved use rather ' than a conditional use. There were no further public comments. Chairman McNiel felt here was a need to provide services that the community uses; i .e., service stations, fast food restaurants, and car washes. Although they were needed uses, the question was where they should be placed. He felt those services needed to be placed relatively close to residences. Commissioner Chitiea stated that so long as the use was a possibility, the ; Commission would always deal with the "not in my back yard" mentality and the easy way out would be to prohibit the use-, however, ; she felt there could be appropriate mitigation measures in some locations. She felt it would be appropriate to develop 'interim guidelines but realized the Planning Department was short-staffed. Chairman McNiel felt there had already been a good background of input and interim policies could be developed rather easily. Commissioner Blakesley felt there would not be an inundation of applications ` and that' current guidelines were sufficient. Commissioner Chitiea felt it would be helpful to be able to give guidelines to developers. Commissioner Bmer ck stated that as the Commission composition would be changing, guidelines would provide a more concrete record of reasoning. Brad Buller,: City Planner, stated staff could prepare a Memorandum of Understanding- of the Planning Commission' s current policy on this type of, establishment. They could then add a future Work Program item to develop full guidelines. Commissioner Chitiea felt that would be appropriate to provide consistency. Commissioner Tolstoy felt it was important to have; needed services in the neighborhoods where people live, so as not to add to traffic congestion as individuals seek needed'' services.' It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to prepare a Memorandum of Understanding> outlining current policy and add a future Work Program item to develop full guidelines. Planning Commission Minutes -16- »lucre 14 198 Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to continue the meeting beyond 11:00 P.M. 11:00 P.M. - Planning Commission Recessed 11:10 P.,M. - Planning Commission Reconvened DIRECTOR'S REPORTS P. COURTESY REVIEW OF VICTORIA GROVES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Brad Buller, City Planner, discussed the changes made to the site plan, including the driveway location, height of fence, fence material to wrought iron, and earth tone colors for compatibility with the neighborhood. He stated that the roof was still metal. He said the plans had already been processed through the Office of the State Architect and ground breaking had taken place. Therefore, any change in structure would require resubmission, which could delay construction and potentially mean a loss of construction funds. He questioned if the Commission had a preference between split face fluted block vs. slump block for the retaining wall . He stated the school site had green open space but the fields were not large enough to support legitimate organized soccer, softball, or little league fields. He suggested that the school not place backstops facing the City Park, as such a placement would encourage users to transition the sidewalk bordering the park, which could be hazardous. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that as the school was being built in a residential neighborhood, he would like to see the landscaping bermed up next to the parking lot to mitigate the view of the parking lot. He asked if most elementary schools had playing fields. Mr. Buller stated that most schools have backstops but he was told by the School District that they were not required to have backstops, only open space. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if the school site were larger, it could accommodate playing fields. He felt it should be recommended that school sites be larger in the future. The other Commissioners concurred that school sites should be large enough to accommodate standard size playing fields. Mr. Buller stated the school could place backstops that would orient away from the sidewalk. Chairman Mc Niel asked the gross acreage of the school and the adjacent park. Planning Commission Minutes -17- June 14, 1989 Cave Leonard, Park Project Coordinator, stated it was approximately 14 acres combined, 7 acres each. Mr. Buller stated a normal elementary school is approximately 10 acres, and pare are a minimum 5 acres. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Dick Kemp, school architect, agreed- to berg the landscaping between the parking lot and the street and stated he was available to answers questions. Commissioner Chitiea stated ;she felt the fence at the kindergarten play yard should be a minimum of 4 feet on top of a 3 foot retaining wall because even at that height balls would bounce over the fence into the street. She also wanted landscaping to be added by the fence to give a sense of buffering from the street noise. r. Kemp stated they could landscape around the periphery of the kindergarten ; play yard to help cut down on the noise. Commissioner Chitiea did not feel a metal roof was compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Kemp stated they had only installed the roofs on three schools and ;each time they had complaints because the children climbed on the roofs and broke tiles. He stated that a metal roof is too slippery for the children to climb on. Commissioner 'Cmerick asked if there were any locations in the design of the building that would allow the children to have access to the roof. Mr. Kemp responded there were not. Commissioner Crerick felt that the the roof would not be a problem in that case. Mr. Kemp said that the weighs 8 pounds per square foot and metal weighs 1 pounds. Therefore, the structure would need to be redesigned in order to accept the weight` of a the roof, which would necessitate resubmitting the plans to the Office of the State Architect. He said Sacramento was running out of coney' and if the building was not funded at this time, it would be delayed at lust 1- ,years. Commissioner Chitiea asked if neighborhood greetings had been held when they were first planning the project. Mr. Kemp stated here was a' planning 'group' which included parents,' teachers, and citizens, but the neighborhood had not been built as yet. Chairman McNiel stated the Commission was focusing on the metal roof because there were several in the City that were ugly and peeled after about 8®10, years Planning Commission Minutes -1 dune 14, 1989 Mr. Kemp stated the roof they were planning to use was guaranteed against fading or peeling for 20 years. He said they originally proposed a copper roof, but the price was prohibitive. Commissioner Chitiea thanked Mr. Kemp for allowing the Planning Commission to comment on the plans. She hoped in the future the Commission would be approached earlier in the process. MrKemp stated he would be happy to do so on future projects. Chairman McNiel requested that a the roof be considered if the school was not funded at this time. Even though he felt the metal roof was not compatible in the residential neighborhood, he did not want to slows down the building process. Commissioner glakesley concurred. Commissioner Chitiea agreed that the roof material should' be reviewed if the school was not funded at this time, but allowed the might not necessarily be the best roof. Chairman Mc4iel felt split face' fluted block was a better choice for the retaining wall as opposed to slump block. Commissioner Chitiea felt the wall should be consistent with the school, which used split faced fluted block instead of trying to match` the 'slump block o the neighboring homes*; r. Kemp stated that split faced fluted rock was more durable and easier to replace. There were no additional public comments. Chairman McNiel concluded that he hoped that the School District would consider the Commissioners' comments and that he looked forward to seeing the next school project earlier in the design process. C. REVIEW OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CAPITAL PARK IMPROVEMENT UDGET 1989-90 AND Cave Leonard, Park Project Coordinator, presented the staff report. grad Buller, City Planner, stated the budget was presented to the Commission to see if they found consistency with the General Plan. Commissioner Tolstoy asked why the City had to renovate so+ many playing fields in the park. He wanted to knower if they had been designed or constructed' improperly. Planning; Commission Minutes -19- dune 1.4, 1989 Puss Maguire, City Engineer, said there were lawsuits pending regarding design and construction of Red Hill and Heritage. He said in some cases the soil was compacted too much and in ;other cases the top of the soccer and baseball fields have a black clay surface, with good soil 4 feet down. Commissioner Blaesley asked if a site had been selected for a northeast community park. r. Leonard stated that all but 15 of the BB acre have been acquired at Summit and East Avenue. Commissioner Chitiea asked about the floating park site designation in northwestern section. Mr. Leonard stated a developer was proposing a 5 acre site rear Almond and Sapphire. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if that would take the place of the park site that was deleted. r. Leonard stated it would. Commissioner Tol stay felt there were ; not enough parks in the older parts o the City. He wondered what was being done to address the problem. Mr. Leonard stated infill parks were the hardest ones to acquire. He stated the City had been working hard to try to acquire property in the southwest section and the northwestern section of Alta Loma. He stated ` they had approached owners in both areas, but it was economically unfeasible to purchase the land in question. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the City was not consistent with the intent of the first General; Plan to retrofit parks in the older areas of the City. r.' Leonard stated that authorization to execute the :agreement for construction of Old Town Park was on the June 21' City Council agenda. STATUS OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD MEDIAN ISLAND DESIGN Laura Bonaccorsi , Landscape Designer, presented the staff report. Brad Buller, ,City Planner, stated staff felt there was a need to process an amendment to the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan to allow more flexibility in the median island design. He suggested the illustration ; giving design specifics should be eliminated and replaced with language indicating the final design would be approved at a later date. Chairman Mc Niel felt turf was the most attractive material for a median, but; water, maintenance, and traffic considerations are important. He felt it was necessary to 'look at other alternatives. Planning Commission Minutes -20- June 14, 1989 � .. • * . t� • i• •' � a., _ �. i • . •� � �, a "` s� "" * * �"' "� � � � �, � �91 r "` s * •f �• * • s w � e � � e � ! '., # k ""� ! � �, � w• • a N * 1" a ^� �, � . ' � .� �. '� '. • . '17 !' W a.', W �i a A R. GRADING ORDINANCE _ STATUS UPDATE (Oral report) Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the proposed Hillside Development Ordinance would be presented at a workshop on dune 22, 1989. Following the workshop, slides and a graphic presentation wound be prepared to illustrate the provisions of the ordinance. He stated it would address the whole development issue of footings, opens space, ,rear yard usable space, etc. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he hoped it would state that property lines should be at the top of slopes instead of slope bottoms, COMMISSION BUSINESS There was no additional Commission business at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no additional public comments. ADJOURNMENT ' Motion. Moped b` Tolsto seconded i b Chitiea. unanimously ousl_ carried, to adjourn. 1 : 5 P.M. - Planning Commission Adjourned to a dune 22, lg g workshop at Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center following Design Review to reviews the proposed Hillside Development Ordinance. Respectfully submitted, ABrad�Bull r Secretary Planning Commission Minutes - - dune 14, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA CNA PLANNING COMMISSION Adjourned Meeting May 31, 1989 Terra Vista Town Center Workshop Chairman Larry McNiel called the special workshop to order at S 1S P.M. at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga. ROES. CALL. COMMISSIONERS'. PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: Bruce Emerick STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; pan Coleman, Senior Planner, Otto Kroutil ,' deputy City Planner; Debra Meier, Staff Consultant Debra Meier, Staff Consultant for Terra Vista Town Center, reviewed the staff comments and outstanding issues as outlined in the workshop comments regarding Mervyns. Chairman McNiel suggested that the Commission discuss each item in order on the workshop outline. Item No 1 The Commission had previously expressed a desire to provide a r atIc entry into the sure and create an expression that is more than a facade. The Commission reiterated their view in regard to this issue. Mervyns' store representative, along with the building architect, responded that the disruption of the typical ceiling height would conflict with their in-store marketing strategy. They have created a new prototype that uses 10' high fully merchandised walls. The Commission directed the applicant to study the entry design. The Commission would accept carrying the volume only into the entry vestibule and not into the 'store area if properly designed. This would provide a 'drama that would carry beyond the front doorway, providing an exciting architectural element. The applicant was requested stet to provide the Design Review Committee with alternate designs to review prior to final approval. Item No. 2 - Mr. Robert Bernstein, project architect, agreed to expand the co 'ore concrete entry, with a grid pattern, across the driveway as an extension of the entry plaza. Item No. - 'The Commission accepted the angled arcade design at the two 'front bu y ding corners. Item No. 4 The project architect explained that the building face under the arcs is upgraded with a 4' x 4' grid and the accents. The Commission preferred this concept to the original grid design. The Commission also accepted the lighting design with wall sconces and recessed ceiling lights. Item No. 5 - The project architect explained haw the tower features on the east an' west elevations were re-designed. The roof line now includes a' cornice, rafter detail . The Mervyns° towers will include rafter "tails" which is a variation of the Architects Pacifica cornice detail used throughout the center. The Commission approved the design. The Commission requested a decorative bevel , rather than the flat end, on the rafter outrigger. 1 The recessed accent "medallions" on each tower are proposed with a I" recess and accent color. The Commission preferred a 4" recess for greater shadow and dimension. In addition, the recess must bevel or step back from the building face in a decorative fashion. Other Details: 1. Window Mullions - The Commission accepted the medium bronze finish or t e mu ions on the front entry of Mervyns. . Site Furniture - The architect suggested a Dura Art Stone product for benches, pot, and columns. He noted that this is a different` material and ;product from the Architects Pacifica specifications. The Commission agreed that it is an appropriate choice, as the colors< and materials are very compatible to the voussoir and wainscott' materials; (Conterra stone) on the building. . Main Entry Elements 8- o The Commission recommended that the louvers used to provide air inside the tower should be a large size architectural louver and be attractive as well as functional . o The Commission agreed with the architect that the column stone should be a light color, representative of the building stucco color. The architect noted that the column was to be a 8ura Art Stone product. The Commission requested a double thin cap and traditional base design, as was depicted on the architect's' rendering. 4. Para et - The Commission requested a 211 x 4" wood plant-on with stucco over along the back side of the roof parapet. The stucco finish should continue on the back side of the parapet to within 1211 or 1 " of roof surface. Color and finish of back side of parapet; shall match front side. Planning Commission 2 May 31,' 1988 S. Roof Screen The Commission did not approve the metal roof screen. The `appl i cant was directed to use the cementboard sheeting product, which is becoming the standard roof screen material due to its grind resistant qualities' within the City. The sheeting should be the same color and texture as the building wall . Conclusion: The Commission recommended approval of the Mervyn' s istore elevations subject to the modifications discussed. ; These changes should be reviewed by the Design Review Committee. If, upon review of all issues by staff, ` the revisions are appropriate to Commission comments, a Consent Calendar review would be acceptable. The Commission recessed at 6:40 P.M. The Commission reconvened at 6:52 P.M. for review of Montgomery Ward elevations. Debra Meier again gave an outline of staff comments that had been prepared for this workshop. Tory Bond, Architects Pacifica, gave the Commission an update on the project status and the design sequence that Montgomery Ward has been through:. Norm Abplanalp, Montgomery Ward', provided the Commission with information regarding the concept of "Specialty Shops" that the company has developed. It is a concept that appears to be unique to the industry at this time. He also explained that, in contrast to the Mervyns" design, the entry height is carried into the store and is a crucial part of their image. At this point, Mr. Bond gave a presentation on the design scheme. 1.. Main Entry e indicated that the main entry is very tall (*50 feet) but appears narrow' in context with the remainder of the building. The Commission felt that it did not provide the proper transition at< the edges of the trellis structure. The Commission suggested that the 'side' panels near the front entry could' be broadened. Mr. Bond agreed to study the width of the e"ntry and the roof line transition. Another item discussed in regard to the entry was the connection to the promenade. The architect indicated that decorative pavement will be provided across the drive aisle as an extension of the entry plaza. The expanded decorative pavement will tie in to the promenade. He noted that some adjustments may need to be made to the location of the promenade kiosk to allow the transition to occur in the best manner. He agreed to study it. Planning Commission 3 May 31, 1989 2. Kids Store• Mr. Bond explained that the roof line at the Kids Store entry wi 1 include the exposed rafter tails to continue the exposed wood theme from the entry trellis. The Commission felt that the general concept and orientation here was acceptable. The Commission did have a few suggestions: o The; first archway; on the north elevation should be vision glass. Arches should continue along the wall. The Commission would prefer glass, but will consider alternatives. o The Commission requested an enlarged detail of the Kids Store entry. o Provide landscaping adjacent to the curb to direct the pedestrian through the arcade. The Commission was not supportive of the yellow and purple signage concept and the multi-color awning as presented by Montgomery Ward` for the Kids Store. 3. Electric Avenue: Mr. Bond noted that the same exposed wood rafters' and stone window mouldings are carried through this area, as they are on the remainder of the Montgomery Ward building. The window; mullions at the Electric Avenue area are teal green. The applicant had proposed a red frame within the arch in front of the window; however, the Commission requested that this item be teal green also. The Commission also suggested that the metal trellis frame should appear to "float" within the arch form. The Commission suggested that the stone moulding continue around the window in the tower. The Commission discussed the importance of that corner as it relates' to the east side of the center. Some individuals felt that the tower' roof line did net transition properly with the ' adjacent ' shop building. Mr. Bond will look at this relationship more closely. a Rear Elevation. The critical concern along the rear elevation is the proximity to the street and residential area north of Town Center Drive. Due to this exposure, the Commission felt that the wall` surface should be upgraded. They would consider alternatives to the stone wainscot and 'trim, the detail should be similar to the approach used on the Terra Vista Village. They would expect detail as good or better for Town Center. The Commission suggested that the parking should be located as close: to the customer pick-up area as possible and that taller landscape' materials in some areas along the rear elevation he incorporated. Planning Commission 4 May 31., 19189 * r "' • • • ! • lid, • i .3 M � "� ! 1 • • � M . r i ' � � r s t •�! • C Slqnaqe - The Commission was very uncomfortable with the very graphic image used on the prototype Wards T A. They reiterated that the Wards "Specialty Shops" must conform to criteria within the sign program and be of appropriate color and architectural setting. Conclusion: The architect and Montgomery "Ward ' representatives will respond to the Commission comments and present the solutions for final approval at a Mature Planning Commission workshop. ADJOURNMENT The workshop adjourned at gP.M. Respectfully submitted, e.000- 0 Brad Bu lr Secretary Planning Commission 6 May 31, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting May 24, 1989 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: David Blakesley STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, I Deputy City Attorney; Brett , Horner, Assistant Planner; Russ Maguire, Cityi Engineer; Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner; Gail Sanchez, Secretary; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, stated staff and the applicant were requesting that Items E and F be continued to June 14, 1989. He also stated that the applicant had requested that Item G be continued to June 14, 1989. Chairman McNiel announced that Bill Silva had accepted the position of City Engineer with the City of San Leandro. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 89-02 - 9CAURUN ' RUMES---T_ ,x NC. A request to pre-zone approi5itfily 25 acres of vacant land 11 ocated at the northeast corner of Highland and Rochester Avenues to a density of Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) - APN: 225-152-01, 02, 03, 04, &-18. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 89-03 - BLACKMON HOMES INC - A request to approve a deve lopmen - agreement for single family' res nces on approximately 25 acres of vacant land located on the northeast corner of Highland and Rochester Avenues - APN: 225-152-01, 02, 03, 04 & 18. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1 851 LEWIS HOMES - A residential subdivision and design rertiew of condominiums '6 lots and 8 single family lots on 9.07 acres of land in the 'Medium Density Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) within the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southwest corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Milliken Avenue - AN: 1077-091- . Chairman McNel asked if anyone in the audience wished to address items E, F, or; 0. When several members of the audience stated they were present' regarding Item 0, Chairman McNiel asked if they could return on dune 14. They affirmed' that they could return on June 14. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that if anyone had questions regarding the project they could contact City staff. Motion. Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried to continue Environmental Assessment and Development [district Amendment 8 -0 , Environmental Assessment and Development Agreement 89-0 , and Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13351 to June 14,; 1989. APPROVAL OF MINOTES Motion. ' Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adopt the Minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of March 30, 1989. Motion; Mowed by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, carried with Emerick abstaining, to adopt the Minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of May 8, 1989. Motion. Moved by; Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adopt the Minutes May 10, 1989. CONSENT CALENDAR A. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87- 0 - INLAND AREA FELLOWSHIP - A request to allow a church within an existing pre-schoolor Kids n y" facility on 118 ages of land in the Low Density Residential District ( - dwelling units per acre), located on the sough side of Base Line,` east of Hermosa - APN: 1077-01-09. B. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85- 1 AND PARCEL MAP 998 - MASI - The duelo ent of a Master an for a acre iWi!Ml park and the first phase of construction, consisting of a 58, 00 square foot mini- storage facility with a caretaker' s residence on 2.95 `acre of hand in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), located at the southwest; corner o Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue - APN: 9°-011-10, 1 , 21, 26, 7, and 28. Planning Commission Minutes - - May 24, 1989 C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13566 - ' CENTURY AMERICAN The design review of building elevations and' deti ed site ?p an ifor 75 single family lots in a previously approved tentative tract map consisting of 154 single family lots on 28.7 acres of land in the Low Density Residential District ( -4 dwelling units per acre) , located on the south side of 24th Street, north of Lower Loop Road - APN 6-111�D Associated with th is application is Tree Removal Permit 89- 7. j Pp ±I D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-01 '- BARTON DEVELOPMENT he d ve opment of in ustri buff ings totaling square feet on 1.28 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southeast corner of Utica Avenue and Fulton Court - APNw 9-14 -51. ' Commissioner Emerick requested that Item 8 be pulled from the Consent Calendar because he wished to excuse himself from voting on the item, as he had been involved in litigation on the subject property. Commissioner Chitiea requested that Item D be pulled from the consent calendar for discussion. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by T lstoy, unanimously carried to adopt Items A and C of the Consent Calendar. B. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8 - 1 AND PARCEL MAP 9998 - MAST Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy{, carried with Emeric abstaining, to adopt item B of the Consent Calendar. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-01 - BARTON DEVELOPMENT Commissioner Chitiea stated she wished to raise issue with the design of the project as it was presented at Design Review. She stated that the two Committee members could not agree on the possible addition of spandrel glass in the entry way. She believed that this matter needs further discussion, Ralph Hanson, Deputy ,City Attorney, stated that the issuance of a Negative Declaration was the only action before the Commission at this time. Commissioner Tolstoy said he was one of the Committee Members and felt the addition of spandrel glass' would enhance the building but he was not sure it was necessary for the type and location of the building. Chairman Mc'iel invited public comment. Dale Frisby, Barton Development, stated that spandrel glass was typically used where the look of storefronts was desired, and that since this was a ' industrial building which was not visible from Haven, he felt the expense was not ,justified. He indicated the initial cost and maintenance cost of spandrel glass was excessive. He felt that since he was not permitted office uses, he should not have to make his building look like an office building. Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 24 1989 There was no further public comment. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the issue had been brought up in Design Review and the item could be returned to Design Review or brought back before the Planning' Commission. He said he understood the Committee's difference of opinion and would forward the matter back to the Design Review Committee with options. Motion. Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adopt Item D of the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT g-O CITY DF RANCHO CU' AMONGA - An amendment to the land use definition of "building maintenance services'" to include small operation building contractors which meet certain criteria. Brett Horner, Assistant Planner, `presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the 'public hearing. Hearing no testimony, the public . hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the amendment was well written and the use would be a good addition. He felt the truck definition and the prohibition of outdoor storage would eliminate possible adverse effects. Commissioner Chitiea felt the expanded definition might help to make more centers' viable. Chairman McNiel agreed that the added language rude sense.. I Commissioner Emerick felt the expanded definition might encourage some small bu`sinessowners to move out of garages into centers. Motion.' Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and Industrial Specific Plan Amendment Dg-O . Motion carried` by the following vote. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHI 'IEA, EMERICI , MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES. COMMISSIONERS; NONE ASSENT:i COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY -carried Planning Commission Minutes -4 May 4, 1989 I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-15 - ONIGLOBE REGENCY TR : A request to establish a trave bureau in ease space of 2,978 square feet within an existing office 'complex on 4.24 acres of land in the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at 87 Haven Avenue - ` APN': 09-411 8 &. 4. Cindy Norris Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the use determination that a travel agency is a personal service versus a; support service. Following a brief discussion it was determined that the issue did net need to be pursued at this time. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Geoff Meyer,; Arical Properties, Inc., property owner,% recommended approval and introduced dim Roberts', president of dniglobe Regency Travel. Mr. Roberts stated they were a corporate travel agency and would conduct all of their business over the telephone. Hearing; no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by ; Tots oy, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit+ 89-1 . Motion carried'; by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMER C , fiCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BLAESLEY -carried J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ;87-14 NEW HOPE--CHURCH - A request to expand an eistfing , square oot church by , square' feet within an existing industrial park on 20.7 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8), located at 95 1-A Business Center Drive` •- APN< 09-0 1.- 9. Torn Gratin, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. ` Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Sarah McAfee, 701 North Haven, 00, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she was a member of the church and was representing the applicant. She said the church was growing' and they needed more room. Chairman McNiel asked if future plans included proving into their own building. Planning Commission Minutes -5- May 24, 1989 Ms. McAfee stated that; their long range plans included moving into a building of them own, but not for the next 3 to 5 years. Commissioner Chitiea asked if additional fire safety items needed to be accomplished. Ms. McAfee stated that Foothill Fire District had visited the site and notified the church of additional requirements. She said the church was currently in the process of obtaining the items. She stated they would not occupy the building until all fire safety items had been addressed. Nearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tdlstoy, seconded by , Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Modification to Conditional Use Permit 87-14. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: CNITIEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL, TQLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT* COMMISSIONERS: BLA ESLEY -carried OLD BUSINESS: K. DOME OCCUPATION PERMIT 89-1 5 - DOLAN - An appeal of st 'f's decision to deny a dome ccupation ' ermit or a multi-track recording' studio located in the Low Density Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 9292 Arrow Route APN: 208- 61- 9. (Continued from May 10, 1989. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the Resolution of Approval incorporated Commission comments raised '! t the May 10, 1989, muting.; He stated both the Resolution of Approval and a Resolution of Denial were provided for consideration by the Commission. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Michael Dolan, 9292 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he wished t reassure the Commission ission that he had ample parking ;and soundproofing for the studio and felt the use should not affect the neighborhood. Fred Deaux, 110 Shaw Street, apposed the studio placement in a Low Density District, and felt that it would be enticing to people in other areas to open such operations. ' He asked that the request be denied or that hours and noise levels be severely restricted. He felt the operation would be better suited to a commercial area instead of a residential area. Chairman McNiel stated the provision for code exists to allow home occupancy permits based on certain criteria. Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 24, 1989 Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea felt the use was an extension of the definition of home occupancy. She hoped the permit would not set a precedent. She indicated that she was willing; to support the project because the site was located l across from an industrial area and on a busy, noisy corner. She felt the Planning Commission should review the permit if any problems arose. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the use redefined the Home Occupation concept that he held. He felt', a home occupation should entail either no clients or at most a maximum of t or 2. He felt the use was not appropriate for a residential neighborhood. I Chairman McNiel did not see the use as a redefinition. Commissioner Emerick stated he had voted against permitting a Lamaze class in the pant because he felt the use would create too much of 'a disturbance to the: neighborhood. He disagreed with allowing 2 groups per day at -5 participants' per group, and supported the denial . Chairman McNiel felt denial would deprive the City and the applicant an opportunity. Commissioner Chitiea stated that after looking at the number of vehicles she was concerned with the impact of traffic on the neighborhood. Chairman McNiel did not feel that 5 cars; per day would cause a significant impact. Motion: Moved by McNiel to adopt the Resolution approving Home Occupation' Permit 9- . There was no second. Motion. Moved by merick, seconded by Tolstoy, carried with McNiel dissenting' to adopt the Resolution denying Home Occupation Permit 89-1.85. Chairman McNiel invited Mr. Dolan to comment. r. Dolan stated he was disappointed in the decision and felt he should have requested that Mr. Tolstoy remove himself from hearing the item, as he felt i may have represented a conflict of interest. He stated he felt he had presented evidence of ample protection of the neighborhood. He indicated he would be happy to; operate with only 1 or 2 people at a time. Mr. Buller stated' staff had drafted the Resolution based on previous Planning Commission discussion that the number of clients be raised to up to 5 per session;, and 2 sessions per day. He indicated the applicant had requested approval for only 1 client per day. He suggested the Commission could act on the applicant's request. Commissioner Imericl stated that the number of cars affected his decision and he would reconsider on a lesser number of vehicles. He felt the noise concern was well mitigated. Planning Commission Minutes - - May 24, 1989 Commissioner Chitiea stated she was willing to reconsider her vote with a lower number of clients. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, carried with Tolstoy abstaining, to reconsider the action. ` Chairman McNiel asked what the limit should' be. Commissioner Chitiea stated she would be comfortable with 2 people per session and 2 sessions per day. Motion: Moved by M Ni l seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Horne Occupation Permit 89-1 5 with modification to limit the number of clients to 2 per session and 2 sessions per day. Motion carried by the following vote. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHI IEA, EMERICK, MCHI L NOES: COMMISSIONERS. TDLSTOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; BLAESLE -carried 8: 5 P.M. - Planning Commission recessed 8. 5 P.M. - Planning Commission reconvened. DIRECTOR' S REPORTS: L. THE 1989 9O AND 19 0/91 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS Russ Maguire, City Engineer, presented an overview of the capital improvement budgets. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how priorities are selected. Mr'. Maguire stated a City Council Resolution was passed in November 1986 which set priorities and that was the basis used for 95'% of the allotment. The remaining 5% of money was allotted based on reactive needs; such as finishing out a street when the school district builds only half of the street,. He said storm drain priorities were set by City Council directive and in the area of traffic, safety was the first consideration. Chairman McNlel asked if a system was in place to cover landscape maintenance costs. r. Maguire replied that most of the work done with Beautification Funds i not in the Landscape Maintenance Districts, so the General Fund is used to Planning Commission Minutes -8- May 24, 1989 i crake up the difference. He indicated Regional trails came from the General Pond and were not in an assessment district. He asked that the Commission review plans with the ides that the City should receive a benefit from all required landscaping. He felt low maintenance and proper construction needed o be emphasized. Commissioner Toltoy stated that staff should make the Planning Commission aware of how to get items into Landscape Maintenance districts. Chairman McNiel agreed that maintenance costs should be placed on Homeowners Associations or in Landscape Maintenance Districts. r. Maguire stated that certain Landscape Maintenance Districts are fast approaching the maximum assessment allowable by City Council. He stated h would like to get Landscape Maintenance District #1 increased. COMMISSION BUSINESS There was no additional commission business at this time COMMENTSPUBLIC There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 9 P.M. Planning Commission Adjourned to a May 31, 1989, workshop op at Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center at 0 P.M. to review plans for Mervyns and Montgomery Wards.' Respectfully submitted, ABrad Sol r Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -9- May 24, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMO'NGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting May 10, 1909 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at :00 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161' Base'Line 'Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Niel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT- David Blakesley, Suzanne Chiti;ea, Bruce Erneriek, Larry MuNiel , Peter Tnitey ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT- Brad Roller, City Planner ; Dan iColeman, Senior Planner; ± S rrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Brett Horner, Assistant Planner; Cynthia Kinser, Assistant Planner; Dave Leonard, Park; Project Coordinator; Betty Miller, Assistant Civil' Engineer; Gail Sanchez, Secretary, Rill Silva, Deputy City Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Mc Niel announced that them had been a Design Excellence awards presentation on Monday, May' O, 1989. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motions Moved by Chitie , seconded by Blakesley, carried with Toistoy abstaining, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned `Meeting of April E, 1989, as amended. Motion: Moved by Tulsto, , seconded by Chitiea, approved with Blakesley abstaining, to approve the minutes of April 26, 1989, as amended. CONSENT' CALENDAR A. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13114 - NOROIC - A 21 custom lot subdivision n 5.5 acmes o and in the 'Low Residential District' 2- delling units per acre}, located at the southeast corner o Vineyard Avenue and Calle Del Pr do -'APN: 200-92I-0 04. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8 -43 RARASCH ARCHITECTS - The development of one industrial building totaling 30,300 square feet on 1.78 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) , located at the northeast corner of Sharon Circle,; east of Hermosa Avenue - 1 APN: 20 - - ® C. MODIFICATION TO DESIGN 'REVIEW 11626 - 3RIMAR The request to modify an approved site plan by i bstitutin approved Plans 3 and 1 on Lots 81 and, 82 respectively, located on the north side of Almond Street, east of Beryl ; Avenue -=APN: 1061-821-21 & 22. D. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5-04 - RYDER A development for truck rental , lease, and saps on 4.23' acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14 of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the west side of Santa Anita Avenue, north of 4th `Street - APN: 229- 331-06. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8-44 BARASCH ARCHITECTS - The development of 3 industria buildings totaling ,45 square feet on 3.79 net acres of land' in the General Industrial District (Subarea, 2), located south of gth Street between Lion Shoot and Hellman Avenue - APN: 209-013-24. F. VARIANCE 89-04 - COMMERCIAL CARRIERS - A Resolution of denial of a request to reduce the parking setback from 25 feet to 8 foot and the landscape setback 'from 35 feet to D feet for 12 acres of land in the Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located on the south side o Mersey Boulevard, between Utica and Vincent Avenues - APN; 205-143-0 , 08 O . O. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 3 - 1 - COMMERCIAL CARRIERS - A, Resolution of denial o a request to grade and pave appr—(Tx—imatJ—y12 ages of land for an existing site within the Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9), located on the south side of Jersey Boulevard, between Utica and Vincent Avenues - APN. 209-14 -0 , OR & 09. Motion: Moved by,Chitiea, seconded by 3la esley, unanimously carried to adopt the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAR 12O5D 3ARASCH ARCHITECTS - A subdivision o 3, net acres of and into 3parcels in the General Industrial` District (Subarea 2 , located south of 9th, Street between Lion Street and Hellman Avenue - APN, 20 -01324. 3arrye Hanson, Senior• Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked why the parcels were offset on the corners. Planning Commission Minutes ' -2- May 10, 1989 rr. Hanson stated they were offset to balance the parking on the different projects. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Chtiea, seconded by glakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 12058. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: HLA ESLEY', CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TC STCY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried 1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-07 - A ±A E The: request to establish a second dwel ing unit on a single airily lot in the Very Lour Residential District O dwelling units per acre) , located at 5254 Galloway Street - APN: C 1® E RID. Commissioner Chitiea excused herself from hearing the item because her house is located within SOO feet of the property. Brett Horner, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. George Gulick, 570 Galloway, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had power of attorney to represent the owner, Mr. Adme. He stated Mr. Adarne was now living in the small house and his son and daughter-in-law lived in the larger house. Mr. Gulick objected to the proposed garage placement because he stated it would be too costly because of grading and cement slabs in the back yard. He felt there would not be adequate access to the proposed garage site and it would also look unattractive. He requested that the applicant be allowed to continue parking on the cul-de-sac street. '- Al Hanlon, 5271 Turquoise, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he lived ;in back of the property. He requested that Mr. Ad me be allowed to use the unwed bridle' trail for access to the second house. He also suggested that Mr. Adame be allowed to park his tar on the existing cement slab next to the existing' garage. He stated the back yard of the property had several cement slabs and it would be prohibitively expensive to put in a driveway and garage. Fearing no further testimony, the public hearing was iclosed. Commissioner Tol toy asked if the house could be used as a rental' when the intended use terminated or the property changed hands. Planning Commission Minutes - - May 10, 1989 J Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the Resolution was presently conditioned to allow for future potential rental . He stated the applicant had indicated a willingness to delete the condition allowing for future rental . Chairman Mc Niel asked if City cues required the addition of a garage for the new unit. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that when the granny-flat provisions were added by local ordinance, carports were allowed in single family zones. He stated that original plans from the applicant proposed constructing a carport on the cement slab next to the existing garage. However, the City code was changed `in December 1983 to >require a minimum of a one-car garage for the new unit. He stated the applicant had suggested this evening that he would like to apply for a Variance, however, such a request would have to be advertised. Mr. Coleman stated that staff was not recommending any driveway connections to go back to the second dwelling unit. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there was enough room to the south of the house for a driveway to ;access the; back unit. Chairman Mc i el stated that the terrain would preclude having a driveway in the area. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he felt the intended use was acceptable but he was uncomfortable with allowing the use to change to a rental. Commissioner Emerick felt a Variance would be necessary. Commissioner Nlakesley supported restricting future rental possibilities. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the Commission would consider a carport in lieu of a garage. He wanted to know if a carport could architecturally be blended- into the house. Chairman McNi el suggested that the item be continued until dune 1.4 to allow' the applicant to apply for a Variance and have the Commission hear both requests concurrently.; He reopened the public searing to allow the, applicant to comment. Mr. Gulick stated they would like to continue the item and apply for a Variances Chairman McNiel asked if the Planning Commission could restrict future rental .' Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated he believed the code allowed the Planning Commission to use discretion in restricting future uses. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Hrerick to continue Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 39- 7 to dune 1.4, 1989. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes - - May 10,' 1989 r AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BEA iE LEY, EMERIC , MCNI E, fiOL TOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried ABSTAIN: CHITIE J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 12218 HIX DEVELOPMENT - A subd1vis1on D9 acres of and into parce'`s id the Low Residential Development District, located the east side of Hellman Avenue, south of lath Street '- AP : PO -OCI -35, OR, & 40. Betty Filler, Assistant Civil Engineer,; presented the staff report and corrected the Resolution to drop parcel number O -0 1-40 from the request. Chairman Mc el opened the public hearing. Ernest Hi , president of Hix Development, stated they objected to condition 7 of the resolution because they did not wish to give up the 30 feet. He stated that in the raster plan three streets were bulbed and they would be grilling to extend those streets into their development. He felt that the master plan would have a street to the east of parcels 2 and 3, which would allow` them access to a street other than Hellman `Aveoue, Phyllis Aquino, 6905 Kirkwood Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, wanted to know if her street, which dead-ended into the project site, would be opened to through traffic; and if so, hoer much traffic would be generated® Chairman McNiel stated that when a street is dead ended, it is generally presumed that the the street may; eventually be opened. He stated that at the present' time the map was only conceptual ,; so there was the possibility that the street would be opened.' He stated there was no gay to currently tell how much through traffic would be generated. s. Aquino asked how many houses were being proposed. r'. Hix stated that approximately 70 homes were being planned. Dad Coleman, Senior Planner, stated the developer would be encouraged to hold neighborhood meetings to gather input from local residents'. Mr. Dix stated that they had contemplated having separate neighborhood meetings with residents of each of the cul-de-sac streets. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emer ck stated he favored retaining condition 7 of the Resolution because it allowed the developer the flexibility to retain the 30 foot section by appropriate master planning. Planning Commission Minutes -5- May 10, 1989 i Commissioner Tolstoy agreed and felt that condition 7 was flexible enough to allow the applicant to place the lot line where he wished. Commissioner Chitlea stated she would be uncomfortable approving the parcel map without condition 7. Chairman McNlel reopened the public hearing to allow Mr. Hix to comment. r Hix asked hors he could get the 30 feet back after the parcel map was recorded. He suggested that another~ condition be added to allow for a lot line adjustment in the future by merely baying the land from the sellers if the map were recorded prior to acceptance of the master plan. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney felt there was no need to add a condition to the Resolution. Chairman McHiel felt that minute action would adequately protect the applicant. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 12218, with> modification to change the APN to 202-061-35 and 39 Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MC IEL, TDLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MUNICIPAL CODE, AMENDMENT CITY DE RANCHO UT MCN A Various amendments o Tirt1e , the ubdivi ion Ordinance, F ardin appeal periods, approval periods, and extensions. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. He indicated that the amendment was brought before the Planning Commission to allow their comments. He requested minute action only. Chairman McN el asked if it was legal to allow only 4 months instead of 36 months for an extension. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, Mated that it would be illegal to allow; less than the state requirement. arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated staff had been allowing the Map Act to govern. Planning Commission Minutes - - May 10, 199 Commissioner Chitiea stated that the l -day; appeal periods for tentative tract` or parcel crap actions, would be permissible because it was longer than the state-mandated 10-day period. Mr. Coleman stated that appeal periods for all other types of action were 10 days and he felt it was confusing to the public to have two different appeal periods. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea felt it would be appropriate to bring the Municipal Code into conformance with the state lace on all throe items. She felt the 10-day appeal period was a reasonable amount of time to file an appeal . The Planning Commission unanimously supported the changes as recommended b ; staff. NEW BUSINESS L. HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT 9-18 - DOLAN - An appeal of staffs decision toi Te-nyaH u ation rmit fo a l ti-track recording studio located in the Low Density Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 1291 Arrow Route A : C 1i11-1g* Cynthia Kinser, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McHiel invited public comment. Mike Dolan, 929 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they were willing to lower the number of customers to a maximum of one per day, which Mould be less than the average for residences where piano or swimming were taught. He showed pictures of the soundproofing material on his ells and Mated his studio speakers would not reach the maximum level of 110 decibels (d1 referred to in the staff report. He stated he had 'modified his speakers to reach the 110 d1` and ;then taken decibel readings right outside his door and from several other areas up to the edge of his property line. He soured charts,; which indicated a reading of 70 d1 immediately outside his door~ down to below 60 dB at the fence. He presented a letter from his neighbor indicating he had done the sound level readings in the presence of his neighbor and a statement that the neighbor felt the equipment posed no disturbance problem for the neighborhood. Commissioner Chitiea asked how Mr. Dolan could, record groups with a limit of one customer per day. r+. Dolan stated he could record the members individually on various tracts, or coup record the vocal at another location, and trier► mix the various tracts in his studio. Planning Commission Minutes -7- May 10, 1989 Chairman McNidl asked what types of music Mr. Dolan recorded. Mr. Dolan stated he works mostly with light rock, country, folk-type music, or European standards,, such as accordion. Chairman McNiel asked Mr. Dolan if he provided instruments. Mr. Nolan stated he had home instruments. He stated there was no real difference between his equipment and horse entertainment ent equipment. Herman Rey el , 9505 Base tine Road, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that industrial property was located across the strut from the site and Hellman and Arrow were heavily traveled streets. He felt' this was an opportunity for the Planning; Commission to allow a small business person to have a chance. There was no further public comment. Commissioner Toltoy stated that in his experience it would not be commercially feasible to run a recording studio involving only mixing down. He did not feel it could be done with only one person at a time, because many times the artists need an audience to enhance their performance:. Commissioner Emerick felt the noise performance standards were the primary concern. He felt it was unrealistic to control the number of people to one per day, because the Colans might have visitors who were not recording. Commissioner Chit ea asked if the Planning Commission could review a Home Occupation Permit if problems developed. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated the conditions for review would be almost the same criteria as for Conditional Use Permits. Comrissoner 'Chitlea wondered whether one customer per day was realistic. She felt it would not be wise to require Code Enforcement to monitor the number of customers. Chairman McN i el stated the alleyway behind the home has available parking and felt it was not realistic to restrict the customers to one per day. He; invited Mr. Dolan to comment about the available parking space; r. Dolan stated that when their fence blew down, he provided for more parking on his lot when he rebuilt the fence. There were no further public comments.. Commissioner' Chitiea felt it was difficult to place a maximum number on the customers. She preferred to allow for flexibility and thought the Commission could review if neighbors complained because of impaction of traffic or noise. Commissioner Emerick stated the room was wall and he would like to limit the number of customers to three to five per group, and perhaps limit the number of groups to two per day. Planning Commission Minutes - y tC, 1989 Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that if the Planning Commission wished to approve the project, they should continue the item to allow staff to prepare a Resolution of approval for consideration. Chairman McNiel asked Mr. Dolan if he favored a continuance. r Dolan responded he would be agreeable. Commissioner < Tol toy stated he did not feel this was really a home occupation. He felt a horse occupation would generally generate an;extremely ' limited clientele and felt this use opened up a new dimension on the definition of a home occupation. Motion- Moved by Tol toy, seconded by Chitiea, to continue Rome Occupation Perot 9 1 S to May 24, 1989. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: SEA ESLEY, CHITIEA EMERIC , MCNIEL, TOLSTOY' DES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried d, O IX - Planning. Commission Recessed . 5 R.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened DIRECTOR'S REPORTS M. HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT Miki gratt, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Sandra AlaconLopez, County of San Bernardino, gave a brief overview and showed slides outlining the elements of the County plan. She Mated San' Bernardino County prepared the draft and received public comment, following which they revised the plan. She said the County has to submit the plan to the state by dune 1, 1989, ;for state review and approval. She saidthat once` the state approves the plan, Cities have three options. 1') adopt a City plan, ); adopt the County plan, or S) amend City ordinances to refer to the County plan. Chairman McNi el asked if the County was selecting potential sites within the Cities. s. Alacron-Lopez stated they were not actually siting, only setting up criteria for review of applications. Planning Commission Minutes -9- May 10, 1989 Chairman McHiel asked if there were adequate penalties for improper transportation. s. Ala ron-Lopez stated there were substantial penalties and generators were becoming more aware of their own liabilities if they mishandle their waste. Chairman McNiel asked if there was any local control over federal lands located in the County. . Alacron-Lopez stated the County has no permitting authority in the federal jurisdictions. However, she said the federal Department of Health' Services recommends that the County plan be used on federal , state, and local lands. Chairman Mc Niel asked if Cities could designate themselves as toxic-waste free zones, and how that would affect waste transportation. Ms. Alacron-Lopez stated the County was requesting input from Cities regarding the transportation studies. She indicated regional and urban transportation studies were necessary. Chairman McNiel asked if the desert was being considered as a potential site for a waste depository.' Ms. Alacron-Lopez stated the County was not identifying any specific sites, but that mangy people consider the desert to be a potential area. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the City would be concerned about local disposal or transfer sites, businesses which produce hazardous wastes, transportation routes ±through the City, and recycling centers, which might create' air pollution* s. Bratt stated them was a list of hazardous haste generators' and many generators were already looted within the City; i .e , anyone using hazardous materials in processing, such as General Dynamics and any neighborhood dry cleaning establishments. Commissioner Tolstoy wanted to know it the City would then specify where those facilities could locate. s Alacron-Lopez stated the City could specify specific siting criteria in their own plan. She< said that SB477, an amendment to AB2948, contained language granting the Cities more authorityw in Braking the siting criteria more stringent. Commissioner Emeri ck asked' if the City would have any input to oppose a` facility located in an area abutting the City when there were concerns regarding groundwater contamination or air pollution. s. lacron-Lopez stated there was a new policy in the revised County"s General Plan which refers specifically to the sphere of influence. ' The same policy has been adopted in the County"s hazardous waste plan. Planning Commission Minutes _ - May 10, 1989 Ms Eratt stated that the public participation in the plan would be extensive. N. CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR A TREE-ACRE PARK LOCATED ON ALTA CUE TA DRIVESOUTH D `A LIB E THE R D ' 1LL AREA Chairman McNiel excused himself from hearing the item, as he lives with DD feet of the park site. Dave Leonard, Park Project Coordinator, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the park was not originally supposed to be a trail-head with sufficient parking. r Leonard stated the Army Corps of Engineers had originally envisioned parking for 40 vehicles, but that was one of the community objections. He stated the park would Mill serve as the southern terminus of the trail . Commissioner Emerick stated he would like to see a hard surface provided for bikes. Mr. Leonard stated that the design group ranted the trail system to be constructed of natural material , such as decomposed granite. Commissioner Toltoy felt bike racks should be provided. He asked if the Corps of Engineers would provide partial financing. Mr. Leonard stated that bike racks would be provided and the park would be totally City funded. Commissioner Emerick suggested drought-resistant plants be utilized. Commissioner Chitiea requested more shading and seating be provided around the sand play area. Commissioner Emerick asked if exercise stations were utilized in other parks. r. Leonard confirmed that e cercise stations were used in existing parks and that additional shade trees could be added. Commissioner Chitiea requested that the equestrian rest .,,area,,,,be reviewed by the Trails Committee to be sure safety and su�r �va " ty pri�rns,,"were addressed. She felt the Spanish names were more appro 1 t -. Commissioner Tol toy felt Alta Vista, was too common. It was the consensus of the Commission that the nacre Don Tappi'a would be most appropriate for historical purposes. Planning Commission Minutes May 10, 1989 COMMISSION BUSINESS Commissioner Chitiea suggested the Planning Commission should support a proactive approach to recycling to help extend the life spars of the landfill. She stated the current life span was five years, and felt that the life span could be extended to twenty years by utilizing recycling. She stated she supported the Claremont sorting plan. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed. He stated a compost shredder could also be used to create the ity's own mulching to assist with water conservation. Commissioner Chitiea felt the matter was urgent, because of the short projected life of the landfills. It was the unanimous consensus of the Commission to support any City Council action to establish a City-wide policy encouraging recycling. Commissioner Blakesley also supported City ounil 's actions to restrict some of the substances available in the City. Mr. Buller stated a workshop would be scheduled on Wednesday, May 31 to review plans for both Mervyn' s and Montgomery Wards. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no further public comments at this time ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 9:45 P.M. - planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, A4 tl brad ZSul er Planning Commission Minutes _1 - May 10, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CNCA O CA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Molting May 8, Ig g Chairman Larry Mc Niel called the May 8, 1989 Adjourned Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at :CC P.M. The' purpose of the greeting was to present the Rancho Cucamonga Design Excellence Awards. In attendance were Planning Commissioners Larry Mc Niel , Suzanne Chiti a, and Peter Tol stoy. Also in attendance were Mayor Dennis Stout, City staff, and guests. slide show depicting the various winners was presented. Residential division honors went to Calais by Lewis Homes. Office division winners were Haven Professional' Plaza by Haven Investors and Virginia Dare Winery Business Center by Tower Partners. Honored in the industrial division were Sixth Street Distribution Center by; the Nalbandian Group associated with the Bar aian Company and Vineyard 'West Mini-Storage by the Nalband an Croup associated with the Barmakian Company. Commercial division honors were bestowed upon Virginia Dare Food Court by Tower Partners, Terra Vista Village by Dicker filar ington, Burger Ching at Terra Vista Village by Bob Clpit associated with Lewis homes, and Victoria Self Storage by the William Lyon Company. Best master plan was awarded to Victoria Lands South by the William Lyon Company. Honorable Mentions were awarded to Victoria Heights, William Lyon Company in the landscaping area, Serendipity School by Hammer Investments in the area of rehabilitation, and Johanna Jordan for Aribal Properties for community art. The awards presentation concluded at .CC P.M. with a catered reception. Respectfully submitted, Ar Are Nul er Secretary CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING UTE Regular tin April 26, 1989 Chairman i called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho+ Cucamonga Planning mission to order at : 0 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions' Park Community Center, 9161; Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,a, California. Chairnan McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Brucerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tulstny ABSENT* avid Blakesley STAFF T: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner* Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman, Senior Planner'; Tom Grahn, AssistantPlanner; Barry an u, Senior Civil1 Engineer; Ralph Hansdn, Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner; Brett Horner, Assistant tanner; Barbara Kr all , Assistant Civil Engineer; Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner; Russ' aguir , City Engineer; Gail Sanchez, A Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer; ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman McNiel presented a Resolution of Comendation to Debra Meier,' Associate Planner, for her years of service. APPROVAL OF MINUTES otion- Moved by Tolsty, seconded by Chitiea,' nani usy passed to approve the i s of the Adjourned Meeting of March 1 , 1989. Motion:' need by Chitiea, seconded by Tnlstny, unanimously carried to approve the i s of April 1 , 1989, as amended. CONSENT' E A A. TIME EXTENSION TENTATIVE TRACT 13316 - FRIED E total rest entia ale o nt slur a 11I y ots 0 acres of land in the Very Low Density Residential District ( less than 2 dwelling; units per acre , located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Carari' Avenue - 1- 71-1 , 37 B. ENTERTAINMENT' PERMIT 7-01 HARRY g - consideration to modify, suspen , roc e an e permit ran d a disc loin vocals and playingreca s nightl in conjunction with a restaurant/night club, located at 10877 Foothill Boulevard. Commissioner Tolstoy requested that Item A be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Commissioner Chitea requested thatItem be pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion. A. TIME T SIC`' FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 1331E Coamissioner Tolstoy felt that the letter from the homeowners on London Avenue' should be addressed. He stated that at the time the tract was approved all information necessary was not available to design the drainage channel . He requested that planning have input to be sure the channel s as aesthetically pleasing as possible, as it crossed over the affected properties. Commissioner Chits a supported having Planning review the plans. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Vince Fritch, 5217 London ;avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the runoff would cross his back yard. He stated that the runoff would be underground until it reached the existing homeowners ' property. He stated a small amount of debris now is through, but the amount is governed by -foot pipes at the top of the canyon, and that the Friedman tract would generate ouch wore runoff. felt% ire had been modifications to the project that had not been addressed by the public. He requested a denial of the Time Extension to allow for public input. He stated that Friedman had already had two years to solve the problem. Brad Buller, City planner, stated that Mr. Fritdh was already in contact ith o City Engineering department and theywould continue to keep him advised. He stated that engineering a first approve a functional drainage system before planning could address the aesthetic quality. Chairman iel stated nothing would happen until there was an acceptable solution to the drainage problem and the applicant was now asking for a Time Extension to allow additional time solve the problem. Russ a ui City Engineer, stated that Friedman s' on their third`engineer. e said that a required condition debris basin dam, with a pipe and spillway coming t of the dam, was located at the top of the cul -de-sac street. The Planning Commission Minutes - April 26, 1989 9F a r i i Buller stated that` the tract met the average required lot size and minimum 20,000 foot lot size.. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing s closed. Commissioner issioner rick suggested that the plans go through the Design Review Committee. '. Hanson stated ey could not add a condition to the Time Extension. Commissioner Tol toy stated he ould be satisfied to have the Planning` department review the plans. Lion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick , to adopt the Resolution' approving Time Extension for Tentative Tract 13316. Motion carried by the following vote YES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: C ISI RS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HL CY -carried B. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 87-01 Commissioner hit`iea stated she would like to direct staff by minute action to review the permit in 180 days and forward that review to the Planning Commission. The other' Commissioners agreed. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution declining revocation of Entertainment Permit 7-0 . Motion carried by the following vote., AYES* COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ' NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BL SLCY carried PUBLIC HEARINGS C. T T I T PERMIT 90 - HARRY C' request to conduct live comedy acts, -sync ion ts, air an clothing fashion shows, live entertainment concerts, live ,jazz, and special promotion events' for local businesses and groups in conjunction with arestaurant/night club at 1OB77' Foothill Boulevard. Planning Commission Minutes - - April 26, 1989 Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and stated that a quest had been received m the applicant to delete the fashion show and talent night categories ( including in lip-sync contests) from the expansion request. In addition, he stated that the special promotion events for local businesses and groups were not defined as entertainment under the City ordinance. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Harry is h' 55 University Avenue, Riverside, attorney for the applicant, stated he wasavailable to answerquestions. Fred Deaux, 11036 Shaw Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated it appeared HarryCs as still experiencing problems with fifteen calls between January 7 and. March 1, 1989, including four disturbances and two for deadly weapons. He supported expansion to include the items listed, but± asked if something l be doneto more appropriately manage the cry Chairman McNiel stated that according to information received at the last; Planning Commission meeting, the deadly y arms calls concerned off-duty policemen who had their weapons and there had been no shootings. He stated the entertainment had been carefully selected. r# Deaux supported having the Entertainment Permit reviewed in six months. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing s closed. Commissioner Tolstoy felt Comissioner Chitid 's suggested 1 C-day review mentioned during the Commission 's previous ?action would be appropriate for the expansion request as gall ® Commissioner Chiti a felt the modifications proposed drworthy of consideration and she supported the current application. Motion - Moved by Chiti , seconded by Tolstoy, to ant ;the Resolution approving Entertainment Permit . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY CS. COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C Cy -carried Histen asked if Harry C 's would notified about the 'review. Brad Buller,' City Planner, indicated y would. Planning Commission Minutes 5- April 26, 1989 D. ENVIRONMENTAL; SS TENTATIVE PARCEL P 11212 - WAGNER INSUL CO. u vis 1> n n n e' n t Heavy 1r ustrial District (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the south side of 8th Street, west side of Rochester Avenue A : 9 S1-1C, 11 , 12, 27, & 3 (Continued from March 22, 1989.) E. I VARIANCE 3 R WAGNER INSUL C . request for a reduction of the of e m acres o acres within the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial district (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the south side of 8th Street, west side of Rochester Avenue - APN:+ 9- 110, 11, 1 , 27 , & 3 , Continued from rch 22, 1989. ) Tom Cram, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report on Variance - . Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Robert Schauer, attorney for Covington & Crowe , requested that the Variance be approved. Chairman McNiel asked if the applicant was planning to sell one of the parcels. r. Schauer stated the applicant wished to .sell Parcel 1 , and would continue to operate their business on Parcel 2. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing s 'closed® Commissioner Chitiea felt the Variance was appropriate, ba sed on considerations of the parcel . She agreed with staff'staff's recommendation to modify the parcels to have one a minimum of 5.0 acres and the other approximately 4.8 acres. Comaissioner` eric stated at bast one parcel would be substandard in size, and he therefore supported the Variance. Chairman McNiel reopened the public` hearing to ash why the applicant was proposing the configuration of one parcel at only 3.96 acres. r. Schauer felt that to enlarge the smaller parceli would move the boundary o close to the existing building and encroach on `eir drives Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller. City Planner, stated that staff did not believe enlarging Parcel 1 would` e detrimental to development on either parcel . Commissioner Tols`toy supported the parcels as shown on Exhibit D of the staff report and believed that smaller parcels would lead to circulation problems or overdevelopment problems. Planning o ission Minutes' - - April 26, 1989 Commissioner Chitiea agreed that two larger parcels, wouldmake it easier to develop a good site plan in the future. Conmissioner Emerick felt that either; ay would require a Variance and he wes inclined to defer to the wishes of the present user. Chairman McNiel agreed that in dealing with parcels being cut to less than minimum size, it always comes s back to haunt the Planning Commission. He felt that if the parcels were held at 5 and 4.8 acres, the elo r might not sell off the parcel , but he supported e near S SC split because it madethe best sense for the future. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that since the Co fission was fanning to act on something other than what the applicant requested, they should s if the applicant an nt on the action being considered. Chairman iel reopened the public hearing. . Schauer stated that they obviously needed the Variance. He stated that if they couldn 't have the configuration shown in Exhibit A, they would prefer the one in Exhibit D. He requested that the Variance be approved. Hearing o further testimony, the public hearing vas closed. Motion: Moved by Chid a, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving Variance - 3 with modification to require at the parcels be nearly equal in size,; with one parcel a minimum of S acres and the other; approximately 4.8 acres. Motion carried the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY -carried Barrye Han son, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report on Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11212. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. r. Schauer stated they specifically objected to six of the conditions as being unreasonable and they felt that imposition of those conditions was beyond state law. He stated that they had met` with City engineers regarding moving the railroad ad spur, and it would mean tearing down their existing building to move the spur to whereCity requested. He stated the spin was used, but does not go to thenewly created parcel . Chairman iel stated that the City normally requires undergrounding of all new developments. Planning Commission Minutes - pril 26,, 1989 . Schauer stated they did not believe it was in conformance with state law to require off-site improvements. He stated that he 'knew f an instance where the City had required under grounding on the opposite side of the street, but the developer only paid one-half the cost. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the condition regarding the railroad spur relocation was to be enforced only when modifications were requested on parcel ' . arye Hanson stated that was correct. Co issioner Tolstoy stated that as the existing building a t 1 , if the applicant were to request expansion, he would probably meet opposition because the City does not allow l buildings. Mr. Schauer stated he believed any tenant improvement, not just expansion, would trigger moving, of the spur. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Barrye Hanson stated there were d number of instances where the proponent had only paid one-half of the fees for undergrounding of railroad lines. However,'; on a recent appeal heard by City it , the City Council stated that when the utility line was on the project side of a facility, street, railroad, etc., the full fee should be collected. e further stated that although the property was on the other side of the street from the i railroad lines, his position was that the people to the north 'would never use the street and have exposure to the lines because they 'could not cress the tracks to use the street. Co issioner Emerick asked for the City ttor y 's opinion' regarding the applicant's contention that the conditions 'were legally excessive. Ralph n n disagreed it e applicant and stated he felt the conditions would be upheld He stated that with regard to going off-site an underg-rounding on the opposite side of the street, the allowable reimbursement agreements would be similar to what is spelled out in California Government Code. arye ;Hanson stated that with regard to the utilities on Rochester, the applicant being asked o underground the utilities on the project side of the street and pay a portion of the fees for undergrounding the utilities on the opposite side of the street because utilities on the opposite side of the street would cost more to underground. Chairman WNiel asked n Eighth Street would be expanded, requiring the owing of the railroad, spur so that it would not be in the public right-of-way of the street. a rye Hanson stated the sheet would be widened when parcel 2 was developed. Planning Commission Minutes - April 26,; 1989 Commissioner Tolstoy felt the requirements for under grounding e utilities on Eighth et would be consistent with Planning Commission 's prior posture. He felt that the request to underground e utilities on the corner parcel would pedi undergrounding and the applicant would be covered the reimbursement agreement. Commissioner Chitiea agreed that to do otherwise would be inconsistent. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the fee for undergrounding the railroad utilities should be one-half of the total fee and the City should pay for the other half of the undergrounding because the property on the other side is already developed. Chairman McNiel stated that even though i articular piece of property appeared be unfairly burdened, the City may not wish to change their practice. He was afraid that the City might not have the money to pay for the un' e rg round i n . Commissioner Chitiea felt it would benefit the entire community. Commissioner Emerick felt that it would benefit the property owner, as better aesthetics would increase property values. Commissioner Chitiea ' felt it would rep re se nt a general neighborhood improvement. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated the street was single-loaded, in that only this property fronted on the street, and that in other single-loaded streets full street improvements have been required. Commissioner Chitiea supported s ff's position to require the full payment for under grounding. Chairman el and Commissioner Eme,rick concurred. Chairman McNiel felt the requirements for undergrounding of utilities on Rochester were consistent with what had been done in the past. The remainder, of the Commissioners concurred. Commissioner Chitiea saw no point in putting in a portion of the undergrounding and then leaving the last portion undone. Commissioner Tolsto ' stated the applicant on parcel 2 wouldhave to improve up to the property line and would be eligible for reimbursement when development (redeve ntl ok place on the "Not a part" property. He saw no reason to change the condition. ar~rye Hanson stated that the other property already had a building on it, but he felt it was not developed to its highest use. e Comissioners concurred that the condition should remain. Planning Co ° issidn Minutes - April 26, 1989 Chairman McNiel asked about the Rochester right-of-way. Barrye Hanson stated that the City would acquire the right-of-way at the developer 's expense if the 'developer was not able to obtain in the right-of-way on his 'o Ralph Hanson stated the condition was the result of a condition in the Map Act` whereby neither the City nor the applicant own the property and the property needs to be acquired prior to recordation of the find map. Commissioner Chitiea felt the condition would be appropriate. Chairman McNiel concurred. He felt Eighth Street would need to be widened and stated that because the street could not be widened ithout roving the; railroad spur, the spin would eventually have to be moved. Commissioner Tolstoy stated it would be necessary to relocate the railroad spur, but the applicant would have flexibility on where to relocate it. Bar rye Hanson stated it could potentially go north/south. Connissioner Chitiea felt it was necessary to provide for relocation allow for widening of Eighth Street. Ralph Hanson asked if the Co i sion rs wished to thane the :wording of the condition regarding nant improvements triggering the need for the Eighth Street improvements. Co issioner Chitiea felt it would be moreappropriate to change the wording so that expansion or change in building use would trigger the Eighth Street improvements. She felt the phrase "tenant improvements" was too broad,ad, ,as it could conceivably include improvements to the interior. Co issioner Tolstoy stated he was wholeheartedly in favor of all of the decisions with the exception of the railroad utilities® Boni Moved by Tolstoy to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11212 withmodification tocharge one-half fee for undergrounding of railroad utilities. There "was no second. Motion* rived by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11212, with modifications to change the parcel sues to be consistent with Variance 88-23 and have Eighth Street improvements triggered by expansion or change in use of the existing building on Parcel 2. Motion carried by the following vote: V E S. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL CS: C ISSI S> TCL STOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY -carried Planning Co ` issien Minutes _l ® April 26, 1989 x � � W■ � x # # '" a + x:;. � ' W � �: w. :. n felt the south side of Jersey looked like an industrial ghetto, but he had do the quality of development in Rancho Cucamonga and felt the area would be improved. He felt the paving represented r expansion tote Commercial Carrier facility and that more traffic would be generated. He complained of loitering in the evening hours high he felt was caused by employees or visitors to the Commercial Carriers site. He stated Commercial Carrier 's metal buildings were not attractive and he felt the 25 foot landscaped setback s not unreasonable. r. Becklund stated no future development would be taking place on the site° and that the lot had been paved a year ago as a dust control measure. He stated e was no change in the use or additional construction to take place, except for those requirements contained in the Resolution. Commissioner Chitiea asked if any trees were planted >when the site was paved. r. Becklund stated it was not a parking lot, but a vehicle stDr8ge area and o aesthetic improvements had been made. He stated the area was covered with 1/2" gravel mixed with emulsion, giving e appearance of a gravel ya r. Barton stated that nothing had been done where Red Oak terminates. Loyd Shockley, Maintenance Supervisor for Ryder Trucks, stated that people loitered in front of his property, but they were not his employees and that he had spent a lot of money and time cleaning up the site n he originally bought the property. He said they were originally told by City staff that they l not be required to make any improvements and that surfacing with a macadam rook coating would only require a `grading and; paving plan. Commissioner Chitiea asked the condition of the street, and why the applicant' had not been asked repair it. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated at major street improvements are required for full redevelopment or new development, but not normally for a Minor Development Review. Hearing o further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel felt the Planning Commission had performed an acceptable job when the project was first reviewd. He did not think modification of the conditions and granting of the Variance was in the best interest of the community. He felt it was appropriate require upgrading of the property with the application for the Minor Development Review. r. Kroutil stated that City Council felt there should be a ' more realistic relationship between on-site vs. off-site improvements. They had questioned at triggered the requirements for improvements. 1t was felt than theoretically the applicant could go back and remove the macadam coat and no improvements could be required. Therefore, City Council felt it might be better to reduce the amount of improvements required. Planning Commission Minutes - - April 26 , 1989 Commissioner Chtea asked if the site would meet the County requirements for: dust control if the coating o ed. . Kroutil stated it would then become a code enforcement issue, because storing of trucks could require screening and the City would have the legal sans to make them remove the vehicles. Commissioner Finerick vented to know if a Development Review would be required to remove the macadam coat. M Kroutil stated the macadam coating was applied subject to conditions. if the conditions were not met, the approval would be void® He felt City Council returned the matter because they felt the City would get nothing if the Variance was not granted. Commissioner Telstoy stated that if the applicant paved the area as a parkin lot, that would, require a permit and it would trigger the need for landscaping. routil stated that had the Planningissien determined that the macadam coating was not a form a paving, the Minor Development Review would' not have been required and no conditions could have been placed on the site. Commissioner rick stated the Commission needed to determine if the macadam coating should be considered paving. Chairman McNiel stated the macadam cdatin ` was put down to control dusty He felt that as the requirements did not include under grounding, they were not a major burden. He felt the improvements re not significant and he wondered why Ryder was opposed improvements. Comnissioner Chitiea felt people' on the adjoining properties and those people traveling down Red Cad had to view the site and it was an eyesore. She felt that the conditions originally imposed were at the minimal side of what is normally asked of other property owners. Coamissioner Tolstoy agreed that the original conditions were consistent with at is asked of other property owners. Commissioner Emerick felt that the original conditions were correct. Chairman McNiel felt that the dust generated beforethe macadam coating was more of a nuisance to Ryder Trucks than to surrounding property owners. reopened the` public hearing forcomment from r ecklund. ri lund stated that the original conditions required movingthe office parking lot and a loss of approximately 2 acres of storage to relocate the parking lot. Chairman McNiel stated that landscaping generally runs 1111 - 11t of a total project. Planning Commission Minutes -1April 26 , 1989 Mr. Becklund stated they would be agreeable to that percentage if they were proposing brand new development. However, he felt this as ' this was not a new development, major landscaping should not be required. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the applicant originally appealed s ff's conditions on a Minor Development< Review application. The Planning Con mission upheld s ff's conditions and the applicant appealed to City Councit . City Council' determined the applicant should resubmit the matter to the Manning Commission and request a Variance. e applicant then resubmitted,` a d on the direction he heard City Council . The Planning Comnission should now consider the City Council direction and take action on the application. tion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea to direct staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial for _Variance 9-0 . Motion carried by the following vote AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: L SLE -carried rBuller asked if the Commissioners wished to reconsider their position on any of the original conditions regarding the level of improvement. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they; would request' improvements consistent with what they had done previously. . Chairman McNiel stated he would be willing o discuss possible moving of; driveway locutions, and he would possibly be willing to leave the driveways where they were currently proposed. Ralph Hanson, City Attorney, stated that the Resolution for the Minor Development Review required a Variance, which the Commission had voted to deny. Therefore, the Minor` eve opment Review could not be approved. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea to direct staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial for Minor Development Review 87-71. Motion carried by e following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHIT , EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: C ISSIC ERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BL ®carried Planning Commission Minutes, -14 April 26, 1989 H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT , TENTATIVE 54 LEWISHOMES su 7vsoan dts and 55 condominium units on12.2 ao o an in th' e Medium Residential ` District -14 dwelling units per of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located on the northeast corner of Havel Avenue and Church Street - . 1 77- 1C15. Brett dr r, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Don Thompson, Lewis Homes, stated they were in agreement with the conditions; and he was available to answer questions. Commissioner Chi°tiea asked if a materials b rd were available. She asked what material was= being used for the balcony walls. r. Thompson did not know what the material' as. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was olo d. Commissioner Chitiea suggested subtle color variations should be used. She requested at the colors and balcony wall material be re ie d by the Design Review Committee. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by C itiea, to adopt the Resolutions< approving Environmental s ss rat and Tentative Tract 13664 and Design Review' of the 86 condominium units with modification to require Design Review Committee approval of building colors andsecond-story patio wall+ rial . Motion carried by the following vote . AYES* COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY -carried I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 112 LEWIS theF—Tsu vas do a s d an n a e s rn errs to anned Community,, 1 a d on the east side of Milliken Avenue, north of Church Street - : 27-151-1 14. J. ENVIRONMENTAL SS SCONDITIONAL USE PERMIT '-42 - PITASSI DALMAU eues p eve op a , s ua oo o ° on ao ' s o land within the Recreational Commercial District of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located on the east side of Milliken Avenue, north of Church Street AP : 227- 1 . Brett Horner, Assistant Planner, presented e staff report. Planning Commission Minutes _15 April 26, 1989 : . ING=. oil a � w � e ♦ � W $M � a ,� * r Bi 11 Si Iva, Deputy City Engineer, stated the City would enter into construction improvement agreements, probably with Lewis Homes, before accepting dedication. Chairman McNiel asked about the progress of construction of Milliken Avenue adjacent to the site. Mr. Thompson stated they hoped to start construction within a few weeks and hoped to complete it within 3 months. Chairman McNiel asked if that could hinder the subject project. Mr. Silva responded that the construction of Milliken was already bonded by Lewis Homes. He isaid building permits could be approved, but occupancy would be held up until completion of construction. Chairman McNiel asked if the storm drainage system was being constructed in conjunction with the streets. Mr. Silva confirmed that it was. Mr. Pitassi asked if the condition requiring approval of the land use amendrent prior to issuance of building permits could be removed. Can Coleman, Senior Planner, stated building permits could not be issued if the property was not zoned properly. Mr. Thompson stated the current zoning was Recreational Commercial and he wanted to know if that would be acceptable. Mr. Buller believed the YMCA use may be a conditional use under the Terra Vista Community an, but stated he would need to verify. Mr. Barton asked if the conditions which Lewis had already bonded for could be removed from the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Silva stated that the conditions would have to stay because it must be guaranteed as required by the Code. As to as the improvements have been bonded, building permits can be issued. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that many of the concerns raised by Mr. Barton were already covered by the Lewis ' bond which covers the construction of Milliken and the for drain. Mr. Barton stated he did not object to the conditions so long as they were not asked to modify the street plans. Mr. Silva stated that if Lewis Homes defaulted on the agreement, the would have to be some guarantee of the construction of access. it Planning Commission Minutes -17- April 26, 1989 Barrye HansonSenior City Engineer, stated he believed the applicant had already t the intent of the emergency d access condition. He felt the Piro Department would approve the plans as currently designed. Chairman McNiel next asked to address the concern raised :by Gr. Barton regarding development fees. r Coleman stated that development fees were established by City Council and could not be waived by the Planning Commission. Ralph Hanson stated that the lease agreement would address the fee situation. Barton stated that they felt their costs should start at the property; line behind the curb and that sewer laterals , electrical , and water would be brought to the site. Puss Maguire , City Engineer, stated that the utilities would be brought to the site for the park. However, if the YMCA will have special ter, sewer, an electrical needs that will require larger than normal electrical and water lines , it wow i l 1 have to be covered in the lease. r. Thompson affirmed that Lewis Homes would be installing the lines large enough to support the t. Chairman McNiel next addressed e condition regarding joining of Lighting and; Landscaping Districts. He stated that it could be covered in the lease agreement with the City. Hearing no further sti n , the public hearing s closed. Commissioner Emerick stated he liked the architecture, but felt perhaps articulation could be placed on the large flat wall . Commissioner Tolstay stated that the wall in question was recessed and would not be that easily seen. He asked what material was being used on the column ba ses. Commissioner` hitiea stated she recalled Design Review had requested the material be more substantial than plain stucco because of possible damage from skateboards and bicycles running into it. She said she preferred tile. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to ask what material was being u se d. r. Pit ssi stated the proposal called for stucco over concrete , which he felt would be rore durable than tile. He stated the stucco could easily be repaired. He felt that the would pop and crack with abuse. He suggested an alternative Dwight be to use sandblasted, painted co Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes; -18- April 26 , 1989 Comissioner=T lst y felt the concrete would be more durablea , st . Commissioner iti a felt using the concrete would add another texture not used elsewhere in the building. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that I using till would add another , l t that %asn 't carried t enough in other parts of the building. Chairman McNiel stated he liked the way the columnslooked and felt either concrete r stucco would be a e tab l `. Comissioner Chits a felt that from a maintenance standpoint the concrete would be aily repaired, because it would merely need repainting scratched, whereas the stucco finish would have to be reapplied. She s ta te d she appreciated working with the project proponents in the evolution pro jec t She felt it would fit in nicely in the surrounding community and would be a rice addition to the City. lion* Moved by Chitia seconded by Tlsy, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11286. Motion j carried by the following vote YES: COMMISSIONERS: ITI , EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY CS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: Y -carri ed Lion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Cbiti a, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental s s nt and Conditional Use ' Permit 8842, 'with modification to requiresandblasted, painted concrete column bases. Motion carried by the followingvote: YES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES.* C ISSIC CS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: C carried r Buller suggested the YMCA, Lewis Homes, and the City should all sitsdown soon to discuss the project. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Citina, unanimously carried, to continue tin beyond 11:00 P.M. Planning' Co mission MinutesApril 26, 1989 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONALS IT BLACK ELL A request to es p ,' square feet' within an existing industrial park on 3.8 acres of land in the General Industrial District Subarea f the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 6th Street - - 1- 3 a 33 Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner, presented e staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Tamy Blackwell , 10809 YoloStreet, Rancho Cucamonga,' stated she was' available to answer questions® Chairman McNiel asked what type of dances would be taught.` s. Blackwell stated tap, ballet, and jazz. Chairman McNiel asked how many students she anticipated. Blackwell stated she currently ran a dance studio in Ontario, which she wished to relocate a ha Cucamonga. She currently ad 50 students and she projected she would have approximately 75 - 100 students. Commissioner Emerick asked if she kept the doors open. Mrs. Blackwell responded doors would be closed. Commissioner Brick asked if there would be vibrations from the music. Mrs. Blackwell stated she had no complaints from the neighbors at her current location. She stated the speakers could be placed on the floor. She said her hours of operation would net be the same as the surrounding businesses and she did not anticipate any problems. Stephanie Alexander, stated she had been a resident of Rancho uca na for six years. She stated she currently did a let of business in Ontario because she made six trips per week to take her children to the dance school there. She felt the school would provide a service for the community and she supported approval . Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion- Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to wept the Resolution` 3 - Motion n and Conditional Use Permit_ app vEnvironmental Assessment o carried by the following vote: AYES- COMMISSIONERS: I O T II L ES* ISI LSt NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 3L P carried Planning Commission Minutes April 26, 1989 i L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTPARCEL MAP 12121: - ROBERT FULLMER - A su vi i 1 Industrial District (Subarea of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north of the AT&SF Railroad tracks APN: 1C- 1 & 22. Barbara Krall , Assistant Civil Engineer, presented staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. i` i Paddock , 175 South Grove Avenue, Ontario, stated he representedFullmer Construction and 'was available to answer questions. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing s closed. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded y Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving n iron n l Assessment and Parcel Map 12121. tion carried by' the following vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: ITI , EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: -carried M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL SE PERMIT - RANCHO PACIFIC request to esU51i s an office uw in ease space o square eet within an existing industrial park 4.24 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 11), located at q Utica To!m Gran, Assistant Planner, presented staff report. Commissioner Tolsoy stated that according to parking calculations, no parking wouldbe available if additional office space were leased. However, since most of the current tenants werefor office uses, he wondered how industrial use tenants would fit into the project. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Benson , Koll Company presented o aerial photographs taken at 1 : an 3:45 P.M. on Thursday, April 20, 1989. The photos showed at of the 253 available parking spaces, only 122 were in use at 10:40 A.M. and 105 were in use at :45 P.M. He stated that the parking study indicated the highest demand at 145 spaces. He felt the study and the photographs showed there was` still available parking for future expansion. He also felt that office an industrial uses were compatible. Planning Commission Minutes 1 April 26, 1989 Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Ch i t i oa stated that because the parking study s convincing and appeared to support the use , she supported the Resolution. Commissioner Tolsoyr appreciated the aerial photographs. Motion: Moved by Ch;itioa, seconded by Tolsto , to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental s ' ss nt and Conditional Use Permit ` g_C . Motion carried by the following vote AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS- NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BL SLEy -carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS N. CLARIFICATION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL REGARDING LANDSCAPING OF - 5 Otto rbutil Deputy City Planner, presented the staff report. Motion- Moved by Chitioa, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolutions approving dific tion' to Conditions of Approval for Development Review 7 C and Development Review -SS. Motion carried by the following vote: YES COMMISSIONERS* CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS- NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: L ESLEy -carried 0. DISCUSSION OF RECYCLING FACILITY A N N S Brad Buller, City Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chita stated she felt the City needed °to support recycling, but it was also necessary to maintain high standards and a o the -recycling facilities aesthetically pleasing. She supported the current requirements. Commissioner Tols oy felt perhaps the structure which had been approved should be reviewed to be sure it was convenient for both the 'user and the person unloading the recycled material . agreed at the co unity did not want Planning Commission Minutes - - April 26, 1989 trucks/trailers sitting in parking lots or the multi-colored ells; He; felt> the City should Fully support the intent of recycling and perhaps recycling could, e tied in `with Boy Scouts, schools, or service clubs. Chairman McNiel felt that churches already had recycling facilities, but that probably did not meet the ` intent of the 'law. He felt the City should not relax the i r° standards. Commissioner Toltoy ; stated d the City was faced with the problem of retrofitting some centers which had been built before City standards enacted and it would be difficult to retrofit those centers. Commissioner Chitiea felt it was important indicate that the..Cit has *grade a strong commitment to the program. CCMMISSION BUSINESS P. TRAILS ADVISORY CCMMISSION VACANCY Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that Vicki Jackson had submitted her resignation. Connissioner' Chitiea suggested appointing someone to fill Vicki Jackson 's ter from the list of applicants generated durin the last recruitment, e other Commissioners concur Commissioner Toltoy stated that two considerations should be taken; into account: 1) was the applicant qualified, and could the applicant meeti when the Trails Committee is scheduled. He asked if any qualified candidates were on the list from the last recruitment. Coamissioner Chitiea stated that Greg Pilcher made a well doc u 'me nte d presentation the Trails Committee on short notice. n Coleman, Senior Planner, stated Mr. Pilcher'was President of the Alta Loma Riding Club and had ` spoken before the Planning Commission regarding the Sapphire Trail . Commissioner Chitiea suggested Greg Pilcher be recruited to fill the remainder' of Vicki Jackson 's term. The Planning Commission concurred. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. i Planning Commission Minutes - - April 26, 1989 ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded iti , unanimously carried, to adjourn. 1aP.M. Planning Comission Adjourned the May 8, 1989, Awards of Design presentation to be held at Lions Park Community Center. Respectfully submitted, A 4 Br�ad Bu ler Sec re ta ry Planning Co omission Minutes - - April 26, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ACTION MINUTES April 20, 1989 THE CITY DE RANCHO CUC A - 1989 W D EDP DESIGN EXCELLENCE The Third Annual Awards for Design Excellence will be held May , 1989. The jury will review the nominated projects and decide which projects are worthy of an award of excellence. Staff Comments: The Planning Commission awards jury) previously reviewed the nominated projects on March 30, 1989 The jury narrowed the 'total' number of projects down to thirteen. The jury requested a tour o the thirteen pro ects, April lath, for further review* The second and final meeting eeti will determine the finalist of the wards program. Action of theJury: Members Present David Pl akesl e , Bruce Emeri ok, Suzanne Chit ea Peter Tolstoy Staff 'Planner: Jeff Gravel The jury reviewed thirteen projects and concluded that the thirteen should be rewarded for their exceptional contribution to the City. e projects are as follows: RESIDENTIAL. Calais, by Lewis Noires The front patio areas reinforce Calais 's village-like quality which equates to a strong sense of place PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ACTION MINUTES April 20, 1989 Page 2 OFFICE: • Haven Professional Plaza, by Haven Investors An innovative project in the use of materials shape and mass, despite the restrictive development standards in the Kmart Shopping Center by the Krat Corporation. • Virginia Dare Winery Business Center, by Tower Partners A at example of adaptive reuse, exhibiting re,tainment of the original character of the winery'. INDUSTRIAL: • Sixth Street Distribution Center, by The Barmakian Company This industrial complex is a prime example of exceeding the base development requirements to achieve a superior product. • Vineyard West Mini-storage, by The Barma,kian Company This project has extensive landscaping which works as an effective transitional buffer zone between industrial and residential development. COMMERCIAL: Virginia Dare Food Court, by Tower Partners Regarding an array of attractive Design elements such as lush landscaping, trellised pathways, and a sound nurturing water element, the ambiance creates a California oasis dream setting, nestled within an active community center. Terra Vista Village, by Dicker-Warmington (Associated with Lewis Homes) Sensitivity to detail and richness in Design are exhibited with thoughtful locations of street furniture and hardscape, 360 degree architecture and superior rear building buffering from the adjacent residences. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ACTION MINUTES April 20, 1989 Page • Burger King, Terra Vista Village, by Bob Del pit Exceptional attention to detail iaddressing the unique problems and issues associated with a fast food chain type uses, in addition to providing architecture consistent with Terra Vista Village. • Victoria Self Storage, by Ni l l i am Lyon Company Valued: for its residential compatibility and quality in Design regarding the office/residence building. MASTER PLAN`: Victoria Lakes South, by William Lyon Company Excellence in Master Planning, a plan which may put Rancho Cucamonga or the map of places to go. LANDSCAPING: (Special Contribution HonorableMention) Victoria Heights, by William Lyon Company A brochure is offered at the Victoria Heights sales office which demonstrates a premier attempt to educate how buyers the capability of landscaping and saving water. REHABILITATION: (Honorable Mention) Serendipity School , by Hammer -Property Investments This is an example of a rehabilitation project which integrates into the neighborhood beautifully in addition to contributing to the need of child care service. COMMUNITY T: (Special Contribution - Honorable Mention) Community Art, by Jerome Mahoney, Independence Corporate Centre located at the North East Corner of Haven and Sixth Street. One of the first contributions to public art noted for its location for which it can 'be shared by the passing motorists on Haven Avenue. CITY ,OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting April '1 , 1989 Chairman Mc Niel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho ' Cucamonga ; Planning Commission to order at *OO P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Cuter, 9161'-Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner, Brad Buller, City; Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, Tom Gahn, Assistant Planner, Jeff Gravel, Associate Planner, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, 'Ralph' Hanson, Deputy' City Attorney, Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner; Brett Horner, Assistant Planner, Cynthia Moser, Assistant Planner; Otto Kroutil , Deputy City! Planner, Russ Maguire , City Engineer; Betty Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer; Beverly Nissen,' Assistant Planner, Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer, Gail Sanchez, Secretary; Bill Silva, deputy' City Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Bla esley, carried with McNiel and Tolstoy 'abstaining, to approve the minutes of February 2 , 1989, as amended. Motion. Moved by Bla esl y, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of March 3, 1989. Lion. Moved by Blaesley, seconded by Emerick, carried with Chitiea and Tolstoy abstaining, to approve the minutes of March 22, 1989, as amended. CONSENT CALENDAR A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -04 - GREUBEL - The design review- of a self-serve car wash, lu5e sop, an auto etas shop, on 3. acres of land within the Neighborhood Commercial District,, located at the southwest corner of Haven and Lemon - APN. ' 01- 6 -48. (Continued from March 22, 1g ® ) R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88- 1 - AVERY - A 10,000 square dot it on to an a ast ng ware du se a ng, to ling 43,250 square feet on 2.27 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea' ) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the south side of 9th Street, east of Vineyard Avenue - APN: 9- 1 - . Chairman McNiel announced that a request had been rude to pull Item A from the Consent Calendar. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to approve Item D of the Consent Calendar, A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7-04 - GREUBEL Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jerry Creube , applicant, stated that many residents had not been satisfied with the project as originally approved. He said they had revised the plans to et theresidents ' concerns, but the project no longer made economic sense. He therefore requested he be allowed to withdraw the application and submit a revised application at s later date. Terri Brooks, 10331 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she originally was not made aware of what was to be constructed on the par'~cel . She wanted to know what would be submitted and stated she did not want a car wash built. She said the project as it exists today is nicely built. John Barna, 6331 Revere, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he wanted to go on record that the screening landscaping, lighting issues, and hours issue were still important to the neighborhood. He stated he did not wart a 'fast food restaurant or a car wash and die not want anything that would bring a lot of tra ffic Nearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Lion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to allow the applicant to withdraw Design Review for Conditional Use Permit 87- C4 Planning Commission Minutes - - April 12, 1989 PUBLIC HEARINGS C. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 87-01 - HARRY C" consideration to modify,' suspend, or revo e an entrtn perm granted for a disc jockey doing; vocals and playing records nightly in conjunction with a restaurant/night club, located at 10877 Foothill Boulevard. D. ; ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT gg-C - HARRY C' - A request to conduct live comedy acts, -sync contests, fiiir; a--n-d clothing fashion shows, live entertainment concerts ,; live Jazz, and; special promotion events for local businesses and groups in conjunction with a restaurant/night club at 10877 Foothill Boulevard. Bruce Abbott Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Rich Beswick , stated he had been retained as attorney for Harry C's. He saidi the calls to the 'Sheriff's department regarding possession of a gun involved' off-duty law enforcement officers. He said Harry C's wanted to sponsor a local talent night in order to provide a forum for local' people who wish to enter the entertainment fields. Paul Duran, 9158 Conifer Lane , Apartment J, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was the General Manager for Harry C's. He said Harry C 's had instituted a "designated driver" program, which provided free non-alcoholic beverages to "designated drivers". He said they were trying; to arrange for the yellow cab company to have several cabs waiting at Harry C's at closing time. He stated he ran a peaceful club and the calls to the Sheriff's Department were prevention calls made so that situations would not get out of hand. Chairman McNiel asked the capacity of ;the night 'club. Mr ran responded it was 364. Chairman McNiel asked the average occupancy. Mr ran replied they averaged less than 100 patrons„ including the off- nights. He stated that on Saturdays there is generally a line out to the sidevalk. He said they would like to average 200 people per night. He said he had been managing the club since July 27, 1988, and felt: they had 'shown considerable improvement. Jim Engelbart, Entertainment gager for Harry C's , stated the listing o proposed entertainment reflected the Commission 's concerns stated at previous stings* Mr. ge ' ick stated Harry C's wanted to hold a =Chamber of Commerce Mixer for the Miss Rancho Cucamonga Beauty Pageant on April 19, and he had hoped they could get approval to allow that event to take place. Planning Commission Minutes - - April 12, 1989 Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea was concerned that calls for ;Sheriffs services would increase if the entertainment was expanded. She did not feel there had been substantial improvement and was concerned about expanding the uses. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had no problem with extending the current Entertainment Permit. He felt the Planning Commission might consider allowing a limited expansion of the entertainment for a trial period of 120 days He felt a live jazz band and telecasting of sporting events would be acceptable. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that Harry C's did not need an entertainment permit to show closed circuit television. Commissioner Chitiea was willing to extend the existing Entertainment Permit, but not inclined to broaden permitted uses to include all of those requested. Commissioners erick and glakesley concurred. Commissioner glakesley stated he felt Harry C 's had scaled back on Sheriff's cads. He felt if there was continued improvement he would support expansion on a trial basis. He felt live jazz was acceptable. Otto routil , Deputy City Planner, suggested the Commission might wish to continue the item to allow time o prepare a Resolution. Commissioner erick suggested the approval be for a limited time to allow calculations on which types of entertainment caused problems. e Planning Commission concurred that a jazz band and comedy were acceptable. Commissioner Emerick was willing to try the Fashion night for 120 days. Mr. kroutil stated there were no provisions for a limited time limit on Entertainment Permits. He stated the Planning Commission could however ask for a review at the end of six months. Commissioners Tolstoy and Chitiea stated they did not support fashion shows , because they might be provocative. Commissioner Chitiea opposed the talent night on the basis that no guideline re proposed. Commissioner Blakesley' stated he would agree' to the talent night if the definition were not so open ended* i Chairman McNiel and Commissioners Tolstoy and Emerick concurred* Chairman McNiel felt concerts ;would be acceptable, because if they got provocative acts which caused problems , the Planning Commission could revoke the permit. He suggested a Resolution of approval be prepared for the next Planning Commission meeting: Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 12, 1989 Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney suggested the Commission might wish to direct staff to prepare a Resolution to deny the revocation of Entertainment Permit 8 -01 and continue Entertainment Permit 89-02 to allow the applicant to modify their request to address the concerns enumerated this evening': Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Mr. Beswick suggested the staff could approve the entertainment each week. Mr routil stated he did not believe it would be appropriate for staff to approve the entertainment on a weekly basis. Mr. Beswrick asked if it would be possible to get approval for the Miss Rancho Cucamonga affair. Mr'. Kroutil stated City provisions allow staff latitude to approve one-time special special events. He suggested the Planning Commission could give direction to staff to approve the Miss Rancho Cucamonga mixer. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that Harry Cs management had not shown good Judgment in the past and he suggested they pay particular attention to those who are left in charge when the Manager is not there. Lion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Tolstoy, to direct staff to prepare a Resolution of denial of revocation of Entertainment permit' 87-01 for the April 26, 1989 meeting. Motion carried by the following vote : AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHI TI EA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS.* NONE ABSENT* COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Blakesley, to continue Entertainment Permit 89-02 to April 26, <1989, in order to allow' the applicant ' to Modify their request. Motion carried by the following vote : AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHI TI EA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: C ISION Sk NONE ABSENT: C ISSIONERS NE carried E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13898 - NUUUUUNE - A residential i5MMiW 6f__T_Si`_ngle__faeily lots on 2.47 acreo and in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) , located at the northwest corner of Lemon Avenue' and London Avenue - APN: 20 -25]-5 SD. )Continued from March 22, 1989. ). Planning Commission Minutes - - April 12, 1989 Beverly Nissen, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Henry Nunes, applicant`, stated that lot H was really HC feet wide, but there a curve at the corner which continued for 15 feet, so the lot was marked as having only 66 feet of frontage" Cr. Bonnie Hunt, 6127 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the proposed master plan seriously affected her property because of the relocation of Banyan Street. She presented copies of the 1986 City Council Resolution vacating Banyan Street and stated she did not want Banyan Street relocated per Tentative Tract 1898's master plan. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner, stated that the planning Commission was only considering a subdivision of eight lots. He stated the applicant was rewired to submit a conceptual master plan to suggest circulation for the surrounding area, but approval of the Tract would only mean approval of the lots, not the master plan. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated no alignment study had been conducted for Banyan Street. He ;said that if at some point in the future there appeared to be a need to connect Banyan Street because of traffic, there would be an alignment study, public hearings, and final' approval by City Council , Co issioner Tolstoy felt the subdivision was more consistent with the neighborhood and he felt it wes a good project. Commissioner Chitiea felt the plotting represented an improvement. She favored even larger lots, but felt the tract was acceptable. Chairman McNiel concurred, but sued the two lots immediately to the west had limited access. As the lot owners were not protesting, he supported the pro jec t® Lion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by glaele , to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13898. Motion carried by the followingvote : AYES: C ISSIQN S: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEI_, TOLSTOY ES: C ISSINERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried ` Planning s on mutes �6� April 1 1989 _ Commission si _ M , I F. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-0 - A. W. DAVIE - A request for expansion of a noncoh orra ng use y i ng square feet of off ice space to an existing building and warehouse totaling 4,560 square' feet on 3.82 acres of land in the General Industrial District (subarea ) of the Industrial ' Specific Plan, located on the southeast corner of 9th Street and Nelms Avenue - APN: 09® I-5 54. (Continued from March 22, 1989.) Brett Horner Assistant planner, presented the staff "report. Chairman McNiel opened` the public hewing. Charles Doskow, 222 North Mountain Avenue, 10, Upland, attorney for the applicant, stated they were satisfied with the staff report and appreciated' the attention given to the matter. Hearing;no farther testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea pointed out that the applicant had increased the office space request by 110 feet and she felt that allowing the larger office would perpetuate the use for a longer period of timeShe felt the fencing should` be upgraded from chain link to wrought iron and .it landscaping should be more substantial . Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the City Engineer had already established the extended time schedule for public improvements. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated the schedule had not as yet been negotiated. He said the City Code allowed a time frame of 3-12 months and typically staff Engineers negotiate the time frame. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would be satisfied with allowing staff to handle the negotiations" Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. r. Doskow stated they: felt the public improvements should not be made because the use of the property would be phased out. in 3-5 years and it was their understanding at the sidewalk would not be required before that time. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that discussions to-date had centered on the 3-5 year period for full improvements and requested if the planning Commission concurred with the previous discussions" Dan Coleman, nior Planner, stated the Minor Development Review would be for an initial -,year building permit approval period. He stated the clock would not start running on completion of the improvements until the City had reached an agreement with A. W. Davies. sow stated they intended to complete the building addition as soon as possible, and their proposal was to defer installation of sidewalk , street trees, and street lights to be completed in a -6 year time fro Planning Commission Minutes' -7- April 12 , 1989 Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel stated that if the use vas to be in place for -S years and the improvements were going to be implemented in 3-5 years, then the improvements would not be done until the use changed. r. Buller stated the Resolution was drafted to provide flexibility, requiring the installation of the 13 parking spaces, the relocation of the fencing along Helms Avenue, the Fencing of 9th Street, and the landscape improvements prior to the issu_ arye of an occupancy perm_ it for the expansion, _bu_t leaving vi,ng open the CityEngineer's ability to extend the t period for completion of other' .,y improvements <required in the public right-of-way. Commissioner Finerick asked if a landscape plan; had been submitted, and what the tack would be. _ garrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated final landscape plans would be submitted prior to issuance of building permits. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that because the requested expansion had increased from 600 square feet to 710 square feet, more landscaping should be provided. He was not comfortable with vines on 'a chain link fence. Commissioner Chitiea concurred. She stated that other applicants had requested Minor Development Reviews and they had been required to upgrade their properties to current City standards. She felt the Helms Avenue frontage was important because it could be seen from 9th Street'. Commissioner Rlakesley concurred' that it was important to screen the outdoor storage. Co ` issioner Blakesley stated that if the intent was to use the fence to support vines for the screening, chain link fencing would be better than wrought iron. Commissioner Tolstoy felt a heavily landscaped chain link fence along Helms would be acceptable. Commissioner Emerick preferred a wrought iron fence on 9th, and agreed that a chain link fence an Helms would be acceptable. Chairman McNiel felt the Commission needed to review the landscape plans. on 9th and Hellman. He felt the property would be used longer than the projected 3-5 years. He favored wrought iron fencing and wanted capital improvements within 3 years. Commissioner Tolstoy concurred that wrought iron was appropriate for 9th Street. Commissioner Chitiea stated the Commission 's Job was to protect the community. She felt the Design Review Committee should review the landscaping and wall Planning Commission Minutes - - April 12 1989 treatment on Helms and gth and wanted all capital improvements installed' within a maximum of 3 ;dears. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Minor Development Review 9-07, with modifications to provide for Design Review Coamittee approval ' of the landscape plan. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNTEL, TDESTCY COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NE carried ' 9:00 P.M. - Planning Co is ion Recessed 9:'15 P.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-0 SHOWBIZ PIZZA requs tp ett i s oca at t e sour east corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue - APN: C - 5 ZS & 26. Continued from March ZP, 1989. ) Cynthia' Kinser, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and distributed a brochure submitted by ShowBiz Pizza along with a letter from the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce supporting the project. Commissioner Chitiea asked if the concern raised at the neighborhood meeting regarding service of alcohol had been addressed. s. Kinser stated that; the applicant already had a beer and wine license. Commissioner Tolstoy asked the maximum decibel level of noise. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner,, ponded that the maximum was 60 dB from 10:0 P.M. to .CU A.M. and 65 dB from 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 F.M. Co issioner Rlakesley asked why there were two separate calculations on the parking for the restaurant. Mr. Coleman responded that the standards call for a higher parking ratio over 6,000 square feet, because the kitchen does not generally have to be expanded, providing a greater ratio of patrons. Chairman McNiel opened the ;public hearing. Planning Co mission Minutes - - April 12, 1989 Richard Huston, ShowBiz Pizza, stated they were a wholesome, family oriented restaurant, with of their business coming from families with children under b and from families with children under gy He did not feel the arcade wes typical of arcades which normally attract teenagers. He stated + there would be no dedicated video area and the arcade would include a puppet show and games geared to younger children. He stated the arcade could be seen from throughout the restaurant. Commissioner Chitiea asked how many video games were being proposed. r. Huston responded they were proposing 18-1 , including 2 stand-up with the remainder being rides. Sue Teran, 8248 Onyx Court, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the project because she felt it would create a noisy, unsafe, environment and attract teenagers, who would hang out in the parking lot. She said the requirement for bike racks indicated the City felt teenagers would be using the arcade. She was afraid t trash would be placed near the residences. She stated the restaurant pad was on a higher grade than the iresidences, and she felt children would' look over the fence into adjacent ,yards. She said the residents had been told previously that the back area of the development would not be used for restaurant pads. Donna Windhurst, 8217 Onyx Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she had previously been assured that restaurants would not be placed in that portion of the site. She opposed the arcade. She 'objected the proximity to homes and felt the sale of beer and wine should not be allowed. Michael Roy, project developer, stated that one of the constraints of locating the restaurant wes its size because rowBiz Pizza wanted 10,000 square feet.' He said they had reviewed ShowBiz Pizza operations in other locations and determined at it would be a good operation. He said they were prepared to mitigate the concerns of residents. Mr. Huston sued that the bike racks were required by the City as part of the entire shopping center complex. He said trash would be picked up frequently, r Coleman stated that daily trash pick up was a condition for the center. Huston stated that the restaurant was noisy on the inside, but the construction people had assured him that the noise would not carry outside. He said they strictly control carding of those who wish to drink and watch for signs of intoxication. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was 'closed. Commissioner Blakesley did not like the idea that the developer was restricting future growth at the center because is use would require such a large number of parking spaces, He did not feel the use would draw an undesirable clientele and felt they mould be a good neighbor. He felt trash and noise concerns would be properly mitigated. Planning Commission Minutes -i®- April 12, 1989 Co' issioner Chitiea was "uncomfortable with the project because parking requirements could restrict future leasing of the center. She also va s concerned because both Chuck E. Cheese and Champion Pizza had failed in Upland. She felt the use wes more of a family arcade/fun renter than a family restaurant and felt a moretraditional family restaurant would be better suited to the a rea. She was afraid that extra cars and children outside the restaurant would cause exterior noise. She' was not comfortable with this use in this iparticular location. Co' issi°over Tolstoy indicated that his only concern had been noise. He felt the two conditions regarding noise in the Resolution would mitigate the noise. He felt other pads within the project were smaller and he didn 't feel the use would generate future parking problems. Commissioner Emerick felt ShowBiz would be a clean user and they would not be a nuisance to the nearby residents. Chairman McNiel stated that this particular center has a walking patrol twice daily. He did not feel there would be a lot of activity behind the building except for employees leaving at the end of their shift in the evening. He supported the project but suggested that the applicant make their' employees aware of the sensitivity of the concerns of the neighbors to the south. Motion: Moved by E` rick, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution' approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 89 D . Motion' carried by the following vote: AYES- COMMISSIONERS: L ESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: CHI TI EA ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NE -carried Commissioner Chitiea stated she ;opposed the project because of the extensive parking it would require, the failure of similar restaurants in Upland, the desire for a more traditional family restaurant, and the fear that the use might be a nuisance to the neighbors. H. ' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT requist to consider Additional alternatives or the real-ignment, of the north leg of Red Hill Country i Club Drive by including a raised, curbed median on Foothill Boulevard in order to eliminate left turns into and out of Red Hill Country Club Drive, Paul Rougeau Traffic Engineer, presented the staff report, as well as letters from the Foothill Fire Protection District and Central School District opposing the installation of a median. Planning Commission Minutes' -11- April 1 , 1989 Commissioner Blakesley asked the expected tiring for widening the railroad crossing on Foothill Boulevard. Russ Maguire , City Engineer, estimated ground would be broken in 18-20 months and construction would take 12-18 months He indicated Alternate 1 would require another trussel structure , which would add to the time frame. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Chin Bollinger, representing San Antonio Community Hospital , stated they had been trying to get the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan modified for over 18` months. He said they had plans for developing their property in process and he anked the staff and Planning Commission for looking at other al ` rnatives Cordon 7wissler, 7879 Sierra Vista , Rancho Cucamonga, felt too much attention had been given to looking for a quick fix. He said he had talked to other residents on Red hill and they did not feel that prohibiting left turns from Foothill Boulevard would be advisable, He thought the road should be brought in across from San Bernardino Road. He felt parking could` be added behind the Sycamore Inn to compensate for any lost parking to the east, He wanted to get rid of the railroad. Joshua Warren, 7893 Alta Cues , Rancho Cucamonga, stated the traffic problem on Alta Cuesta has become intolerable. He felt Alternatives 5` or S offered a; partial solution to the problem of through traffic and favored Alternative 5 because it was the least expensive. He felt people would not use the alley behind the Sycamore Inn because of the speed bumps. Rat Lewis, 835 Camino Sur, ;Rancho Cucamonga, asked the Planning Commission to reaffirm Alternative 4, because shutting down the traffic for the convenience of those living on Alta Cuesta made it too inconvenient for the other sidents on Red Hill . Ronda Hatley stated she had>a townhouse project south of Baker. She wondered if residents would have to go to Carnelian and make a U-turn to get to her development. Wayne McLaughlin, 7939 Camino Predera , Rancho Cucamonga, supported Alternative 4. Dale Frisby, 7904 Valle Vista, Rancho Cucamonga, supported Alternative 4. He felt the median would create other problems. John Cagle, 8508 calle Quebrada, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the installation of median would add 2.4 miles to his commute, and he supported Alternative 4. Helen Zwisslbr, 7879 Sierra Vista , Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned that emergency vehicles would be 'delayed in reaching residences on Red Hill if the than was installed. She supported Alternative 4. Planning Commission Minutes -1 April 1 `, 1989 Elizabeth Balvis , 8166 Foothill Boulevard, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she owned; the liquor store at Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill . She felt it Wes not necessary to change the align nt and felt the City should only prohibit left turn lanes from Red Hill Country 'Club drive onto Foothill Boulevard. Chairman McNiel asked how many additional residents in the audience had no new comments but were in support of Alternative 4. Approximately B-B people raised their hands. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel awed the timing ;on the Amendment. Mr. Rougeau responded that if the Planning Commission acted this evening,' staff punned to take the matter to City Council on May B, Commissioner Chitiea stated she still favored the connection to Grove. However, because that option was not available, she felt Alternative 4 was best. She felt the issue of public safety was of paramount importance as expressed by the Foothill Fire prevention District and, the Central School District. She wanted a left turn signal of reasonable, not minimal , length. Commissioner Blakesley felt the current alignment created a problem because it was too close to Grove, He felt adding a median and leaving the streets in their current locations' would not solve any problems. He felt Alternative 6 would place a heavy burden on the intersection of Foothill! Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue. He favored Alternative 4. Commissioner F..merick felt a significant burden would be imposed on residents of Red "Hill by adopting Alternatives 5 or 6. He felt having to wait for a left-turn arrow with Alternative 4 would discourage some of the through traffic, Commissioner Tolstoy felt 4 was the only viable alternative, so+ long as a left turn lane could be constructed long enough to accommodate the traffic. He felt it+was not practical to require residents to go down the 'street and make a -turn, He felt the letters from the Fire Protection District and School District should be considered. Chairman McNiel felt that if a break was provided in the median for emergency traffic , it would be used by residents and commuters as ll. He felt the current transitio on Foothill for vehicles turning left to go south on Grove and those turning left to +go north on Red Hill Country Club Drive s o co` d felt the comments from the residents tonight showed strong support for Alternative 4 and he also favored Alternative 4. Lion: Moved by Chtiea seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the 'Resolution recommending Alternative 4i for the Environmental Assessment and Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Amendment 8 -C . Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -1 - April 1 , 1989 AYES. COMMISSIONERS: RLAKESLEY-, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTCY ES: C ISSICNERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried 10,40 P.M. - Planning Commission Recessed 1055 P.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 1143 - LACY - A' suv s on o acres o an into-_ pa e-Is in es ential Development District, located on the south side of Hamilton Street, east of Hermosa Avenue - APN. C - C1- 3. Betty Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer`, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Danny Pierce, GVW Engineering, Inc., project engineer, said they agreed with the staff report and he was available to answer questions. Terri Brooks, 1031 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, asked what type of residences would be constructed. She was concerned that toxic wastes may have been dumped on the property in the past. She was concerned because the site nest to a kindergarten and she wanted to be sure dirt was kept under control and the children would not be able to enter the property. She stated traffic was congested in the area and it would be increased, by the construction traffic. Michael Jones, 10354 Mignonette Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned about traffic congestion® He requested ' single story houses be constructed because the grading on the property s higher than his adjacent home. Pierce stated detached 'single family homes would be built-, but the homes had not been designed as yet. He said there was a block wall next to the school and construction fencing would be put up behind the sidewalk, so children would not have access to the site. Commissioner Chitea asked when construction wes projected to begin if the project were approved. Mr. Pierce responded they hoped to begin in 4-6 months. Chairman McNiel asked if a soils report would be required. Ir. Pierce responded affirmatively. Planning Commission Minutes -14- April 12, 1989 i Chairman Mc Niel asked if that would answer the toxics concern. Commissioner° Tolstoy stated that sails reports en ally only address; compaction. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated recent legislation requires finding previous uses for the land,; which should uncover previous ;toxic users. Otto kroutil , Deputy City Planner, stated that toxics are generally only found at former industrial sites, and those locations are identified on a map,' against which all projects are checked. Jack Corrigan, GVW Engineering, Inc ., stated that lending institutions require sign off that them are no toxics present. Chairman McNiel suggested minimum grading be used to help cut down on the dust erosion. He stated that if two-story houses were used, they could be set forward on the lots to minimize impact on adjacent homes. Ms. Brooks stated the fend neat to the kindergarten was only S feet high. She was concerned that if construction started in 6 months, it would be very win Mr. kroutil stated that four lots or less go through staff review. He stated that erosion control and fencing are standard items that are required. Ms. Brooks stated that buses have a difficult time getting through the traffic and with construction next to a school , every precaution must be taken. Mr'. Pierce stated the construction trucks would probably use Hermosa. Blearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel stated that eventually 19th Street would be fully improved, and signalized and that would help alleviate the traffic congestion. He stated that every precaution would be taken to condition the development properly. tion: Moved by T lstoy, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution; approving Environmental Assessment and.. Tentative Parcel Map 11473. Motion carried by the following vote- AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NE -carried Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to continua the meeting beyond 11:00 P.M. Planning Co mission Minutes ; -is- April 12, 1989 J. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 9 01 - SHELIY' S RESTAURANT - The review of providing Mi enterta n n an conjunction wa re's aurant use, located at8038 Haven Avenue, Suite E. Torn Crahn, Assistant Planner, presented tWstaf'f report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. John Marquez, General Manager, asked if it weld be possible to expand the scope of the Resolution to allow entertainment any night of the week and during happy hour, times, so that if they should with to provide such entertainment in the future they would not have to apply for a new permit. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how much business was for the bar only. 1 l r' alcohol related d _sales. ' revenue s f from alco r Marquez stated that of their He estimated that perhaps S of their business was bar only, He said they proposed no dancing and no cover charge. Hearing; no further testimony, the public hearing was closed, Commissioner Chitiea stated she supported allowing music any night and removing the; limit on hours. She stated they were not proposing any uses; which she felt would bring in an undesirable element. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed. Chairman McNiel stated that he envisioned the center as an entertainment complex He was not opposed to expansion of the hours, suggesting that Shelly's may wish to have music during brunch. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, ;to adopt the Resolution approving Entertainment Permit' 9-01, with modification to remove the restrictions on hours and days. Motion carried by the following vote : AYES: C MIS.SIONE S: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLST'O ES: COMMISSIONERS: NE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSES ENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT'S AMENDMENT 89-01 - CITY OF ques a acres o e eve rip n Districts map rom ilium Residential ' (8-14 dwelling units per acre) t Low Medium Residential 4-8 dwelling units per ac )', located approximately 600 feet south of Lemon Avenue, 470 feet north of 'Highland Avenue on the east side of Archibald Avenue - APN: 01- 541. Planning Commission Minutes' -16- April 12, 1989 Jeff Gravel ,!' Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing, Terri Brooks;, 10331 orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, asked if a light would be installed at the intersection of Lemon and Archibald.' Russ Maguire , City Engineer, stated a light was planned and would probably be under construction in December. Hearing; no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea Felt that in the interest of consistency the Amendment should be adopted. Motion, Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and Development Districts Amendment - 1. Motion carried by the following vote : AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CNl TI EA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTO NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT, COMMISSIONERS: N -carried L. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-04 - DELAPi RA - A request to establish the sae of hardiquor or on_ to consumption at Eel ipe 's, an existing restaurant of 2,360 square feet on .85 acres of land in the Community Commercial District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan (Subarea ) , looted in the Miller's Outpost Center at 8017 Archibald Avenue - APN: 1C77-EI- 9. Cynthia Kinser, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, as well as a letter from an employee of a nearby shop opposing the sale of hard liquor. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing Felipe Del apiedra, applicant, stated they run a family restaurant. Chairman McNiel asked if he planned to increase his hours of operation. Mr. Belapieda stated he would possibly increase his hours in the summer. Commissioner Chitiea asked > for comment regarding the letter from the nearby shop employee. r. Delapiedra, stated he was not aware of any ` problems caused by his customers. Planning Commission Minutes - 7- April 12, 1989 Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick felt the sale of liquor and Mexican food was, a natural ' combination and it would help the restaurant business. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed. Lion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional ' Use Permit 8 -C4, with modification : to remove the restriction on hours of sale. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TCLSTCY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried M. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 1659 BL TON - A request to delete a portion of the locaT-t-r-a-i-F-s-y-s-te-m—A4ja—C6iit o f5i proposed Community Frail on the south side of 24th Street; for a subdivision of 135 single family lots nd three common lots on 67.67 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (1-2 dwelling units per acre) ;within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and 24th' .Street - 'APN: 225-111-38 and ' 9. Steve Hayes, ;Assistant Planner, presented the staff port. Chairman McNiel opened the public hewing. Wayne Blanton, applicant, stated he was available to answer questions Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick felt the area was better turned over to the homeowners to avoid falling into disrepair, Commissioner Chitiea stated that as the development did not consist of equestrian lots at this location, she felt it wes appropriate for equestrian users to utilize the adjacent Community Trail . Lion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution` approving Modification` to Tentative Tract 12659. tion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY' ES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE _carried Planning Commission Minutes -18- April 12, 198 NEW BUSINESS N. MODIFICATION TO THE VIRGINIA BARE PARKING STUDY - A review of mo i to t 'are parking concept and projected parking demand for the Virginia Dare Center. Dan Coleman,, Senior Planner, stated - staff was requesting that the item be pulled to allow time for review of the parking study that had been submitted. Chairman McNiel requested that the parking study view be completed prior to Planning Commission review of the proposed additional building. O IRECTOR'S REPORTS Nll RI SPECIFIC PLAN - A request to initiate an amendment 1 d O� I _..UST__.. .. C _ to the. an_ q, use regu a t i on s fbr 955a rea 7. Brett Horner, Assistant Planner, presented the staff ;report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. David Left, associated with development of Arrow Business Center stated Mid Valley Management Company was the property management company which operates the facility for them. He provided picture's of facilitie,s leased to two small general contractors and one small plumbing contractor. He s tta ted they had discussed the concept with Brad Buller. He said their typical units were BOO' feet and all units have office space with some industrial space. He said they do' not rent to welders" or cabinetmakers, because their uses would be noisy and dusty, He said their proposed users were generally not on site except for the office staff, He requested that the use be allowed in the zone ; without a Conditional Use Permit. Jack Corrigan, BCE Development, original master planners of the business park, stated that when the property was originally developed, provisions were' made to avoid having contractors' storage yards in the area. He stated; that when the Arrow Industrial Condominiums originally built, ' small general contractors were allowed and there had never been any problems . He felt the modification was warranted. He felt the management corporation would police' any weathered trucks being stored on-site . Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the C &Rs restrict outdoor storage at Arrows Industrial Condominiums . Mr. Left stated that their leases prohibit outdoor storage. There were no further public comments, Planning Commission Minutes -19- April 1 , 1989 Co issioner Tolstoy stated he felt the proposed use was acceptable so long as the wording 'prohibited outdoor storage and equipment other than trucks or service vehicles. Chairman McNiel stated that electrical and plumbing contractors sometimes buy old Langendorf panel trucks and haul them to construction sites to store their' equipment. He did not want those types, of 'trucks left at the; business centers. Co ` issioner Tolstoy suggested the ' wording should exclude than type of vehicle. Commissioner Blakesley asked if parking ; of a certain; duration ` coup be prohibited. Commissioner Chitiea asked who would enforce this provision. Commissioner Tolstoy stated an inoperable truck would constitute outside storage; and if there was; no way to make a ' distinction of the kinds of vehicles that could be parked here, he would be against the Amendment. He felt if there was some way to word the Pmendment to restrict the inoperable panel tacks, he would support the change. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that City Code already prohibits the storage of imperative vehicles at Commercial/I ustrial sites. Chairman McNiel invited fir. Corrigan to respond. r. Corrigan stated that as City Code already prohibits the storage of< imperative vehicles, he felt the property owners would do an adequate job of policing. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested the Co mission could direct a modification of the definition of building maintenance services and could prohibit overnight parking in conjunction with those uses... Chairman McNiel stated= that he did not want the City get into a problem with enforcement. Mr. Corrigan stated that CC&Rs are one of the toughest things to enforce`. He felt the quality of the project would be the determining factor. He stated that the applicant did not build and sell , they managed the properties. There were no further public comments. It was the consensus of the planning Commission to direct staff to initiate an Industrial Specific plan Amendment to expand the definition of the Building Maintenance Services category to pewit small building contractor uses. Planning Commission Minutes April 12, 1989 P. PLANNING DIVISION WORK PROGRAM 19 9/9O Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea felt the Planning Department was being pushed to wvrk on projects quickly for ; the benefit of others and that was cutting down on available staff time for other critical projects. She felt quality was More important than quantity, even if it meant a slowdown in processing of projects. Chairman McNiel stated that special projects were still needed because they covered critical areas, and he hoped that 'there would be a balance of working on special projects along with processing applications. We said the development community would have to understand that with the temporary staff shortage it would take longer to process in order to allow time to adequately' review projects. Commissioner Toltoy stressed quality review including sitevisits and inspections and agreed slowing the process may be appropriate. r Krotil stated that according to the Building Department, permits are up'' significantly this year, which means that playa checks and inspections have greatly increased;. r Buller suggested that he would be looking into the review process and would be proposing options to the Planning Commission to maintain the level of service desirable. One example Haight be to licit the number of items placed on the Design Review Committee agendas to three per side. ` The purpose of this would be to lessen the burden on the Committee and staff to allow adequate quality review time. Chairman McNiel stated he felt in-house special projects were critical . Commissioner Tolstoy stated he felt the Hillside Grading Ordinance s critical . COMMISSION BUSINESS There was no additional commission business at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no additional public comments. ADJOURNMENT Planning Commission Minutes - 1- April 12, 1989 Motion; Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Slakesley, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 1 A.M. planning Connission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, p Brad Bul er Sec re ta ry I, Planning Comnission Minutes - - April 12, 1989 ti CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION I :UTES Adjourned tin April 6, 1989 Terra Vista Town Center Workshop Chairman Larry iel called the special workshop meetingorder at : C p.m. at the Rancho Cucamonga Nei hb orhood Center, 9791 Arrow i Rancho Cucamonga. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT David Blakesley, Suzanne, hitiea, Bruce E ei , Larr ,. McNi COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT Peter Tolstoy Staff Present: Brad Buller, CityPlanner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Otto routil , Deputy City Planner ; Debra ier, Associate Planner; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer Tom Bond, of Architects PacificaS described the concept of the new Montgomery Ward corporate image. He stated the new style includes ree entries, the main entry to the store , Electric Street and Kids Store. The main entry was covered with a truss reminiscent of Green and Green style architecture set atop two large con terra stone columns. con terra 'stone is also included as a wainscot across the front wall the entire height of the entry is see- through lass. r!. Bond stated that. the Electric Street entry includes a trellis set at skew to the building face. Colors used at this entry include teal green and re d- r. Bond stated that the Kids Store entry is more traditional and comes close to etin e design goal of the project. The elements are of a smaller scale and are very symmetrical . The general response by the Planning Co mission was that the design was disjointed and discontinuous. Specifically, they had the following o nts- 1. The concept of the truss at the main entry is acceptable. They suggested that the truss be scaled too smal 1 , and suggested wider/taller structure with modification to the building face. P. The Electric Street entry is not acceptable as proposed and should be redesigned. The Commission suggested deleting trellis and using an arcade, or utilizing arches with portico details. The Commission felt that adding the arches would provide an opportunity tD add detail and richness. element should be considered as well as a new palette of colors. 3. The'Co issio oid out that the southwest elevation will be an important element to the Foothill Boulevard streetscape and would need considerable attention. . The si n ge concepts shorn were acceptable and actually help break the building area. The Electric Street and Kids StDre signs e should be "maximum height of ". . The combination of the individual design elements would need to be integrated to create a wre unified project. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P Respectfully submitted, ABra�dBu er City Planner Planning Commission 2- April 6, 1989 CITE" OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting 'arch 30, 1989 ETI ANNA NORTH OR SHOP Chairman Larry MdNiel called the adjourned March 30, 1989 Etiwanda North Planning Commission Workshop to order at approximately 4:30 p.m. at the Neighborhood Center, located at 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga. The adesign chi tedtura content of the i to ' review purpose of .the meeting a Specific Plan. POLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: ` David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce` Emer ick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstdy STAFF PRESENT: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner; Milo Ertt, Associate Planner; Brad Buller, City Planner-, Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; doff Gravel , Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Larry Henderson, Senior Planner; Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner; Betty Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer, Beverly Nissen, Assistant' Planner; Bill Silva, Deputy 'City Engineer Miki Bratt, Associate Planner, gave a brief update ;on staff' s review of the Specific Plan. She discussed the status of the fiscal analysis, density/unit count, ;flood control land opportunities, grading, green bolt concept, narks and open space and equestrian lot counts. She then asked for an open discussion. Commissioner Emerick stated' that he was very concerned about the use of Day Creek Canyon regarding the use of the land and its access. He felt it should not be restricted, except during the fire season. Joe ili orio, President of the Caryn Company, concurred with Commissioner E erick' and suggested that this be made into a special work item. Commissioner Emerick suggested moving or transferring density away from the canyon area. r. pildrio ;stated that Landmark Land Company now owns the land around and in the Bogiand canyon area. He stated that there was a possibility that Landmark` Land Company may consider an open, non-private community plan. s. Bratt suggested that the development line be pulled down from the hillside to be consistent with the National Forest boundary. There was a general concurrence that this concept be considered. Commissioner Farerick suggested a parking lot trail-head be located further down from the development line, and provide an open space corridor for access into the canyon area. He felt Knoll l Park 'would be a logical spot for trail- head parking, with a hiking trail maintained to the gaging' station. s ratt stated that the 'Forest Service is suggesting that the open space corridor connect the Bog and the 'canyon. Commissioner Chit ea questioned the breakdown on the number of equestrian lots that will be allotted in the planned area and requested that a more detailed analysis of equestrian lots be prepared. Mr. Cilorio responded that of the total lots in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan area will be eligible for equestrian use. Commissioner Chitiea questioned the location of the equestrian center indicating that the east side of the Specific Plan should be considered for the equestrian center. Mr. Cilorio responded that the equestrian center was tentatively planned on the eastern edge of the Day Creek spreading grounds. However, the center could possibly be located closer to the center of the plan area, rasing Flood; Control land* Mr. gilorio suggested that Flood Control, City staff, Caryn Company and the consortium form a task force to study use of Flood Control lands. Larry Henderson, Senior Planner, indicated that because other agencies will need to review the plans, the concepts being discussed, using Flood Control lands, should appear on the plans as soon as possible. Commissioner Tolstoy had a concern regarding the discussion of concepts which are not on paper. For eagle, the gaging station is not located on most of the naps presented by the { and/Plan/Design 'Croup. Mr, giorio also stated that to complete the financial planning' for this project area, density is the most important. issue. In addition, he stated that it would be difficult to tell the members ' of the consortium that denrsitios may be reduced by annexing into the City. He stressed that the consortium is looking for the City to allow what the County allows at its; base level of density. Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated that the Commission could only give a general indication that the density numbers are in the right ball park. He stated that the Commission can and will make a definite decision during public' hearings. Mr, gilorio stated that it was very important to lock in the density numbers and establish a financial plan as soon as possible so that it could become' effective July 1, 1989, the same time Eti anda Highlands begins to sell homes. He stated Fti anda Highlands will ;set a precedent for the rest of the project area in terms of taxation. Planning Commission Minutes March 30, 1989 Commissioner Mc Niel asked the difference in density numbers between the City and County. rr. Henderson responded that the numbers are ;fairly equal , except for• the Tracy property which has the biggest single difference. He stated the County' s density is RES 3, or 3 dwelling units per acre, while the City has 3 different designations on this particular property: flood control , open space, and 2 dwelling units per acre. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the adequacy of the grading plan. He also questioned whether the grading plan would allow less density than the Specific ; Plan indicates. r ilnrio stated that if the City accepts the grading concept presented in the Specific Plan, and the outcome of the concept will only; allow a lower density, he would accept the loss in density. Commissioner Tols oy questioned if the streets follow the contour lines of the topography. Jess Harris responded the collector streets primarily follow the contours'. Bill Silva, ,Deputy City Engineer, stated that are still some outstanding issues that need to be addressed ;by the City traffic study. r. lilorio stated that he felt these should be dealt with at a staff level . He briefly reviewed some of the revisions concerning architectural guidelines, development regulations, parks, and open space. The meeting was adjourned at -35 p.m. with the next greeting tentatively scheduled for May 4, 1989. The applicant was requested to prepare and submit the graft Specific Plan document in a completed force for review by staff at lust two weeks prior to the next greeting. Respectfully submitted, 44 ran Bulole Secretary Planning Commission Minutes 3- March 30, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting March 22, 1989 1 Chairman Nciel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Pare Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Niel then led in the pledge ofallegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Bruce Finerick Larry MlcNiel ABSENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Peter Tol toy STAFF PRESENT; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner,; Tom Brahn, Assistant Planner, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Russ Maguire , City Engineer; Debra Meier, Associate Planner;,' Betty Miller, Assistant Civil ' Engineer; Scott Murphy,; Associate Planner; Cindy Norris , Assistant Planner; Gail Sanchez, Secretary; Bill Silva, 'Deputy City Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS Bari Buller, City Planner, announced that the City had received requests from the respective applicants for Items C D, F, C, and L to continue the items. Mr. Buller announced that the Commissioners may Irish to continue Item I to the next meeting, as several Commissioners had stated they would prefer to have the full Commission hear the item. Chairman McNiel presented a Resolution of Commendation to Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, for his years of service. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairman McNlel requested that no action be taken on the February 22, 198 minutes until the three Commissioners present at that meeting could review them, Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Emerick unanimously carried to approve the minutes of March B, 1989. PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1389 - NUNEZ - A residential u r v i s on d s n 3 arni y ots on « -6c s o and in the Low Residential District 2-4 dwelling units; per acre) , located at the northwest coroner of Levan Avenue and London Avenue - APN: 201- 51'-S SD. (Continued from January 25, 1989. ) Chairman McNiel announced that the applicant had requested the item be continued until April 12, 1989.i He asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak regarding Item D, and there was no response, Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13898 to April 12, 1989. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSES ENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAC" 11212 - WAGNER INSUL CO. su v lion o a s o an into garde s n t e n�mum mpac Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the south side of Bth Street, west side of Rochester Avenue APN': 229-251-10, 11, 12, 27,''. & 32 A VARIANCE 88-23 - WAGNER INSTIL CO. - A west for a reduction of the mi n'i mum of s�ze from ac re s to' acres within the Minimum Impact <Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the south side of 8th Street, west side of Rochester Avenue - APN 229- 251-1D, '1 , 1. , 2 , & 3 . Chairman McNiel announced that the applicant had requested the items be continued until April 26, 1989. He asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak regarding Items and G, and there was no response.`- Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11212 and Variance 88-23 to April 26, 1989. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 9-03 - SHOWBIZ PIZZA TIME - reques o es s an area e w t n a staurant oce a t e southeast corner of Foothill ` Boulevard' and Hellman Avenue - APN 20 -21- 2S & 26. Chairman McNiel announced that the applicant had requested the item be continued until April 12, 1989. He asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak regarding Item L?, and there was no response. Motion: Moved by E ' rick, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 89-03 to April 12, 1989. Planning Commission Minutes - - March 22, 1989 I. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89- 7 - A. W. DAVIES - A request for expansion of a non-conforming use a ng square feet of office space to an existing building and warehouse totaling 4,560 square feet on 3.82 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea ) of the 'Industrial Specific Plan, located on the southeast corner of 9th Street and Helms Avenue - APN.' 09-031-5 & 54. Chairman McNiel Mated that the item had been continued from the March 8 meeting and that the Commissioners would prefer to continue the item until April 1 , in order to allow the full Commission to consider the item.' Chairman McNie,l asked if the applicant would agree to the continuance. Lea Davies, applicant, stated they had no objection. Chairman McNiel asked if anyone else in the audience wished to speak regarding Item D, and there was no response® Motion: Moved by 81akesloy, seconded by Emerick , unanimously carried, to continue Minor Development Review 89-07 to April" 12, 1989. CONSENT CALENDAR A. VACATION OF Aiii LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ACCESS EASEMENT _ A request, to vacate a ME55i ' iiiiMinance easement et ' en Wheaton Court and the Southern Pacific Railroad's right-of-way, "located west of Milliken Avenue and north of Base Line Road - APN 202-891- & 39. B. TIME EXTENSION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-45 - AJA - A five lot Master Plan o c re s An ` eve op n o ots an of the Mas ter Plan; Lot P consisting of a 41,600 square foot industrial building on .32 acres and Lot' 3 consisting of a 51,250 'square foot Industrial building on 2.72 acres of land, in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 12) , located on the east side of Pittsburgh, north of 4th Street and south of 6th Street - APN. 9- 633 & 4. C. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND "DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT reques o a n e eve o n s r cf Map from Flo Cofitrol (FC) to Medium Density Residential (M) (8-14 dwelling units per acre) , which encompasses 1.6 acres of land located on the west side of Carnelian Avenue, approximately 1,000 feet south of Calle del Prado - APN: 7-022-64. (Continued from March 8, 1989. ) Item C was removed for discussion. Motion. Moved by 8lksle,y, seconded by Eerick, unanimously carried to adopt Items A and 8 of the Consent Calendar. Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 22, 1989' C. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL <ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CREEL,s -LTD—. ---- Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Stan Scates, Burgundy Creek, Ltd., requested that the Planning Commission continue the item to allow them to present their Design Reviews package to the Planning Commission. Chairman Mc Niel stated he had no;objection' to continuing the project. He felt' the project was in an awkward location which weld require engineering to work up traffic numbers. Ralph Hanson, City Attorney, stated that if the Planning Commission was going to entertain the; possibility of taking any action other than the denial , it would require a public hearing. Therefore, he stated the appropriate action would be to pull the item. Chairman McNiel asked if that would negatively affect the applicant. Brad Buller,; City Planner, Mated that if the Planning Commission would allow the applicant to proceed through Design Review' with his development package, the applicant could then determine whether he wanted to reapproach the Commission with the Development; District Amendment. In that case, both the deve,lopment of the project and the zone change could ` be considered concurrently and .would' be readvertised. It was the consensus of the Commission to pull Resolution of Denial for Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendment 87-12 from the agenda. PUBLIC HEARINGS E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 92 - THE PLIES subdiviMh R 39.5 acres o an In p�rce s in t e nera Industrial District (Subarea B) of the Industrial Specific Plan and the Light Industrial District (Subarea 4) of the Foothill' Boulevard Specific Plan, located; north of Arrow Route, east of the 1-1 Freeway, and south of Foothill Boulevard - APN: 9-0 1- 9 Barye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the s ff report. Chairman McNiel opened` the public. hearing.' Tom Carmody, The Keith Companies, stated he represented Mr. Plies, the applicant. He said they supported the staff report and would be happy to answer any questions. Chairman McNiel asked, 'what was planned for the area. Planning Commission Minutes 4- March 22, 198 Mr Carmody responded that they planned varied uses conforming with the specific plan. Chairman McNiel stated that he wished to go on record as stating that the Planning Commission had rigid architectural , maintenance, landscaping, and screening standards for properties which can be viewed from the freeway. suggested the applicant contact the City Planner for information regarding the 1-15 corridor concepts. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that a condition could be added to the Resolution to reflect that the master plan wes conceptual only and would be subject to future development design review approval . i Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Blakesley concurred with Chairman McNiel that the developer would need to be sensitive to the freeway view. He also stated that screening might' be complicated because of the Edison easements on the property. Lion. Moved by Bla esley, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 9326, with modification to indicate that the master plan was conceptual' only. Motion carried by the following vote AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS- CHIIIEA, TOLSTCIY -carried H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 117 RDIC - A i Ms on 6 acres o an nto parce 5 e Very Low Residential Development District, located at the southwest corner of Hermosa Avenue and Almond Street -' APN:' 1074- 51-Ell. Associated with this is free Removal Permit No. 89-1 . Betty Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked if a fault line had been identified on the property. Ms. Miller responded that the property in the Alquist-Prioo zone, but no fault line had been identified on the property. Scott Murphy, satiate Planner, stated the actual fault line was north of Almond. Chairman Mc Niel opened the public hearing. Jerry Wilson, Civil Engineer for the applicant, stated he Wes available to answer any questions, Planning Commission Minutes - - March 22, 1989 Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Blakesley stated he was 'concerned regarding the plotting of the units relative to the proposed trail , as the trail bisected the lots approximately 130 feet back. He stated the Trails Committee had discussed the matter and it appeared not much could be dune regarding placement of the tail , so the developer would need to be sensitive to the problem when he plotted the houses, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that much of the back half of the parcels was in the flood control flood sway, so those portions of the lots were not buildable land Chairman McNiel reopened the public hewing to ask the developer how he planned to provide access to the back portions of the lots. Mr' Filson stated the developer planned to gate across the trail to allow access, ' but the flood Tway through the area had a deep swale and it would be difficult to make a walking trail to get down into the Mood way and up into the other side. Brad Buller, City Planner,; stated that a condition would be placed on the design of the trail to require an access gate on both sides of the trail to allow access from the 'home site through the trail to the back portion of the lot. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Blake le , seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11738. Motion carried;by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, IMCN EL ES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, '`TDLSTDY _carried J. MODIFICATION TO VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 13823 - DEC - A request t c ange a prey ous - approve' ract map rom a one-lot subdivision to a five-lot ' subdivision for the development of 265 condominium units on 18.9 acres of land in theMedium-High Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre) , located east of Haven Avenue on the south side of Lemon Avenue - A N: 1` 2 1-79. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Blakesley' asked the percentage of substandard size units in the development to the west. Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 22, 1989 Mr. Murphy did not have that information available. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. ; Rick Eisenberg, Devcal Industries, stated that the property to the west did not have any units smaller than 550 square feet. He stated they were requesting the subdivision of the lots only for financing purposes and to allow escrows for the buyers to close quicker. Chairman McNiel Mated that the City had revised the minimum size to 650 square feet because many smaller units were being proposed. He was uncomfortable with the' 55 square feet units. Mr`. Eisenberg stated that the other five floor plans were considerably larger and there were only 47 units that were 535 square feet. Chairman McNiel asked 'how many buildings were involved. Mr. Eisenberg stated there were 5 different building types, three of which' contained the smaller units.. He said they had processed through a second plan check and grading was already started. He said a redesign for larger units would require a significant amount of rework. Chairman McNiel asked what aevcal would do if the Modification was conditioned to require larger units. r Eisenberg stated they would then respectfully request that their application be withdrawn. He said they would prefer to deal with the lenders' on financing than to redesign the tract. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Finerick felt that as the developer was merely asking for a change for financing purposes and the development process was so far advanced, it would be a hardship on the developer to require strict adherence to the new standards. Commissioner Blakesley stated he would like larger units, but realized that if the modification was denied, the units would still be built at 535 square feet. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded` by Hlakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Modification to Westing Tentative Tract 13823. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIE ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE AISE Tr COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLS OY -carried Planning Commission ission Minutes' -7- March 22, 1989 K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 14011 - PANNON DESIGN res ent a u vision an esign lots on 9.2 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) , located at the southeast corner of Lemon Avenue and London Avenue _ ,APN: 01- - 1 A 22. Associated with this is Tree' Removal Permit No. -1 . Tom Grahn, Assistant ; Planner, presented the staff report along with an addendum suggesting a modified Resolution, which provided for the developer to request reimbursement for one-half the cost of flood control construction; from future development on; the opposite side' of the channel and provided for alternatives for the maintenance of Lot A to be approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney. Commissioner Emerick asked for clarification of the options regarding Lot A. r Grahn stated that the minimum average lot size is 6,000 square' feet. He said that if Lot A was created for access purposes, it would be pawed and could not be considered in the average lot size. Then the minimum ,average lot size would be below 6,000 square feet. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Peter Laden, Pannon Design, stated they were agreeable to all conditions of the project and requested that the Commission approve option A of the Addendum presented this evening'. He stated that the developer felt the requirement for a Homeowners' Association would create a hardship. Chairman McNiel asked the width of Lot 41 if Lot A was removed. Mr. Laden responded that it would be 60 feet. Michael Grant, attorney with Best, Best, and Krieger, stated Pannon had tried to acquire the 44 foot railroad easement parcel to the south and failed. He requested that. the Planning Commission adopt option A, allowing an easement for the access. He felt that since the access strip was so small , it would b difficult to form a Homeowners' Association just to maintain the small area. He stated that if the strip was set up as a Lot 'A, it would require a variance and that would delay the process. Commissioner Blakesley asked if the proposed easement would fall entirely within Lot 41 and would be surfaced with asphalt. Grant stated the easement would fall entirely within Lot 41 and the conditions required that it be pawed and have E foot ` high walls on, both sides. He stated they were not suggesting any changes. r Laden suggested that if the easement was adopted, it should be left as a greenwa,y and not paved and walled off until the developer of the lot to the south would need it. He indicated Pannon would be willing to improve the area when needed. He suggested adding instructions in the escrow; that it was an Planning Commission Minutes - - March 22, 1989; easement for future development, and suggested that the owner of Lot 41 should maintain it. Chairman Mc Niel stated that it would constitute a large piece of land and he felt it was unfair to ask one homeowner to maintain it but not be able to use it. He said that in the addendum to the staff report, a mention was made that the developer had offered to eliminate one •lot.' He asked which lot would be eliminated. Mr. Laden stated the offer was made in a discussion prior to being advised by Mr. Grant that a better solution would be to allocate the easement to Lot 41, which would allows the lots to be in conformance without+ elimination of one lot. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner glakesley felt the easement would be used just enough to be a nuisance to any adjacent owner. He stated that even if an easement was created, the land`` would still be removed from the usable area of the tract, and, he favored elimination of one lot, Commissioner Emerick stated one lot needed to be eliminated just to be at the minimum average lot size. Commissioner Blakesley agreed that a Homeowners ' Association; should not be; formed just to maintain the minimum area. Commissioner Emerick agreed that Homeowners' Association administrative costs would be greater than the maintenance costs'. Chairman Mc Niel asked if anything was planned for the railroad right-of-way land if they should obtain the parcel . Mr. Gratin stated the developer 's Alternative "A" tentative tract 'map would merely extend the adjoining lots. He stated that if Pannon could not obtain the parcel , the current property owner would have the option to develop the land. Dan Coleman, Senior Manner, stated that it did not seem likely that a building could be proposed to fit on 'a parcel that shape. He stated it was' re likely that it might be used for agricultural purposes. Commissioner glakesley stated he would like to see the average usable lot size' increased. r. Coleman stated that the strip of land could' become a fire 'hazard, because it would be totally surrounded by development and it would be difficult for need abatement control . He said that without a paved access, the fire department would have a difficult time getting in to combat a fire. Commissioner Blakesley stated he would be in favor of allowing an easement, but requiring the loss of a lot. Planning Commission Minutes -9- March 22, 1989 Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, asked who would own the easement. Commissioner Blakesley stated he had no objections to the easement being owned' by Lot 41. Mr. Hanson stated that the revised- conditions contained a provision for acceptance of an alternative to the owners " Association, subject to approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. r. Coleman stated that staff recommended the item be continued if the Planning Commission wished to modifythe map, in order to allow the developer time to modify the map and staff time to consider the conditions. Chairman Chair n MlcNiel supported continuance, as it would also allow the developer to attempt once more to obtain the former railroad right-of-wady. r. Hanson stated that the applicant would need to consent to a continuance. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to allow the applicant to comment. Mfr. Laden stated they had already been in process for one year and that he would like the approval of the Planning Commission for option A this evening. Chairman McNiel stated that the Planning Commission was leaning toward adapting option C, a continuance to allow time for submission of revised plans with one lot eliminated. He said the additional time would also, allow for more time to attempt to acquire the rail road parcel . Mr. Laden stated that the owner had commented he would not sell the parcel for $1 000,0C4. He felt it wes not his fault and it was unfair to require that he give up one more lot and wait another 'month before being able to proceed.` Chairman McNiel stated that the minimum standards are set so that when the City is built out, it will be liveable He stated that the problem was also not the fault of the City and he favored continuing the item. r Laden stated ;that he could not Trait for the owner of the south parcel to sell and he would therefore instruct his engineer to drop a lot. He sta te d he would like action tonight, but he would be willing to continue the item i necessary. Russ Maguire , City Engineer, suggested approving a base tentative tract ma p with 47 lot ,and the Al terna to "A" tract map, Which would include the railroad parcel and a total of 48 lots. That way the developer would net have to return to the Planning Commission for approval if he should be successful i obtaining the extra land. The developer would merely record whichever map he wanted. He felt that if the additional land was not obtained, it was important to keep; the access easement open for weed abatement and emergency fire services access and that if one lot ' owned the easement, they would use the land. He therefore felt that it was unfair to burden one property owner to maintain the easement. Planning Commission Minutes -10- March 22, 1989 Commissioner Blakesley agreed to allowing two alternates to the tract map. Commissioner Emerick asked if it world be necessary for the Commission determine which lot was dropped. r. Coleman stated that the Co mission could approve the Vesting Tentative Tract with a condition that one lot be dropped for one alternate and the Alternate A shown in the staff report as the other alternate , or they could' continue the item to see which lot would be dropped. Chairman McNiel stated that dropping one lot would definitely improve the project. Commissioner Emerick felt it was not necessary to see which lot was dropped. Nor. Laden s to ted ;that if one lot was dropped they would prefer to drop a lot from the cul-de-sac street. be suggested dedicating the easement to the City Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that the City did not want the ownership of`the easement. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated that it would be necessary to know the substantial configuration of the lots at the time the Tentative Tract Map was adopted because the final map has be in conformance with the tentative map. Chairman McNiel asked if it would be possible to adopt the Resolution subject to Engineering and Planning approval , r. Silva suggested calling a recess to allow the applicant to advise which lot would be eliminated, and to allow staff to consider the wording of the conditions. 8:30 - Manning Commission Recessed 8:40 - Planning Commission Reconvened Mr. Maguire suggested that Alternate A be adopted s an alternate to the Tentative Tract hap. He suggested the basic tentative be adopted with the condition that one of the lots from Lots 13 through 18 be eliminated, with the area redistributed to provide for S; lots instead of 6 in that area,' He suggested the access be Lot A with a change in wording to provide that the ownership and maintenance of Lot A be established to the satisfaction of the City planner, City Engineer, and City Attorney._ Lion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Vesting Tentative Tract 14011 with modifications to allow adoption of basic map with one lot eliminated and an alternate p of 48 lots with the addition of the former railroad right-of-way Planning Commission Minutes -1 - March 22, 1989 and with ownership and maintenance of Lot A to be established to the satisfaction of the City Planner, City Engineer, and City Attorney. Motion carried by the following vote : AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLA ESLEY, EMERICk, MCNIEL NOES: C ISSICNERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TQL Off` -carried OLD BUSINESS M. SAPPHIRE- TRAIL - Review of proposed community trail improvements on the st iiTe-W—S-apphire Strut, south of Banyan Street. Sett Murphy , Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Blakesley asked the height of the top rail on the 3 foot fence. rMurphy responded that the top rail height was approximately 2 feet 8 inches. Commissioner Emerick asked the purpose of the breaks. r* Murphy stated they were to provide an escape hatch to give people an opportunity to exit the trail area if they saw >a horse coming in the opposite direction. Chairman McNiel asked if the current break in the fence at the local equestrian trail would remain. Mr. Murphy stated the, proposal was that the break should remain open, with staff monitoring it. If it s felt the break causing a problem, it would then be closed. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Linda Valenti , 6278 Marble Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the break points were needed not only to allow people exit the trail when a horse Vas approaching, but also to allow pedestrians to exit the trail when meeting children riding bikes. She stated the fence had already been vanda,lized, with one of the posts already broken and one of the rails down. She felt that with the large number of children in the area the fence would be subjected to future b u se There were no further public comments. Commissioner Rlakesley felt the fence was a handsome and functional improvement since its modification with the increased sight corridors. He did Planning Commission Minutes _i March 22, 1989 not support any additional breaks. He did not support the lower height of the fence because he felt a horse might trip over the fence if it bolted. He felt the height should be kept at 4 feet 6 inches. He agreed the local trail should be kept open unless it proved to be a problem. Commissioner Emerick stated that it appeared the Trails Committee and residents had agreed that a 3 foot fence would be appropriate. He felt the members of the Trails Committee would have more expertise than he did and since they were willing to compromise down to the 3 foot height, he would be willing; to accept the 3 foot fence with the 2 rail design. He didn 't like the idea of brow points and felt that people with strollers could use the sidewalk on the opposite side of the street, « Murphy stated the Trails Committee would prefer no breaks in the fence.' He stated a number of different fend heights were considered and the 3 foot fence was a compromise agreed to by the residents and a representative from the riding club based upon direction from City Council to explore the idea of lowering the height. Chairman Mc Niel agreed with the height and concurred that no additional breaks should be added® He felt that if a horse got spooked near a break , it would run into the street and be hit. He felt the height should be lowered in this case only, and this area should not be used as a precedent for 'other trails in the City. He stated he would be inclined to dose off the break at the local' equestrian hail . Commissioner glakesley felt that if someone was exiting the local trail in a pickup the sight line was acceptable, 'but a car could have problems with ;sight line visibility. Chairman McNiel asked if the 30-inch height would help the sight' line visibility from a: car. r Murphy stated the lower fence could help, He also stated that the Trails Committee recommended ' that ` the lower fence height would apply only to this section of the trail and that the City should explore other options for other sections tion of the City. Brad Buller, City planner, asked if the other Commissioners agreed that the design of the fence in this section should be for this section only. Commissioners Blakesley and Fmerick concurred that the fence design was for this section only. Chairman McNiel summarized that the Commission was at a -1 consensus on the height being lowered to 3 feet, and a -C consensus on providing for no additional breaks. Mr. Murphy stated the residents would like the fence pulled back away from the local equestrian trail corner to provide for better sight'line'visibility. Planning Commission Minutes -13- March 22, 198 Co' issioner Emerick asked if there had been any discussion regarding closing; the local trail access. Mr. Murphy stated the residents have indicated they do not wish to see the trail access closed because they use the area for access by construction vehicles for building of pools, back yard maintenance, etc. Commissioner Emerick stated that. he felt it was good for the homeowners to have access to the rear of their lots. o issioner Elakesley asked if the southern boundary of the tract had any other rear-yard access except off of Sapphire. Mir. Murphy confirmed they did not have other access. ' Commissioner Blakesley felt the trail access should be kept open. Commissioner Emerick asked who maintains the tail . Murphy stated the local homeowners have to maintainthe tail . Commissioner erick felt that vehicles traveling over the area would help to keep weeds down. The Commissioners concurred -1 to leave the access open, with Monitoring tD be conducted by staff to see if any problems arose. Chairman McNiel invited further public comment. Ms. Valenti ; stated that she had spoken ;to the S Ms District At rney 's office and had been informed that because the easement had been in existence for over 7 years it must remain open. Russ Maguire , City Engineer, stated that he felt state law would allow the access to be closed off so lore as there was another access. NEW BUSINESS' N. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13748 - GRIFFIN HOMES - The design rev ew o u i 1 d ng a ev at I Ions an e r e sI a pan dr a previously approved Tentative Tract Map consisting of 10 single family lots on 28.8 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District (4 g dwelling units per acre) , located north of Highland, west of Milliken - AP'N: 1- 71-55 Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner , presented the staff report and suggested adding a condition to provide for tint or texture treatment be added to all driveways or that 15% of the units provide a bonus room to the garage. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Planning Commission Minutes -1 - March 22, 1989 Tian Beedle, Griffin Homes, stated they had gone through a number of ichanges as 'result of staff and Design Review comments. He said they had no problem with the condition added. He said the tract was an approved 'tract, and they re merely changing units to add a new model . Chairman Mc Niel asked if Griffin planned to add the enhanced driveway paving or the bonus room to the garage.- Mr. Beedle stated that the bonus room expansion was not possible because the floor plans in the garage area did not provide for a good transition and also the market was geared toward 3-car garages. He said he understood that Design Review wished to see a modified front, and they were planning to add brick agent paving in front of the units, Commissioner Blakesley` stated that Design Review was looking for an interior -car garage with an exterior look ofliving space plus a -car garage® Mr. Beedle stated they were willing to put, in driveway patterns of texture or back and that would give more character to the houses. Brad Buller,' City Planner, suggested that the Planning Commission might wish to consider side windows in some of the garages. Commissioner Finerick felt a window in the garage was a good idea, because it added interest to'a blank, stucco wal1 . Mr. Beedle asked' if they could examine and return to staff and perhaps; alternate with some models hawing windows and others' having brick patterns in the driveway. There were no further public comments. Chairman Mc Niel stated he would like to see enhanced driveway patterns on all units and add windows to some units, He suggested they return to the City Planner for approval on the windows. Motion: Moved by Emerick seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review for Tentative Tract ` 13748 with modifications to provide for enhanced pawing to be reviewed by Design Review and addition of garage windows to selected units to be approved by the City Planner. Motion' carried by the following vote : AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIEL NO ES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: EHITIEA, 'TOLSTOY carried Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 1989 D. DESIGN REVIEW FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-04 - DPEUHEL - The design review o a se -serve 'car , ; u e s op, and auto shop, on acres of land within the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at the southwest corner of Haven and Lemon - APN: 201- 2-48. Debra Meier, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Jerry Greubel , applicant, stated he had been in the car wash business 'since 1978 and had developed another ear wash in 198 stated he had meti with the residents of the area and they had raised three concerns. (1 ) visibility from the can wash, ( ) visual screening of the car vash, and ) hours of operation He felt they had addressed the concerns adequately . They agreed' to restrict visibility from the car wash by installing a 6 foot high wrought iron fence 10 feet inside the car wash property line. fore, people could not walk right up to the wall adjacent to the residences. He proposed a row of trees between the wrought iron fending and the block well of the residences to provide the visual screening. He said he was still meeting with the residents to determine what trees would be most suitable and he preferred to have approval at a City staff level .- He proposed that hours of operation be limited to 6 OD a.m. to 11. D p.m. for the car gash and regular business 'hours for the rest' of the center. He proposed turning off the lights except for one bay and; security lighting at 1400 p.m. He stated the police department had indicated they did not want a solid row of trees along Lemon Avenue to ''block the view, but preferred to have the trees clustered. He said the fire department had indicated they did not want any access restricted. He stated the auto plaza had two' other tenants. Commissioner erick asked the hours ofoperation of the other tenants. He asked if the other tenants would be policing the car wash. r. Greubel stated the other tenants included a pizza parlor and a video store wfiich would be open various hours. Fred Deaux , 11036 Shaw Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that three quarters of the current residents did not five in the area at the time the project vas first reviewed and therefore had not had an opportunity to object to the car sh when it was proposed. He asked where the lighting would be placed. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated the detailed lighting plan was not included as part of this process. Chairman McNiel stated the bays would be lit and there would be accent lighting on the buildings and parking lot lighting. Mr* Deaux stated the lighting should not flood, into surrounding homes. He felt b.gD a.m. to 11: 4 p.m. would not be appropriate hours , and they should be changed to 7:00 or 8:00 a.m for opening and 10 DD p.m. for closing. He wanted to see the hours tied to the Conditional Use Permit in order to give the City leverage. He also wanted a timed shut-off switch so that there would Planning Commission Minutes -16- March 22 1989 be no chance of someone using the car wash after hours. He felt a car wash was better suited for a heavy industrial area. Chairman McNiel stated that in the past people wanted to get rid of service stations and now people complain because there are not enough service stations in town'. He felt it was important to serve the needs of residents. Mr'. beaux Mated that without proper policing trash ' would wend up in surrounding yards'. Steve Donley„ Donley-Bennett Architects, project architect, stated that the design as presented contained many 'changes as the result of neighborhood stings and Design Review. H stated the; polite department did not want the entire front of the property to be hedged., but proposed groupings of trees with hedges between to allow the police to see into the property. He said they upgraded the landscaping from 4" box trees to 48" box trees and they were continuing to work with the homeowners and City staff to determine ghat plants to use. He s tai d the lighting would be mostly surface mounted on the buildings and directed down to avoid shining into neighboring yards. He said there would be an automatic shut off at the end of the d ,y and them would be anon-site manager during the shank of the 'day. Chairman McNiel stated that at Design Review there had been a suggestion to change the roof from; a single level , but he preferred' two-tiers over the proposed throe tiers. Mr. Donley agreed to change to two tiers from the proposed three tiers. Gene Ullrich , 10410 Lemon Avenue, stated he had moved into his house directly across the street from the project in May 1987 and on June b a 'letter went out to notice a neighborhood meeting. As he never received the letter, he presumed it was forwarded to the former owner. He stated his house was not on the list for the 'formal hearing. He stated Mr. Greubel had been cooperative with the people living to the west. As he was afraid customers would play loud radios , he asked that the hours of operation be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. He stated Mr. Dreubel had worked with his wife regarding the color, and that they would prefer the blue color. Ms . Meier stated that Phase was currently painted green. She stated the applicant had indicated t if the Planning Commission chose the ` light blue color, he would repaint Phase I so the entire center would be the same. Alicia Niemirow, 6341 Revere, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she was still concerned about privacy and felt that people might be able to look into her house from the car wesh site. She wanted trees planted to provide total privacy, and suggested cypress' would be a good choice 'so long as they were planted close together and neatly maintained. Chairman McNiel felt other landscaping should be considered. Ms Niemirow stated the hours of operation should be more restricted and should not be open after 1004 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes - 7- March 22, 1989 Mr. Creubel stated he had met with Ms . Niemirow and understood her concerns.' He stated he had originally wanted a 24 hour operation and was now proposing a compromise of leaving only one 'bay open from 10.0 to '11:30 p.m. and shutting off all the equipment at 11; D p.m. He felt that by cutting down to only one bay at 10: C p.m., most of the noise would be eliminated, He suggested the parking lot lighting be directed from west to east. Mr. Coleman stated the Planning Commission could recommend that a formal agreement, including these conditions of operation, be forwarded to City Council for approval , ;or the Commission could decide that the changes to the site plan were significant enough to require a modification to the Conditional Use Permit, which would mean the applicant would have to process through the Conditional Use Permit;public hearing process again. Greg Bennett, Donley-Bennett Architects stated the whole focus of the meeting was to seek approval of the design. He said they had already gone through public scrutiny and concession after concession He said the surrounding homeowners now supported the project with the concessions. He said the only modifications to the site plan were to satisfy the concerns of residents,: Chairman McNiel Mated the site plan had been changed and the Commission needed to decide if the changes were significant enough to warrant a' modification. r. Bennett asked that the Planning Commission approve the design; and allow the City attorney to review` the agreement. He stated the changes were merely` an evolution of the original project with everyone working together. Chairman McNiel agreed that the project had been scrutinized very closely. Mrs Deaux stated that the option to reopen the Conditional Use Permit had not been presented to the residents before this meeting. He felt Mr. ga na had been led to believe the Conditional Use Permit could not be reopened, s. Niemirow stated she did not feel comfortable with the car wash and had opposed; it since it was originally proposed. She preferred to see a real estate office. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Emerick liked the idea of the wrought iron fencing to keep people away from the hack yards of the adjacent homes. He felt landscaping could address the view and privacy problem, He preferred that the hours of operation be limited o :00 a.m. to 10:0 p.m. during the vRek, with perhaps an extension to 11:0 p.m. on 'Fridays and Saturdays. He thought the blue color would be a better choice and preferred two tiers for the roof line. He felt everything else seemed to be a compromise between the residents and the developer He felt it would be sufficient to have staff review the lighting, but preferred to have the landscaping returned to the Design Review Committee and stated the specimens should be large. Planning Commission Minutes -1 - March 22, 198 Commissioner Blakesley felt the blue color was acceptable and liked two itiers on the roof. He preferred 7.00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. for the hours of operation. He felt quite a bit had been done on buffering the car wash from the residences with the use of landscaping and the wrought iron fencing, but he was not entirely satisfied that it would be successful in insulating the° use from the adjacent neighbors. Commissioner Emerick felt the changes were net a substantial deviation from the original plan presented and he did not feel it warranted a modification to the Conditional Use permit. Commissioner Blakdsley concurred. Chairman McNiel concurred. He stated the use was permitted and them had been a 'lot of community involvement. He was not sure that sound mitigations for the western edge would be satisfactory. Commissioner Emerick asked if the hews were not on a lower grade. Chairman hlcNiel stated the houses were approximately five feet lower. r Coleman stated that the acoustical study showed that the operation of the car wash, vacuum, etc . would comply with City maximum allowable noise standards. However, he said there was no ;way to address blaring radios in an acoustical study , and that would become a management function of the facility. He stated the applicant 's intent in plotting a lube facility on the north end of the building and the detail shop on the south side was to provide some supervision.` Chairman McNiel agreed that the hours should be 7.00 a.m. to 10:0 ; p.m. with no exception for later hours on weekends. He felt the landscaping should return to the Design 'Review Committee for approval , He liked the two-tier roof as opposed to a three-tier. He 'preferred ;the green color, but stated he was amenable the blue. He stated that the lighting should be sensitive to the neighborhood. suggested dropping the lights down below the normal 1 feet. Brad Buller, City Planner, summarized that; he heard the color 'should be blue,'; there should be two tiers in the car wash roof, the hours should be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., the lighting should be sensitive to the neighborhood and approved by the City Planner, landscaping should be resolved between the neighbors and the applicant and returned to Design Review for approval . He suggested adding a standard clause to the agreement regarding graffiti removal , maintenance, ,and trash and debris . He asked if the Commission wanted to include a clause that there should be an on-site manager during all 'hours the business was in operation. He stated the Commission could direct staff to return with a Resolution , or they could decide that minute action would be sufficient to provide for preparation of the agreement. Chairman McNiel stated that minute action would be sufficient, but he iterated his concern about the sound on the vest wall . Planning Commission 'Minutes -19- March 22, 1989 Mr. Buller suggested that if the Commission was concerned with loud;, blasting; radios, they could draft in language of the agreement that one of the responsibilities of the on-site manager would be to monitor excessive noise levels from patrons. Commissioner Emeick asked if the conditions would be attached to the Conditional use Permit. r Buller stated it would be a separate agreement which would have to be approved by City Council . He stated that unless the buildings were substantially under construction prior to expiration of the Conditional Use Permit, the applicant would have to apply for an extension. Chairman Mc Niel asked what leverage' the City would have with respect to enforcing the agreement. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that it would be an agreement between the City' and the property owners, approved by City Council , and recorded against the property. He said it could provide for injunctive powers for the courts to enforce it. Chairman McNiel allowed public comment. Mr aux asked if minute action would leave room for; appeal to the City Council . He felt the homeowners may want to appeal to the Council to have the Conditional Use Permit reopened based upon the changes. He asked if a' Resolution would be necessary in order to allow appeal . Chairman McNiel stated that all actions can be appealed to the ;Council . Hanson stated that the agreement could be prepared without a Resolution but he recommended a Resolution be prepared. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to direct staff to prepare a Resolution of adoption based on ghat had been discussed. Coleman asked Mr* Greubel for a copy of the agreement he had signed with the homeowners. r reobel provided the agreement. COMMISSION BUSINESS There was no additional commission business at this PUBLIC COMMENTS Planning Commission MinutesMarch 22, 1989 There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blake ley, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 10:5P.M. - Planning Commission Adjourned to a March 30, 1989, workshop at Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center at 4:00 p.m. for continued reviews and discussion regarding the Etiwanda North area and an initial full Jury presentation for the Awards of Design Excellence- program. Respectfully submitted, 4 grad Bu ler Sec re ta ry Planning Commission Minutes - 1- March 22, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting March 16, 1989' Terra Vista Town Center Workshop ervyn's Chairman Larry McNiel called the special workshop; eting to order at 9:5 p.m. at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. i ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT; David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Peter Tolstoy, Larry McNiel ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner, pan Coleman, Senior Planner, Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner; Debra Meier, Associate Planner; gill Silva, Deputy City Engineer Robert Bernstein, of Houston Bernstein Architects, gave a preview of the rvyn 's footprint, building function and architecture. Representatives from r yn's included Greg Gillis , Project Manager, and Card Wessenberg, Head of Construction. A discussion followed with the Commission having the following comments: 1. The elimination of Shop Buildings C and D has taken away much of the character of this portion of the center. The deletion of those shops has resulted in a very box-like form and very linear roof-line. The Commission agreed, ' in concept, to the deletion of Shops C and D, if the design of the rvyn 's stagy front can create a similar sense of design articulation. . The deletion of the tower element and small storefronts on the west elevation hurts the overall design of the courtyard. 3. The main tower feature is generally acceptable. However, the sidelights within this tower should be eliminated. Natural light should be provided' in a different way. 4. All elevations need additional architectural appeal . The; Commissioners felt that the renderings presented to them' did not reflect the overall character of the original approval . After the discussion; of the items above with the architect and rvyn' representatives, the Commission grade the following suggestions to improve the elevations presented. 1. The storefront elevations must be designed to create a similar character as was C a d by using the small perimeter retail shops;. This includes undulation of the building face, or using other architectural elements. The Commission suggested using window displays of merchandise to add appeal to front elevations. rvyn 's representatives noted that idea` was not something they usually lie to do for maintenance reasons. . The building footprint should be shifted approximately 10 feet to the west' and 'north. This would ' allow greater area along the storefront elevations. . Signage shown should Conform to the approved Uniform Sign Program, which would allow one sign per building face with public entry for the major tenants. The Commission concluded by indicating that the rvyn's representatives and their architect should work with staff and the Design Review Committee prior to coning before ' the full Commission for the final approval . Respectfully submitted, *BradeBuKler� ; Sec re ta r Planning Commission Minutes - - March 161, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting March 8, 1989 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the 'City of Rancho Cucamonga P1`anning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park: Community Center, 9161 Ease' Line' Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Niel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS-. PRESENT: David Rlakesley, Suzanne 'Chitea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Tom O ahn, Assistant iPlanner; Ralph Hanson, Deputy l City; Attorney; Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner; ;Olen Jones, RDA Analyst* Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner; it Sanchez,, Secretary; Joe Stofa,, Associate Civil Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced the City had received a request from the project architect continue Item E, Modification -to the Virginia Dare Parking Study, for two weeks. . Duller announced that two Commissioners had advised that they would not be available for the March 22, 1989 meeting. Buller announced that on March 17, 1989, there would be a farewell luncheon for two members of the planning staff, Scott Murphy and Chris Westman. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of January 23, 1989, as amended. Lion: Moved by Chtiea seconded by Biakesley, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of February 2, 1989, as amended. Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of February 3, 1989, as amended. Motion:e ed by Blakesley, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of February 8, 1989, as amended. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-2£ - SMITH - The addition of seven i5iFfiii5t un an e s 5g apar nt complex consisting of 63 units; on 5.33 acres of land in the Medium Residential District' (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Church Street. - APN: 103 - 5. (Continued` from January 25, 1989.) e Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Co issioner' Chitiea asked to see renderings of the changes to the garage units. Mr Grahn stated the Design Review Co ittee' direction had been to design . g g the carports to be consistent with the garages,, with the same roof design and roofing material . He shoved the changes the developer was proposing to Make' to the existing garages, including removal of existing light fixtures, three- foot wall , and stucco elements, and addition of patios and window trim. Commissioner Blakesley stated the Design Review Committee had originally discussed the removal of the wings on the end if they were not structural elements. r. Grahn stated the last 'Design Review Committee approved increasing the width of the end wall elements to be consistent with the proposed architecture. Commissioner Blakesley asked if the patio walls were to be stucco or wrought iron. Mr. Grahn stated the developer proposed four-foot stucco walls with rock' pilasters. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Alen Smith, stated he was representing owner Louis Flinkman. He said they had worked closely with Design Review and he would be happy to answer any questions. Commissioner Chitiea asked to see renderings and a materials board for Archibald. She asked ghat trim would be used around the windows. Mr, Smith stated the trim would be " x b" wood painted brown. Planning Commission Minutes -2- March .8, 1989 Commissioner Blakesley asked if the proposed roof material would be on the addition only. Mr. Crahn stated it would be used on the new units and those on Archibald' Avenue. Commissioner Chit'iea asked about the decorative light fixtures to be added on the existing building. Mr. Smith stated they intended to remove the round globes and would be happy to have the design of the new lights approved by the City. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested returning the light fixtures to the Design Review !Committee ;for approval . Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he was glad to have an opportunity to upgrade the site. He felt the front landscaping would improve the streetscape. Commissioner 81aesley agreed it was nice to have an opportunity for improvement. Motion. Moved by Tolstoy, seconded; by Blakesley, to adopt; the 'Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 8 - fa with AWOL modification to have light fixture design approved by Design Review Committee. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: 8L ` ESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: NE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NC -carried S. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8 0 - WORD OF LIFE The i regdes es a urc n a ease space of 3,060 square eet within an existingmulti-tenant industrial park on 8. 2 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea ) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at 9047 Arrow Route - APN: 09-012-19. Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. He also provided a Plan' Check Report from the Foothill Fire Protection District, which recommended denial of the Conditional Use Permit pending a complete fire and life safety; plan review. He stated that Condition 3 of the Resolution required submission of the plans prior to occupancy. Chairman McNiel questioned why the Fire District was requesting such a requirement prior to approval of the Conditional Use Permit, rather than prior to occupancy. Planning Commission Minutes -3- Ma rch 8,` 1989 Mr. Hayes responded that the Fire District indicated they have had problems in. the past with similar users. Chairman McNiel .asked if the problem was occurring because people were moving in prior to issuance of occupancy permits. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that the Fire District had not given any specific examples ofwhen that has occurred, but they indicated they have had a problem. I Commissioner Tolstoy asked if that was not simply a matterof code enforcement. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that both the Fire District and the City could take action for non-compliance if they should occupy the facility prior to issuance of the occupancy permit. He indicated in the past the Fire District has accepted the condition placed in the Re lotion tying the occupancy permit to the submission of the plan. Chairman McNiel opened the ,public hearing. Randy Alward, 7398 Beryl Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they would not occupy the building until permits were issued. Chairman McNiel asked where they were currently meeting. r. Alward responded they were eying in` the Cucamonga Junior High School on month-to-month contract. Chairman McNiel asked the size of the congregation. Mr. Alward stated they had :forty members. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if they were aware of all the requirements generally made by the Foothill Fire District for public assembly. Alward stated he had talked with the pastor of Cucamonga Christian Fellowship regarding the process. He said he had also submitted building' plans and their proposed usage to the Fire Department and was waiting to hear at they would need to be in compliance. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested the Commission might wish to, ask Robert Corcoran, Operations Division Chief of the Foothill Fire` Protection District, who was in the audience regarding another item, if he was aware of any violations occurring regarding ,occupancy prior# to permits on Conditional Use Permits. Mr. Corcoran stated he was aware that there had been problems with tenants king occupancy prior to issuance of the permits, but that was not his department. He said he would be happy to request the Fire Marshall compile a list and address the Commission regarding the problem. Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 8, 1989 Chair Niel sty d he recalle, having a problem with one church in the past, but he felt it was unfair to pull the rug out from under a struggling church. He understood` the reason for requiring compliance, but felt it could' be handled by Ming the requirement to occupancy permits. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Buller stated it would be helpful to have a listing of specific examples of violations so that the Commission could better judge future Conditional Use Permit applications. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that if the Fire District came up'! with specific problems, the planning Commission should discuss the situation and perhaps change the method of processing applications. Lion- Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt ; the Resolution` approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 89-02. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Commissioner Chitea stated she supported the Conditional Use Permit with the applicant's assurance they would comply with Fire District requirements. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 87-1 REEK;BURGUNDY que amend Vii 'FeV065iiifit OMFiRp' roe o Control C) to Medium DensityResidential M (8-14 dwelling units per acre) , which encompasses 1.61 acres of land located on the west side of Carnelian` Avenue, approximately 1 ,000 feet south of Calle del Pra o - APN: -0 2-64. Cindy Morris, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked if the proposed site plan wes in process. Ms., Norris confirmed that the site plan was being processed. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the site plan vas being processed separately and would not be considered this evening* Only the zone change was to be considered at this time. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing, Stan Scates, Burgundy Creek, Ltd., stated they purchased the property from the Cucamonga County Water District and hoped to have this property zoned the same as the parcel to the north which they owned and which was already zoned Medium. He stated he was available to answer questions. Planning Commission Minutes - March B, 1989 Chairman McNiel stated that historically the City had approved projects at a rate of 10.62 in areas designated 8-1 units per acre and that the proposed' site plan was projected at 12 units per acre. Commissioner Chitiea asked if only one drive was being proposed' for ingress/egress along Carnelian. Mr. Scates. responded yes, along with an emergency access to the north. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel stated that the only item being considered was the land use designation and that the site plan would be considered during the design review ;process. He said the design review process would definitely have to address the problem of ingress/egress along Carnelian. He stated the Commission had to decide if the land' use designation was consistent with the surrounding area and was it reasonable. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if any plans had been proposed for ingress/egress for the parcel of land with the water tank s. Norris stated that parcel had an existing access, which would continue to be used. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that in changing from Flood Control to any other designation it would be necessary to consider the vacant parcel, with the water tank. He felt any design of this property would have to address ingress/egress for the water tank parcel . Commissioner Chitiea agreed that that should` be a major concern for an, density being proposed. She felt it would not be appropriate have any access directly onto Carnelian.' She felt traffic should be routed to the north and was afraid that with separate ownership and no master planning the traffic would exit onto Carnelian. She felt the density proposed was not appropriate for the location, particularly with the curve on Carnelian. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed the density was too high for the property, but did not want to see single family residences either because that could mean many different exits. He felt a lower density project should be considered. Commissioner hiiea asked if a designation other than Flood Control was truly appropriate. Chairman McNiel stated that all the land ; to the north, including the single family residences, was zoned 8-14. Commissioner Tolstoy Felt that circumstances change as the parcels go south because of the configuration of the street and the irregular dimensions of the property. Mr. Buller asked Ms. Norris if there had been any discussions with the Water District to see if they would be willing to share or abandon their Carnelian Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 8, 198 access point for purposes of master planning the area. He stated future development of the parcel south of the Water District property might hinge on cooperation with the Water District. Ms. Norris indicated no. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the Water District owned the entire parcel . Mr. Buller stated that there were four lots independently owned which had potential to be developed. He thought master planning might be used to address the potential impacts of development of those parcels. He asked if it was known if the alleyway to the north was public or private. Ms'. Norris did not know who owned the alleyway. Commissioner Blakesley felt that even at the lower end of the 8-14 density range too much traffic would be generated for the area. Chairman McNiel felt the area should be studied further and master r planned with the parcels to the north. Commissioner Chit ea stated she could not support the project as proposed. . Buller stated that the action before the Commission wes whether the excess' Flood Control land should be developed, and if so, at what density range. Commissioner Emerick asked if a General plan Amendment was required. Mr. Buller stated that the General plan is not lot specific, and staff made an interpretation that the Medium density designation which is immediately to the north would be the most logical extension for the land being declared excess Flood Control . He stated that the Commission could disagree with the assumption and then determine that a General Plan Amendment was needed. Commissioner Emerick asked to look at the General Plan map. The Commissioners viewed the General Plan map. Commissioner Chitiea disagreed with the Medium density assumption. Commissioner Tolstoy also disagreed. rBuller, stated that when the General Plan map was drawn, land which was not buildable for flood reasons was designated as Flood Control . Since the channel was built, the Water District had now determined that the land is not subject to flooding. Commissioner Emerick felt the land was still Flood Control'. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that originally the property was a part of the wash, and during the original General Plan discussions it was not foreseen that the property would ever be developable. Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 8, 1989` Commissioner Emerick stated that he felt the property was still designated Flood Control and the Commission should now determine what would be an appropriate designation for more intense use, rather than merely having the land take on the designation of surrounding parcels He felt 8-14 was too dense and the area should be studied further. Commissioner Tol toy stated that just because the adjacent land to the north is designated 8 14 he did not feel that this property should automatically be the same designation. Chairman McNiel felt the 8-14 density to the north was more applicable to the parcel than the single family designation across the street, but stated he was aware of the safety hazard of exiting onto Carnelian. He felt access to the property should be something other than Carnelian and the area should be master planned. r$ Buller stated the Commission had two options. (1) take action, or ) continue the request and ask that a General plan Amendment be processed concurrently. He asked that if the Commission decided on continuance that they provide direction as to what land use they would like considered. Commissioner Emerick felt designations of -4 and 4-8 should be considered. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if it would be proper for the 'Commission to direct staff to master Plan the area. r. Buller stated that if the applicant withdrew his application and the City s going to initiate the General Plan Amendment, City staff could initiate a master plan for the area, but would request direction ` from the Commission regarding other Work Program items. Chairman McNiel felt it would not be a high priority project. Commissioner lakesleyr felt the planning Commission could not determine that 8 14 wes a proper; designation. Chairman McNiels d the land was designated Flood Control on the General Flan, and since it had now been determined that the land was buildable it could come out of the Flood Control designation'. Therefore, when an applicant made a proposal , the Planning Commission must determine the ';proper density. He felt the surrounding area needed to be master planned. Commissioner Emerick felt the land was still designated Flood Control and the Planning Commission would be willing to look at changing the designation to a designation lower than 814 with an overall master plan and a General Plan Amendment. Commissioner Blakesley stated that the existing parcel to the north could be developed in the 8 14, range with access off Carnelian which would not align with Vivero, thereby creating a gorse` traffic hazard. Planning Commission Minutes -8- March g, 1989' Commissioner Chitiea stated that because only a seller lot would be built at that density the number of vehicles exiting onto Carnelian would be decreased. She was opposed to the current proposal, particularly since they could not take access to the north. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to ask if the applicant wished to continue the item or if he wished to have the Commission take action to deny the proJec t Mr. Scates, stated they had conducted lengthy discussions with the Cucamonga County Water District and they indicated the water tangy was a major water tank. He did not Feel CCWD would abandon: the tank. He felt that the access problem had been alleviated following discussions with the Engineering Department with 'a new street alignment all the way to Base line and an deceleration lane going south, He stated that the problems the Commission was considering had been worked out with Engineering and the alignment with Vivero would take care of the problem. Chairman McNiel asked if traffic would be able to exit the project and go north on Carnelian. Mr, Scates stated plans called for traffic to be able to turn left on Carnelian toward Base =Line. Joe Stofa, Associate Civil ;Engineer, stated that the best possible alignment would be line up with Vivero, assuming they couldn 't exit to the north through the alleyway* He felt the Commissioners' concerns were valid. Commissioner Emerick stated that one of the biggest effects of density is on traffic.. He felt that without a traffic study of the area, the Commission could not make a valid judgment. Chairman McNiel suggested they combine the land use designation with the applicant's land plan. He felt that if the land plan could determine that it de sense that the 8-14 designation could work, then the Commission could consider the designation, He felt that with the information currently before the Commission, the designation did not make sense because the traffic` situation on Carnelian appeared too' a n 'n . He asked if Mr. Scates wished to have the Commission act on the current proposal or continue the item to allow a review of the surrounding property and possible lower designation. . Scates asked if that meant the Commission wanted him to process the Development District Amendment and the development at the same time. Duller stated that if the Commission did not accept s f 's interpretation of the General Plan, then a General Plan Amendment would be needed concurrent with the Development District Amendment. He stated the Commission could act on the project before then only f de rmi d that the rope designation is consistent with the General Plan. He stated the applicant was 'almost ready to bring the project design sign Review, Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes g rch 8, 1989 Commissioner Emerick stated his interpretation was that the land still had the Flood Control designation under the General Plan. Commissioners Tolstoy and Chitiea also disagreed with staffs interpretation. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the appropriate course of 'action would be to conduct a study to determine the appropriate zoning ;and return with a General Plan Amendment to change the zoning from Flood Control . Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, to direct staff to' prepare a Resolution of denial without prejudice for Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendment -1 , stating' the proposed 'zoning was not consistent with the General Plan. "lotion carried by the following vote.- AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: N -carried 0. VARIANCE 89-0 - Nu WEST - A request to allow three wall sighs to exceid Vii maxi m e g t limit of twenty i feet within an existingi commercial center, located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman Avenue - APN: 208-261-25 and 26. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hewing. Scott Langford, Holt & Langford Signage, stated he was available to answer questions. Chairman McNiel asked if the tenants had been selected. rMurphy stated Farr Stationers and House of Fabrics were confirmed, while the third major was still in negotiations.' Chairman McNiel asked if the maximum size for letters would apply to a capital letter or lower case letter when both upper and lower cases letters used toge ther. Murphy stated that the signs would be presented at the next Design Review Committee Meeting and the question this ,evening was the height of the sign from the grade, not the height of the letters. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the grading caused a considerable difference from Foothill to the floor level of the signs. He said that even ''though he would o ' inally not approve anything; higher than 20 feet, he would support the variance because of the design of the buildings, the distance from the street, Planning Commission Minutes -10- March 8 1989 and the grading change. He felt that as building designs progress through Design Review, it was important to ascertain where the signs would be placed and to point out the Sign Ordinance to developers. Commissioner Emerick agreed with supporting the variance. Commissioner Chitiea concurred with supporting the variance, based upon the differential betueen the Foothill Boulevard level and the project site. She expressed concern about the height of the letters. Commissioner Blakesley concurred with supporting the variance. Chairman McMiel stated Nu West had worked with the City and experienced unique conditions with the low lever of the project site. He supported the variance. He agreed that signs should be reviewed conceptually ring Design Review of the buildings. Motion* Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Variance B9-C i i h pp g � ton carried the following vote: _ AYES: C ISSICN S: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NOME -carried MEW BUSINESS E. MODIFICATION TO THE VIRGINIA DARE PARKING STUDY - A review of modi"fications to the, shared piFR15g 5rrcep nd- _pr­oJ­ected' parking demand for the Virginia Bare Center. Chairman McNiel stated that, a request had been received to continue the item and he suggested that the item be continued until April 1 , to allow the full Commission to review the item. He invited the applicant's comment. Larry Wolff, project architect, stated that would be acceptable. Thereno further public comments. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, to continue Modification to the Virginia Dare Parking Study to April 12, 1989Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS-. BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: N -carried Planning Commission Minutes March B,' 1989 8: 0 P.M. - Planning Co mission Recessed D:SS P.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened DIRECTOR'S REPORTS Fa MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-07 - A. W. DAVIES A request to add 710 squa eet offici space to an existing bui ing and warehouse totaling 4,560 square feet on __.82 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the southeast corner of 9th Street and Helms Avenue - APN: 9-031-53 and 54. (Continued from Februarys g, 989.)' Chairman McNiel stated there was a request to postpone the item until March 22, but he would prefer that the item be continued until April 12, 1989. Brad Seller, City Planner, suggested that because, the applicant was not present to voice any concern about the additional delay; it might be best to continue the item until March 22 1989. At that time if the Commissioners did not feel comfortable with the project, they could continue the item until April 12, 1989, to allow the full Commission to review. Lion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Minor Development Review 89-07 to March 22, 1989. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS, BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK,, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried H. REVIEW OF CONCEPTS FOR FIRE STATIONS NUMBERS 4 AND 5 (Oral Report) Olen Jones, RDA Analyst, thanked the Planning Commission for allowing the presentation and stated the purpose was to acquaint the Planning Commission with the project and the constraints and to ask for informal direction on how to proceed. He gave a brief history of the project. He stated that in April 197 the Foothill Fire Prevention District and the City approved a master plan which outlined the need for three additional fire stations, a maintenance' faci 1 i and a training facility. Because of budget constraints the master` plan had been broken into two phases and the first phase included construction of Fire Stations 4 and S and acquisition; of all three sites. He said the second phase, which was scheduled to begin in 1990 g1, would include construction of the final fire station and the training and maintenance facilities. He stated Wolff, Lang, Christopher had been selected as project architect and a design committee had been formed composed of Foothill' Fire District personnel , RDA personnel , Deputy City Planner Otto Kroutil , and Planning Commission Minutes - 2- March g 1989 Deputy City Engineer Bill Silva. He stated three potential sites have been; identified, with two already approved for ;acquisition - Fire i at the southwest corner of Jersey and Milliken and Fire Station S at the northeast' corner of Banyan Street and Deer Creek Channel . He stated the third i would be basically east of the existing Fire Station on Base Line near Rochester. Chairman McNiel invited public co ent. Larry Wolff, program architect, presented study models, a copy of the architectural program, and proposed preliminary site plans, He stated major site planning considerations included windy locations, response times, traffic within the immediate vicinity, and on-site traffic circulation to allow the engines to turn around on the property for refueling and 'cleaning. He stated Fire Station S would be a two-bay, double-deep; station in a residential area and Fire Station 4 would be a four-bay, double-deep station, with the District's maintenance operations and a training facility. added during the second phase of the program indicated the training facility would include a classroom and a' training tower and that it might become regional training facility for other municipalities in the area. He stated it would be important to segregate visitor/public parking and maintenance facility' operations to preclude any disruption of emergency traffic. 'Because the access on Milliken Avenue is restricted, access must be taken off Jersey and driveway locations would somewhat dictate placement of the buildings in a group. He indicated they were considering the addition of either art or a water element in the courtyard area between the three buildings. He stated one of the major criteria for building orientation on both sites was to orient the overhead door's 90 degrees from the prevailing Santa Ana winds, They' felt the project had the ability to establish development standards for other facilities in the area. He questioned if the fire stations should look the' same and be; constructed of similar materials so that people could easily cognize the facility as a fire station. He stated they had not selected building materials, but they envisioned tan or light buff concrete block masonry with light green metal roofs. He asked for the' Co mission 's input on design concepts. Commissioner Tolstoy asked about placement of Fire Station b and asked if it would include the northeast area of the City and the North Etivanda area. Robert Corcoran, Operations Division Chief of Foothill Fire Protection District, stated they felt dire Station b would provide adequate coverage for that a a. Chairman McNiel stated that in dealing with public agencies the City has maintained high standards in the area of materials and architectural design,; He felt it was important ke the surrounding areas into account and to use the best quality materials. He asked how tall the training tower would be. r Wolff stated it would be four stories high and they planned to locate it in the center of the site. Planning Commission Minutes -1 - March 8, 1989 Commissioner Tolstoy was concerned that the training tower should not be in such public view, as it might impact traffic in the area when fire training exercises were being conducted. . Wolff stated that Milliken rapidly slopes downward in the area to go under'; the rai 1 reed bridge. He felt the embankment would partially block out the view. He said the tower was placed where it made the most sense considering both aesthetic and safety factors. Mr. Corcoran stated that the training, tower would be stainless steel lined and would be fired by propane gas, which is much cleaner burning and does not cause the dense black smoke. Commissioner Chitiea concurred with Chairman McNiel regarding materials and design. She felt that the improvements made to Station 2, which picked up elements from the neighborhood well done. She felt that type of approach in a residential ' area would be appropriate. She felt high-tech industrial design elements could be considered in an industrial area, but would be inappropriate in a residential neighborhood. Commissioner Blakesley' stated he did not want contemporary architecture, but would prefer something re traditional and he also liked Station 2. Chairman McNiel felt it was not necessary to have the two stations be similar. He felt it was more desirable to interweave with the surrounding community. Mr. Wolff stated that metal roofing was very expensive and he questioned why the Commissioners' objected to it. Chairman McNiel stated that several commercial centers had been built with metal roofing, and the consensus of the Commission was that it was not aesthetically pleasing. Mgr. Wolff asked about using concrete blocks with variety of textures and enhancements. Chairman McNiel stated some kind of treatment would u1d be necessary and a sol id wall of concrete blocks would not be desirable. r. Wolff stated he would like to workshop the item. Chairman McNiel agreed that workshops would be a good idea, because the Fire Stations were important to the community. .'` Commissioner Chitiea reiterated the materials should be location specific. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the item had been brought before the Commission this evening to allow' early input, Flaming Commission Minutes -14- March 8, 1989 G. UPDATE 4N CITY COUNCIL GROWTH MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP Brad Buller, City Planner, gave 'a brief overview of the City Council Workshop on the Carlsbad Growth Management Plan and the programs that the City of Rancho Cucamonga has in place. Commissioner Chitiea stated she would like to see a lowering of density ranges to establish a range lower than "less than 2." Commissioner Tolstoy stated there were three -valid arguments for requiring larger parcels: earthquake area, fire hazard, and grading. Commissioner Chitiea wanted to have a classification for the lower density, so that it did not seem arbitrary; from the 'Planning Commission point of view. She felt that would help the growth management plan and would allow the City to approach the matter more systematically and consistently. Commissioner Tolstoy thought a Hillside Grading Ordinance should be established. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the City should not accept will serve letters from Cucamonga County Water District because ' current residents have complained about lack of water pressure. Mr'. Buller stated that CCWp sets the standards for ghat is necessary and that under state lain it was their responsibility to meet at least the state- mandated minimum. He stated the City,' Fire District, and.. the CCWD are currently discussing the problem. Chairman McNiel stated that it was suggested at the Workshop that the City Council should establish necessary levels of service regarding r quality and the amount of water pressure and impose those standards on CCWD. Commissioner Emerick did not feel that the will of the City could be imposed on an autonomous district. Chairman McNiel suggested requiring new development go ahead and stub out to the street where the sewer system vas not already in the area. Then when the area was retrofitted for sewers, the stub outs would be in place and it would be easy to provide hook ups. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the Ctiwanda North area was requiring 'a lot of staff time and he felt the results of the workshop would also be taking a lot of staff time. Chairman McNiel stated that he had asked the City Council to funnel any requests for Planning Staff time through the Planning Commission for their input to talk about work program . Planning Commission Minutes _ 5- March H, 1989 COMMISSION BUSINESS Brad Buller discussed dates for the ANards of Design Excellence program. Thursday March 30 was agreed to for initial full jury presentation, with final ' jury review to be made on April 20, and the awards presentation on May B, 1989. PUBLIC COWENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Talstey, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried to adjourn. C. C P.M. - Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully submitted, 'ABrad Bu ler Sec ry Planning Commission Minutes -16- March 8, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting March 3, 1989 North Etiwranda Plan Workshop Chairman M Niel called the adjourned March 3, lg g meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at approximately 430 p.m. at the Neighborhood Center located at 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga. The purpose of the meeting was to further discuss the content of the Etiwvanda North Specific Plan. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blake ley, Suzanne Chi iea, Bruce Emerick Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT; Brad Buller City Planner; Otto Kroutil , deputy City Planner; Larry Henderson, Senior Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Mii Bratt, Associate Planner; Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner; Jeff Gravel , Assistant Planner; Bill Silva, 'Deputy City Engineer; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Betty Miller, Assistant` Civil Engineer' Larry Henderson, Senior Planner, began by giving a quick overviews of the status of the review of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Joe Di Iorio, President of Caryn Company, distributed architectural guidelines, which he requested the Planning Co fission review. He stated there were seven different architectural styles indicated in the guidelines with their specific details. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, expressed concern regarding the minimum size of the d ' 11f = vats. He said that these newly distributed guidelines should fleet unit sizes, upward in size, to reflect actual expected snit size a discussed during' the previous workshop. r. Di Iorio indicated this issue was not addressed in the architectural guidelines. Chairman McNiel objected to the introduction of the text. The first paragraph, last sentence, referenced hardships to the developer in terms o design and materials. Chairman McNiel stated that like all other' residential projects processed through the City, the City's top priority is an attractive product and that means requiring quality design and materials. Jess Harris, Land/Plan/Design Croup, indicated that the intent of that phrase was to avoid criteria that would loci in builders and 'require them to construct custom` homes on a production scale, Chairman McNiel concluded by saying, that the sentence should be rephrased or possibly eliminated. . Coleman stated the design detail matrix section on Vertical vs. Horizontal was confusing and may be hard to interpret. He suggested a graphic example could be included with an explanation. `r. Qi Iorio explained the idea behind vertical vs. horizontal was to set a percentage of vertical structure or mass vs . horizontal structure. Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that there should be some sensitivity regarding view and placement of taller units. Commissioner Chi`tiea expressed concern regarding the chimney details. Some of the details indicated in the guidelines, refer to the use of wood. She said wood siding on a chimney would be inappropriate except on a contemporary style structure. Chairman McNiel concurred, stating he would not approve of a lot of chimneys with wood sides. He indicated that there should be some use of double doors in the front entries.: `r. Coleman indicated that the architectural elevations showed some double doors. Cornissio,ner Emerick = suggested that the fence detail should be included with the architectural guidelines. Commissioner Blakesley expressed ; concern regarding fencing and roofing materials and their durability in heavy winds. Brad Buller, City planner, indicated that the issue of wind would be analyzed in the CIR that is being prepared for the specific, plan and that planning for wind impacts would be very important. Chairman McNiel cautioned that the drafting of design criteria should not be o specific that it hampered creativity in the designing of dwelling units. Commissioner Slakesley felt the roof pitch allotted for the Victorian style house was too gradual and should be 'increased. r. Clorio Indicated that most of the general requirements for design have been taken' directly From the Etiwanda Specific plan„ He also said that this s reflected in the percentages of side vs. front garages. r. Coleman asked if detached garages were included in that percentage. Mr. Cilorio said. no. Commissioner Blakesley also asked if the percentage included garages with alley access. Planning Commission Minutes 2 March 3, 1989 Mr. DiIorio responded saying that alleys will take away land that will be dedicated to the parkways and paseos. Otto Kroutil , [Deputy City Planner, felt better examples of the side vs. front garages should be presented graphically in the plan with the garages to be de- emphasized. This should include garage approaches and curb cuts. Chairman n Niel suggested reducing the height of the courtyard walls to approximately 4 to B feet instead of the ±6 feet shown on the plan.` Mr. Harris thought that he could include courtyard wall criteria with the section on front yard setbacks in the text. Mr. Coleman suggested that a Monterey style home be used to described graphically depict the courtyard design concept. Mr. Barris indicated he felt that a 'curb cut equal to the width of three cars would enhance the prestige of the neighborhood. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, said that the curb cut width suggested by Mr. Hargis would only allow more cars to park on the driveway. r. gi loriu explained that Landmark Land Co. is the financial entity for oussoulis and Landmark Land may buy the Coussoulis property. r. Henderson indicated that the City had received a letter from Landmark Land o. Miki Bratt, Associate planner, said that the letter indicated some changes in the conceptual thinking about the use of the land, such as the elimination of a' trail through the property and the park site around the bog, but expressed interest in saving the bog. The letter also proposed the development of a gated community. Mr. Henderson suggested to Mr. gilorio that he include Landmark Land Co. as soon as possible in the development of the Etiwanda North Specific 'Plan. Mr. Diilorio indicated that the biggest change in the plan from the previous plan was in Section '7, regarding the locations of ;types of architecture. He said ai builder must now take three styles of architecture and apply them to one third of the total units in a given neighborhood. He said this would allow a blending of styles between the different tracts. . Bratt suggested that because of the wildfires in the open space corridors, architecture most appropriate retard fire conditions should be considered in these areas. Mr. Buller requested clarification from the Commission can the concepts of the neighborhoods and the architectural styles and mix being proposed. He viewed the proposal as presented today as very, weals if the intent was to have an identifiable architectural theme for each neighborhood. Planning Commission Minutes 3 March 3, 1989 Chairman n Niel questioned if the architecture for the commercial developments should be entry style as proposed in the plan, or if it should be consistent As with the type of architecture in the surrounding area It was the consensus of the Commission- that commercial development architecture should blend with the surrounding neighborhood. Chairman McNiel also suggested that a percentage be placed on the amount of certain type of 'architecture in each neighborhood to promote definition and sense of place. e consensus of the Commissioners was that the percentages should be increased to provide more neighborhood definition. The next workshop was planned for March 30, 1989 at'4; a p.m. The workshop was adjourned at 5 45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, brad Bu ler Sec re to r Punning Commission Minutes 4 March 3, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting I, February 22, 1989 i Vice-Chairman Chttiea called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho: Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Vice-Chairman Chitiea then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce` E `erick ABSENT. Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy; STAFF PRESENT: Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner; pan Coleman, Senior Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner; Barbara gall , Assistant Civil Engineer; Otto outil , Deputy City Planner; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner', Beverly Nissen, Assistant Planner; Gail Sanchez, ' Secretary; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, Chris Westmani, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner, announced that the City had received a ' letter of withdrawal from the applicant for Item+ E, Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 87-04. A gentleman (name unknown) From the audience asked if an item was 'withdrawn from the agenda, if the item could be discussed. Mr. Kroutil stated there was no application before the Commission and it was up to the Commission. The gentleman asked if he could address the Commission regarding the matter and indicated a willingness to wait until reaching Item E in the Agenda. Vice-Chairman Chitea suggested that he wait until Item E' was reached on the Agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 1024 - C. R. CARNEY ' - The design review of u ng a evatTons an a s pan ur previously approved tract map consisting of 15 single family lots on 7.34 acres of land in the, Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) , located d at the southwest corner of Hillside Road and Haven Avenue. APN: 01 4- 1' to 15. Vice-Chairman Chitiea stated she had received a request from staff that Item A be'removed from the Consent Calendar. Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner, suggested that an additional condition be added to the Resolution to require approval of the Haven Avenue streetscape design by the Design Review Committee prig to the issuance of building; permits. He stated the applicant had been advised of the additional condition. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked if the applicant was present. Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner, stated the applicant was not at the meeting, but had 'agreed to the additional condition. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blakesley, ; to adopt the Resolution` approving Design Review for Tract 10246 with modification to requireDesign Review Committee approval of the 'Haven Avenue streetscape. Motion carried by the following' vote : AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, TOO Y -carried B. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84- 4 MODIFICATION - SHERIFF & Fropoi5l for remodelfnq the s re run aca e, manor 6511iding addition, and reconstructing drive approaches for an existing Neighborhood Commercial ; shopping center on 7.8 acres of land in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District, located at the 'northeast corner of Carnelian Avenue and Bate Line Road - -APN: ` 0 - 81- 4 thru 2 , 28 thru , 35 and BE. Vice-Chairman Chitiea requested that Item B be removed from the Consent Calendar in order to discuss' the color' scheme. Bruce Abbott, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Otto kroutil , Deputy City Planner, presented a color sample board and a photograph of the rendering for the project. He indicated Phase I included ' painting of the Carl 's Jr, in teal green with gray, and concerns had been raised that perhaps that was not an appropriate color theme for the entire center. He indicated the Time Extension request was not directly related to Planning Commission Minutes - _ February, , 1989 I the color, but as the applicant would have to proceed through Design Review, this might be a good occasion to go on record regarding the color scheme,' Vice-Chairman Chitiea stated she asked that the 'color scheme addressed this evening because the Carl 's 'Jr. color appears far more intense than the color palette suggests. She asked if the applicant was present. Sally Forster Jones stated she was with MBWJ Properties. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked if Ms. Janes would have any objection to working with the Design Review Committee to modify the colors to a less intense version". Ms. Jones stated she had no objection. r Kroutil indicated the conditions of approval could not be modified for an extension, but the minutes would reflect the applicant's willingness to work with Design Review to tone down the color scheme for the center, Motion Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution; approving Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 84-34 Modification. Lion carried by the following vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK ES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, TOLST Y carried PUBLIC HEARINGS C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14218 - NORDIC s en a su vis on an es go review o s ng a family q s on 5.71' acres of land in the Hillside Residential District, located north of Inspiration Drive and west of Crestview Place - APN: 200-441-23 to 28. Beverly Nissen, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report along with a chronology of Tentative Tract 10210, and a letter from resident Charles Morgan, opposing the project. Commissioner Emerick asked if .95 acres was the minimum lot size. Ms. Nissen indicated .95 acres was the minimum of the overall Tract 10210, but the proposed minimum of Tract 14218 was .72 acres, or 31,363 square 'feet. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked' how many dwellings were proposed at build-out in the entire project. Ms Nissen stated that Tract 14218 was proposing B dwellings. She stated that the City had required the applicant to submit a revised geotechnical 'study Planning Commission Minutes' -3- February , 1989 during Design Review of Tract 10210, which showed that a fault line went through, lot 13 and eliminated any buildable area on that lot. Therefore, the applicant was eliminating lot 13, but requesting a revision of Tract 1418 from 6 to H lots, thereby netting 34 homes instead of the 'original 33. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the public hearing. Jim Knudsen, C. P. Lange Engineers, stated he represented Nordic and they concurred with the staff report. he said he was willing'' to answer any questions. Chuck Morgan, 84 Almond Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he owned the land adjacent to Tract< 10210 on the east.. He said the adjacent property owners had fought a developer's proposal for 1/ ' acre lots, and a compromise was reached at1-acre zoning, which the; City Council agreed to in Februarys 1982. 1n July 1982 a variance was approved for 2 lots only, allowing them to be not less than 41,000 square feet. He felt that if the application was approved at lens than 3/4 acre , the applicant would then try to make other lots 1/2 acre. He felt the area was; not conducive to 1/2 acre lots. He stated the builder 'would build his houses and leave and the si'dents would have to live with the consequences. He requested the planning Commission deny the request. Art Bridge, 8715 Banyan Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he owned the property to the west. He gave a chronology of land owners in the area. He stated he eventually wanted to develop his property' in 2 acre lots. He stated he had spent $1 ,000 on geology studies to find the fault lines and had a rough plan to split his land into four 2 acre lots. He felt approval of Tract 1413 would have an adverse` effect on surrounding property owners. He 'asked that parcels be kept at a minimum of 1 acre. Mr. Knudsen stated they were requesting increase in the total lots from 34 to 33, which would change the overall average lot size from 1.04 to 1.0 ac<re s. He stated Hillside Residential was zoned for 2 dwelling units per acre, and their development would be less than 1 dwelling unit' per acre. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Blakesleyr asked for clarification of the Hillside Residential standards. Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner, stated the maximum density permitted in Hillside Residential is the same as in Very Low Residential' , except it is based on buildable acres rather than gross acres,. Therefore, lots could' be a small as half an acre, but only on relatively flat, buildable areas; whereas on steeper slopes, lots would be significantly larger. Buildable areas are determined by conducting Design 'Review and Environmental Review processes and them making a conscious decision regarding minimum lot sues given the nature of the terrain. He stated for this original subdivision, the minimum was 41;,000 square foot lots. Because a lot in the tract was lost as a result of supplemental seismic studies , the developer was' turning with this quest to re-subdivide' a bank of six lots to create eight lots. He said the overall project would end up with a minimum lot size of 41,000 square feet with the eight lots in this portion at a 28,000 square feet minimum. Planning Commission Minutes - - February 22, 198 Commissioner Emerick asked for clarification that the entire project would end up at over an acre for average lot size. Mr. Coleman stated that in the recorded Tract 10210 there were some larger lots that kicked up the average lot size to approximately 1 Vice-Chairman Chitiea- pointed out the developer wanted to add 2 lots in this one small area. Commissioner Emerick felt that so long as the average lot size was an acre in the overall ` development, this layout was acceptable. He stated that on hillsides, where there is more buildable, 'flatter land there would be smaller lots with larger 'lots in the re difficult areas. < He stated that since the minimum for the area was 2 per acre and the developer was proposing 1 per acre, he felt it was fair. Co issioner Blakesley appreciated the neighbors' concerns, but he felt that if lots were to be added, this area would be the best part of the project. Vice-Chairman Chitiea stated that she disagreed because when the matter was brought; before the planning Commission in '1981 , it was indicated the lot size should be around I acre rather than 3,/4 acre. She saw no compelling reason to allow an additional 2 lots. She stated the developers had lost only I lot from the tract, and she was uncomfortable with replacing the 1 lost lot with lots. She stated that even though the development was not high density, it made a significant impact within this small area, particularly when going from nearby 41,000 square foot lots down to 28,000 square foot lots Coamissioner Emerick asked what the frontage was on the narrowest lot. . Coleman stated it was 14 feet. Commissioner Emerick stated that was a wide lot. Vice-Chairman Chitiea pointed out that the 8 lots would back up against only lots, a significant drop In size. Commissioner Blakesley stated some space was being lost on one of the lots because of a trail . He stated it wes a difficult area to build and felt the developer was not only over the minimum but had a good discretionary cushion. He supported the project. Commissioner Emerick stated that from an environmental standpoint, any time houses and roads are built on hillsides + there is an impact. He felt the developer was making an effort to fit the houses into the hillside and to mitigate the impact. He supported the project. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked to look at the proposed ;building footprints. She reopened the public hearing to allow the applicant to discuss the footprints. ' Jim Knudsen stated they were the same floorplans as on Tract 10210 , a mix o homes , but was not specific as to plans or plotting. Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 22, 1989 Chuck Morgan stated the applicant was correct that the average sire lot in Tract 10210 was over an acre, but that included some very large lots , at over acres. He felt the intention of the City Council was acre lots, not an average size of 1 acre. Bring no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Lion: Proved by Emerick, seconded by Blakeley, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 14218. Motion carried by the following vo AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, E14ERICK ES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, TCL aY carried Herr: Proved by Emerick, seconded by Rlakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review of Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 14 18. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, TQLSTCY carried Vice-Chairman Chitiea indicated she supported the architectural design but opposed the proposed subdivision, preferring instead the larger lets as originally approved, D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 11472 - L - A subdivision o acres U Md i5fo- 2 parcels in thi Low esa ential Development District, located on the south' side' of Igth Street, east of Hermosa Avenue - APN: 202-201-72. Barbara Krall , Assistant Civil Engineer, presented the staff report,' Vice-Chairman Chi iea opened the public hearing. Dan Pierce, GVW Engineering, stated he presen d the owner and they concurred, with the staff report. Pete Amodt, 7471 Kirkwood Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, asked how many houses would be built on the parcel , Mr. Pierce indicated one house on each parcel . Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes - - February 22,> 1989 Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 1147 . Motion' carried by the following vote : AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA ERICX ES: COMMISSIONERS. NONE ABSENT: Ctl IS ICNERS: MCNIEL, TOLST Y -carried E. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87_04 - GREUBEL - The eve op f a ne g ; or o co re a s oppng den ter consisting o five structures totaling 30,770 square feet on 3.8 acres of land within the Neighborhood Commercial District, 'located at the southwest corner of Haven and Lemon - APN: 01- 6 - ' . (Continued from February 6, 1989. ) Vice-Chairman Chitiea indicated that even i though Item E had been withdrawn, she would allow the public to comment. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that the applicant had originally requested a Time Extension becau,se he wes contemplating revising the design since he was getting back some land formerly leased by the Water District. said the applicant had now decided to abandon that plan and proceed through the Design Review Committee process with specific elevations for the building to fulfill his existing Conditions of Approval . He stated the neighborhood would have an opportunity to provide input through the Design Review process. John Ba'rna , ;6331 Revere, Rancho Cucamonga, asked if that meant the applicant could not develop the land retuned by the Water District. Mr. Coleman stated he was going to put parking and landscaping on that land. Mr. Sarna stated that was one of the neighbors fears. He felt it was not in the best interest of the developer to utilize that land as a parking lot. He felt the developer was going forward with his original plans` as a result o the opposition voiced at the last Planning Commission Meeting. Mr. Garno presented a petition, which'! contained 69 signatures, opposing the building of the car wash. Mr. Rarna asked what their next recourse would be. Mr. Coleman stated that the applicant 'would be submitting his detailed elevations this week to qp to before the Design Review Committee of the Planning Commission. He stated decisions of the Design Review Committee could be appealed to the full Planning Commission. He said the applicant was not proposing to change the site plan, other than to add more parking and landscaping on the Water District land. Mr'. Rarna stated the applicant was in for a fight because of the overall reaction from the public, He felt the City had let the residents down because they communicated with the; public in general instead of specific terms. He asked if anyone would want a quarter car wash next to their house, and stated Planning Commission Minutes -7- February 22, 1989 he did not want one next to his. He said that when he was collecting signatures, everyone in the neighborhood told him they had not known it was going to be a car wash. He said the neighbors wanted issues such as noise, trash, and layout addressed. He felt the car wash was secluded from the street and could lend itself to a meeting place where people could hide out. He felt any type of repair place should not be within 100 feet of a' residence. He felt a child care center or other use would have been a better` use of the property. Mr. Coleman stated public hearings were held on the original Conditional Use Pe i t. r. Earna felt there was a difference between Commercial meaning a 7 11 store and Commercial meaning a quarter car wash. Mr. routil stated the project had to go back through Design Review, at which point the City staff would work with the neighbors regarding their concerns . The Design Review Committee 's decision could be appealed to the full Planning Commission. He felt there might be significant mitigating measures that could be accomplished through the Design Review process. r arna stated' residents vote for politicians to protect their ' best interests and he felt the project was not in the best interest of the nei ghborhood a He asked if there was a time limit on the Conditional Use Permit. Vice-Chairman Chi tiea stated there would be an opportunity for the residents to address their concerns specifically regarding the plans brought forward, including mitigation measures. She suggested they talk to staff outside the Planning Commission Meeting and staff would explain the process in detail and pass along their concerns to the developer.' Gene Ullrich asked when the 'existing Conditional Use "Pe i t expired. Coleman stated he thought it was the end of June or duly 1989. Mr. Ullrich asked if the Conditional ; Use Permit could be revoked because of numerous code violations. He stated` there had been numerous code violations. He stated he had notified Cede Enforcement numerous times. He stated Mr. Greubl "s construction company was ignoring the City by, unloading and loading tractors and bulldozers at 1:00 a.m. every weekend, Mr. A1lridge stated he had called the police. He stated the applicant had applied for a color change and then painted a sea green instead of teak green (the approved color) . Vice-Chairman Chi iea stated the project would not be granted occupancy until the applicant corrected the paint and completed the project as approved* r. Ullrich asked the Planning Commission to look at the code violations and place the item on` the Agenda to ' revoke the Conditional Use Pe i t because of numerous code violations and offenses to the neighborhood. He said I arge tractors and trailers were parked in front of his house and allowed to run 5- 15 minutes and the fumes entered his house. Planning Commission Minutes February 22, 1989 . Kroutil stated he would instruct Code Enforcement to resolve the construction equipment problem. r. Coleman stated that in order to revoke, suspend, or modify a Conditional' Use Permit the Planning Commission would have to set a meeting to 'review the evidence. If them was sufficient evidence, the Co' fission could then set a' public hearing to consider the revocation, suspension, or modification, Alicia Ni emirow, 641 Revere Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she was opposed to the 'car wash because she felt it would interfere with the peaceful , 'quiet enjoyment of the residents of the neighborhood directly adjoining the car wa sh. She felt it would draw people at all hours of day and night and provide a hang ;out for teenagers playing loud music. She felt trash would' end up in the back yards of neighboring residences and crooks would have convenient access to hack yards. She felt the car wash would devaluate the neighborhood. Vice-Chairman Chitiea stated she; appreciated the concerns expressed, but that the Commission had no power to act on the use, as it was a permitted use. Kurt Shull 10336 Orange Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the proposed use is adjacent to residences. He felt the Planning Commission should have known that the use was too close to residences. He felt the residents should not have needed to protest. He stated air power tools would be used in the open, Chris Zola-Wright, 106 Bristol Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, felt the property values in the whole tract would suffer as a result of the car wash. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea stated the residents would be notified when the Planning Commission looked into the specifics of the car wash. OLD BUSINESS F. DESIGN REVIEW OR TENTATIVE TRACT 1 - - M.J. ';BROCK - The design review of--Yu-1of--Yu-17 ng elevations and difiilid 516t pan or a previously approved tract map consisting of 151 ` single family 'lots on 101.4 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) , located east of Haven Avenue' at Rings m - APN: - 1074- 51-0 . Sett Murphy;, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and a letter from the Chairman of the Architectural Control Committee of Haven View Estates, which requested various conditions of approval . Commissioner erick asked about the height conflict with the existing homes. Mr. Murphy stated that 6 of the 14 proposed units on the east boundary approximately 2-34 feet high when taking grading into account. He stated that the grade on lot. S gave the impression of a -story house. Planning Commission Minutes -9- February 22, 1989 Commissioner er ck asked if the houses on the adjoining lots in Haven View Estates were set back 100 feet from the rear of the lots, Murphy stated they were not. Commissioner Emerick felt it was unreasonable for the existing homeowners to request a 200 foot set back from adjoining homes if the existing homes were not set back 100 feet from the lot line. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the 'public hearing. Steve Shephard, M. J. Brock & Sans, stated they were addressing the concerns of neighboring residents. He stated M. J. Brock was sensitive to walls and would not allow any unattractive wars to be built. He felt the materials should not be restricted to the list supplied by the Haven View Estates Architectural Control Committee, as there were other acceptable' materials. He did not 'want to place all one story houses on the side of the street adjoining the existing residences, because he felt that would give an unbalanced look to the street; however, he suggested some houses could be replotted to mitigate having tall houses next to the existing homes. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked which lots would be replotted. r Shephard suggesting placing single stork homes on lots 28 and 36. Commissioner Emerick asked if the developed was planning to install interior fence walls between the lots. Mr. Shepha rd s to ted they were not. Commissioner Emerick asked if the developer was planning to add provisions to the CC&Rs to prohibit chain link and wood fences. r. Shephard stated they planned to prohibit chain link fences. He, felt some wood fences could be attractive and stated the Architectural Review Committee would have the final approval rights on fences. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked what material was planned for the perimeter wall . Mr. Shephard stated there was no perimeter fencing, only an equestrian trail . Commissioner Blakesley asked if grading was the reason for some units not taking access off the side streets. r. Shephard stated some lots were designed to give a more plush circular drive look_. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked to see which lets would be two-story on the model complex street. r. Murphy marked the lots. Planning Commission Minutes -10- February , 1989 Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked if the developer could not move one of the taller houses from the west side to the east side. r. Shephard stated he would explore the possibility with his engineering staff. Commissioner Cmerick stated he would like to see the switch made from Lot 4. Marc Roy, President of Haven View Homeowners ' Association, asked the size of the new homes. r. Shephard stated the minimum size was approximately 3,000 square feet with a bonus rooms, for a total of 4,000 square feet. Mr'. Roy stated he was concerned with the garden walls. He felt wood fences would not survive the winter winds. He said that on the plot plan most of the lots were oriented east/west, which meant that 'side galls would be exposed to the winds. He stated that in the first tract, it was required that houses be a maximum of 28 feet from the center of the grade. He felt the proposed project should have the same maximum height. He felt the proposed 4 of the garages facing the street would not be conducive to the 1 ratio on the existing homes. Mr. Roy stated Tackstem and R ngstem were winding streets of substandard width, and he felt driveways should not exit to those two streets'. He felt a two-rung wood trail fence would not blend in with the existing concrete nail fences. He also wanted ;parking in the front o properties and on the streets to be prohibited. Commissioner Blakesley' asked how many homes were built in the existing tract. r. Roy stated 27 homes were built on the 51 lots. Commissioner Blakesley asked if there 'were any restrictions on front garages. Mr. Roy responded that the Homeowners ' Association would not allow any more front garages to be built. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked how many front garages were in the tract. Mr. Roy stated they would prefer to have no front garages, but their phase had 1 . Bruce Ann Hahn, 5087 Granada Court, Rancho Cucamonga, asked where the two story houses would be that adjoined the existing tract. Mr. Murphy pointed out which lots were still plotted with two-story homes. Ms. Hahn stated that "winds are so strong that block wall fences have blown down in the neighborhood . She was concerned with any driveways exiting onto Ringstem and Tackstem. Carle Kruggel , Chairman of the Architectural Control Committee for Haven View Estates, stated their existing CC&Rs limited the height to a maximum of 28 Planning Commission Minutes' _11- February 22, 1989 feet and he 'felt it was not fair to allow the developer to build higher; He felt all lots adjacent to the existing tract should be a maximum of 28 feet. Mr. Shephard stated the developer was willing to prohibit wood fences,: He stated they wented to mix the fldorplans on each strut to avoid a tract look. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked if another location could be used for the models. r . Shephard stated the location selected was the only possible spot in the front of the tract. He stated that most floor plans had 4 oar garages and the CC&Rs required RVs to be parked obscured from the street behind a 6 foot gall . He stated suet parking had not been considered. He felt the driveways exiting' to Ringstem and Tackstem could be eliminated with the exception of one. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked what was planned for trail fencing. Mr hephard stated they would use PVC. r Murphy stated split rail good was the minimum ui nt for local trails and they could de P � _upgrade VC: There were no further public comments., Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked about the "substandard width" of the streets. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer,; stated the project was approved with 32 foot width streets and they were intended to be "no parking" streets . Mr, Murphy suggested the Commission might wish to approve the Design Review` with a condition that the plotting be reviewed by the Design Review Committee. The City could then advise the homeowners, who could then appeal the decision to the full Planning Commission. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked if grading could be used to lower the height of the houses. r. Murphy stated that the City has generally favored minimum grading and therefore the developer^ had designed the tract with stem walls. Commissioner Blakesley felt wood fencing :was not appropriate suggested they be restricted in :their' CC&Rsa He suggested decorative masonry could be specified. Commissioner Emerick suggested an architectural review committee could be set up for the tract to review fencing by the individual homeowners. Vice-Chairman Chitiea felt it might be appropriate have design standards to give to homeowners as a reference. Commissioner ' lak sley preferred to have the homes adjacent to the existing tract lowered to a maximum of 28 feet, particularly on lot 4. Planning Commission Minutes 1 » February 22, 1989 Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked if the Commissioners wished to entertain the idea l of additional grading to achieve the lower height. Commissioner Blaesley felt grading; night be used where the homes were adjacent to existing homes. Mr. Murphy stated that if padding were to be utilized, it would entail the design of the product type by the applicant. He asked if that type of product should then be used throughout the ;project. Commissioner Blakeslee favored minimum grading and use of `stem walls. He felt perhaps some units could be swapped to cut down on the height next to the existing homes. He felt the units were attractive and thought that the use of side garages in 60% of the units was a good ratio. He felt the cut-through circular driveways were attractive and felt homeowners would opt for the less- traveled route when exiting; the driveways. Commissioner Emerick felt it would mislead buyers to utilize padding and no stem walls on the models. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked the Unix of side versus front garages on the model street. Mr'> Murphy stated three of the ten homes had front entry garages. Commissioner lakesley felt PVC for the tail fencing would be compatible with the existing' fencing and would satisfy durability requirements. Vice-Chairman Chitiea wanted a condition added to require +PVC fencing. Commissioner erick was comfortable with the 6 ratio of side on garages and stated it was a larger percentage than other tracts in the City. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked Mr. Shephard how they arrived at the 60%/40 ratio. Mr'. Shephard stated that they directed the architects to design as many side on garages as possible. 'were were no further public comments, Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked if the number of front entry garages could be reduced if the grading was altered. Mr. Murphy stated that if more side on garages were desired it would require manufactured slopes, which ' would be out of character with the rest of the subdivision. Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner, stated side on garages could be, placed on every lot, but it would require redesigning the houses. Planning Commission Minutes` -13- February 22, 1989 Commissioner Rlakesley felt that considering the bonus room configuration on some of the front entry garages, the design was satisfactory. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blake ley, to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review for Tentative Tract with modifications to require review of the units adjacent to the existing homes to attempt to lower the profile with revised plans to be approved by the Design Review Committee, upgrading of the local equestrian trail fencing to PVC, prohibition of overnight parking on any streets, elimination of designated parking areas within front setbacks, and conditioning of the C &Rs to prohibit wood or chain` link fencing. Motion carried by the following vote- AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: EL, TOO OY -carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS C. APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DECISION TO COLOR MODIFICATIONS TO Steve Hayes, ; Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, along with color' samples and photographs of the buildings. Vice-Chairman invited public comments. The applicant was not present and there were no public comments. After reviewing the color samples, it was the consensus of the Commission to uphold the Design Review Committee 's decision. COMMISSION BUSINESS H. SELECTION OF C ISSIONERS TO ATTEND GROWTH MANAGE14ENT WORKSHOP It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that Larry McNiel and Suzanne Chitiea would attend the workshop. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. Planning Commission inn -1 - February 22, 1989 ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried t adjourn. 9: 0 P. Fla ng Commission Adjourned W a March 2, 1989, workshop at the Ranch Cup mon Neighborhood Center at 4:00 p.m. to discuss the Etivanda Nor Spec fic P an. Re pectf, bmit , Otto rd 1 I Deputy ecretar Planning Comission Minutes -15- February 22, ',1989 CITE' OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting February 8, 1989 , Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at :00 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel then led in the: pledge of allegiance. City Clerk Revery Authelet administered the oath of office to Suzanne Chitiea' and Bruce E ` rick: ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce' Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT. None STAFF PRESENT: Bread Buller, City Planner* Ian Coleman, Senior Planner-, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, ' Deputy City Attorney; Brett Horner, Assistant Planner; Dave Leonard, Park Project Coordinator; Russ Maguire, City Engineer- Beverly Nissen, Assistant: Planner; Paul Rdu eau, Senior Civil Engineer, ; Gail Sanchez, Secretary; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer; Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer; Chris Westman, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner announced that this evening's meeting would adjourn to a workshop on February 9 to discuss the Work Programs for 1989/90 and 1990 91 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by To'lstoy, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of October 6,` 1988. Lion: Moved by Chtiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of October 1I', 198 , as amended. Lion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of December 5 1988, as amended. Motion* Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of January 5,` 1989. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of January 19, 1989. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, carried with Emerick abstaining, to approve the minutes of 'January 25, 1989, as amended. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. MOOIFICATION TO DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87- - WESTERN PROPERTIES - The a ono of---ifibd-n-ted equipieR screen walls to an approved office park development consisting of four 2-story buildings totaling 243,000 square feet on 16.58 acres of land in the Office Park District of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Give - APN: 1011-4 1-05, 09, and 10. . DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 10210 - C. P. LANGE _ The design review of u ng a evat ons and dif7aile e P an or dts 1, 14, 20, 21, and 29 of a previously approved tract map consisting of 33 single; family lots on 9.91 acres of land in the Hillside Residential District, located north of Almond Street, between Sapphire Street and Turquoise Avenue - APN: 0- 441-01, 1 , 20, 21, and 29. C. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 14 _ MERICKEL DEVELOPMENT e eve op n o -s-i—n—gTe—family attached n on ac s tr and in the Low-Medium Residential District 4'-8 dwelling units per acre) at the northwest comer of 6th Street and Hellman Avenue - APN: 09-161-04, 05, and 05. D. VACATION OF ALL - A request to vacate alley southerly of gth Street and s r y o a avaras Avenue - APN: 07- 41- 1. Lion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to approve the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC H I S E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1055 - AANSS e eve op n o' n Dose un son' . acres of land -fin-the Medium Density Residential District 8-14 duelling units per 'ac , located north of Arrow Highway and east of Baker Avenue - APN. 07 1- 2 and 12. Beverly Nissen, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned what type of gates would be installed. He requested cards or some similar device, whereby mobile home residents would not have to exit their'`cars to operate the gate. Planning Commission Minutes - - February 8, 1989' Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. James Ross, Avaness Industries;, indicated they were planning to provide sliding gate with cards used for access, so that people could open the gates without exiting theircars. Commissioner Finerick asked if an easement would be granted to mobile home residents to allow them to go over the project site. Mr* Ross stated there was an existing easement, which they were planning to replace with two easements. Dee Murray, 8651-1 4 Foothill Boulevard, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she was head of the mobile horn park residents ' committee. She requested that she be allowed to bring the natter of the gates before the residents' committee if there were going to be any costs passed along to the mobile home park. Chairman McNiel stated that the gates would be installed at the applicant's' expense. Ms. Murray 'asked if the mobile home residents would have to pay for electricity. Mr. Ross stated the electricity would' be paid for by the new development. He stated that one of the complaints of the mobile home park residents had been' that traffic cut through the mobile home park, but with the gates, through traffic would no longer be able to cut through the park. Chairman McNiel stated there should be no economic impact upon the mobile' home park residents. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy requested that the Resolution be modified to indicate that grading; equipment could not be serviced during non-construction hours. He also requested that residents moving into the townhome project be advised that the access to the mobile home park was not :reciprocal . Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, suggested that written notice be given in the CC&Rs regarding the access easement being cane-ways only. Commissioner Tolstoy asked about dust control . Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, suggested a condition be added to control dust. Commissioner Emerick vented the CC&Rs to reflect that all operational maintenance costs for the gates would be borne by the condominium homeowners' association. Chairman McNiel felt it would impose a burden on the homeowners. Planning Commission Minutes - - February g, 1989 Commissioner erick felt it was important to spell out in advance who would carry the burden of repairs. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Mr. Ross stated the applicant would pay for the cost of installation and the electricity would be paid for by the condo homeowners' ;association- but he felt, it was fair to ask the mobile park residents to pay for repair casts, since they would he the ones using the gate. sMurraystated that the mobile park owners have the right to pass through any new expenses. She therefore wanted to be able to return to the mobile home parkresidents ' committee. She felt perhaps the gatesweren 't necessary. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the mobile park already had an access going through the project and the security gates were being installed to control north/south through traffic, which world benefit the townhome owners as well as the mobile park residents. He suggested the Resolution could be modified to provide that the location, design, and maintenance of the gates should be approved by the City Planner, following a meeting bet" en the mobile home park residents and the applicant. arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated the mobile home park may want to be able to fix the gates when they break instead of waiting for another homeowners' association to fix them. Commissioner Chitiea asked what would 'happen if the mobile home park residents decided they did not want a gate. Buller stated that if the gates were eliminated, t ugh traffic could cut through both the mobile home park and the townhome project. rRoss stated that the applicant did not wish to impose any burdens on the bile home park residents, and therefore they would be willing to accept the responsibility of maintaining the gates. sMurray asked about the ability of emergency services to enter through the gates. &. Coleman stated that the design of the gates would be approved by the fire department and the City. A NOX box would be required, which would povide a key for access by emergency 'services. rRoss stated they didn 't want to impose a gate if the mobile home residents did not want `the gate. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea stated that Planning Commission concerns regarding the original density of the project and sighting of certain buildings were addressed in the redesign of the project and she appreciated the applicant's efforts in achieving the improved designs.. Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 8, 1989 Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by + Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 14055 and Design Review of Tentative Tract 14055,; with modifications quiring automatic sliding gates, conditioning of the CC& s to provide consistent maintenance of the gates by the condominium Homeowners' Association, conditioning of CC&Rs to indicate that the access was not intended to be reciprocal , and dint control measures, as well as prohibiting servicing of construction equipment during indicated non-construction hours, Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIE , TOLSTOY` ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried I F. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL SEE PERMIT -C EIi E -' The eve op nt o' a neig „ or od co rc a shopping center cons sting of five structures totaling 30,770 square feet on 3.8 acres of land within the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at the southwest corner of Haven and Lemon - APN: 201-262-48. Chris West man, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jerry Greubel , applicant, stated they questing a time extension because they wanted to redesign phase II of the project in order to include land formerly leased by the water company. He stated he would be happy to answer any questions} John Rarna, 6331 Revere, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he lived behind< the protect. He stated that when the water company was digging the well , it kept him awake at nights. He asked what 'would be going' in directly next to his house. Chairman McNiel stated he recalled it to be a self-service car wash.: Commissioner Tolstoy stated he remembered the wall was to be heightened at the guest of a resident. He also stated the design of the westerly portion of the site which includes the cawash tube bays, and detail shop would be reviewed by the Design Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits. Chairman McNiel read Planning Division Condition 1 indicating a "combination of decorative walls and landscaping blending with the existing residential development. . .shall include tall growing ' evergreen trees to provide ! such screening" to be approved by the City Planner. Mr.' Barna was concerned with the element he felt used self-service car washes.. He indicated he would like have a higher wall and some trees for Planning Commission Minutes February 8, 1989 screening. He indicated that the southern part of his wall was only -1/ feet on the car wash side. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, indicated that if the applicant wanted to revise the plans to include the additional land from the Water District, it 'would' require going through; the Conditional Use permit process main because of requested modifications. Therefore, the public would have the opportunity to provide input into the hours of operation, noise mitigation measures, etc. r. Creubel stated the ll had been checked and it could be built higher. He stated 'that the project had been designed to have the noisy fu do s turned toward the inside of the project, away from the surrounding residents. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated the planning Commission should discuss. whether they believed the current conditions in the approved Resolution were sufficient to address the concerns of surrounding residents. If they felt the conditions should be modified, they could reevaluate the conditions prior to granting the Time Extension. Commissioner Chitiea hoped the existing conditions were sufficient to allows the issues to be properly addressed during design 'reviews. the asked if it would be possible to control the hours of operation. Mir, 'Buller indicated it would require n amendment to the original Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Chitiea asked if the hours could be limited on the Resolution granting the Time Extension. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated they could. Commissioner Chitiea proposed limiting the hours of operation. Commissioner Tolstoy concurred. r Coleman suggested adding the standard conditions developed by the City Council on the Nu West shopping center, which are now being used as standard conditions on commercial development dealing with hours of operation, property maintenance,' graffiti removal , trash pickup, etc. Commissioner Chitiea felt that would be appropriate. rBuller suggested the Commission might wish to continue the item for two weeks in order to allow' the applicant time view the additional recommended conditions. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. r Greubel agreed to a two-week continuance. Planning Commission Minutes -6- February B, 1989 Motion: ved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakeslby, to continue Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 87-04 until February 22, 1989. Motion carried by the following vote: APES: COMMISSIONERS: 81LAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, 'MICNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried U. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 11780 - K NBLATT - A su ' v s an arc an nto parse s in cry Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling unfits per acre) , loca d on the northeast corner of Almond and Mai Streets - APN$ - 71-55. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 8 8-15 - KORNBLATT - A request to reduce e m n mum average o s ze ram , square feet to 21,954 square feet on two lets within the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the northeast corner of Almond and Mai Streets - APN: 201-071-55. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and indicated that the Commissioners had in front of them three letters from surrounding residents' who opposed the project. Commissioner Emerick excused himself from hearing the item ;because he had formerly represented the applicant on a different matter. Joe Sofa, Associate Civil Engineer, recommended changing the warding o condition 1 of the Resolution to real "Approval shall be contingent upon the action of the City Council to amend the existing Lien Agreement, Resolution 81-1 7. " Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Melvin Kornb'latt, 10010 Almond Street, Rancho Cucamonga, applicant, stated that four or five lays on the approved Friedman project faced C Street and none faced Almond. indicated the potential existed for other lot sues on Almond, as there was one other undeveloped parcel . He presented pictures of all the homes which faced Almond. Chairman McNiel asked if Mr. Kornblatt planned to hook up to the sewer system. Mlr. Kornbltt indicated he planned to do whatever the City required. He stated he would prefer to hook up to the sewer. Bob White, 4947 Mai Street, Rancho Cucamonga, requested that the application' be denied because the lots would be smaller than called for by the City code. Planning Commission Minutes, -7- February 83, 1989 Gary Williams, 9988 Almond, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was afraid if the City allowed this lot split other owners of 1 acre lots would want to split their lots in half. He also stated Mr. Kornblatt had his property for sale. Rarrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated the lots met the minimum lot size, but not the average lot size. r* Williamsfelt the development of the lots would require a large amount of fill because of the grading, and there would be a big differential in the finished grading of the two lots. Phil Herrera, 4949 Ramona, Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned that allowing the split would set a precedent for the smaller' size. Dale Renegar, 9942 Almond, Rancho Cucamonga, indicated he moved to the area because of the spacious lots. He felt allowing the variance would set a precedent, and indicated other lots in the area were larger. r.. Kornblatt felt the open space was lost when the Friedman project was' approved. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. r Coleman indicated that the average lot size was added to the code in or er to allow for variation in lot sizes. He indicated it was not intended to deal with a parcel being split into two lots, but was intended to relieve the monotony of tracts with all lots of the same size. Commissioner Ehitea appreciated theresidents ' concerns and felt that as the Friedman houses were built the feeling of density would be increased. She felt allowing another lot split would add to the feeling of the loss of openness and could find no reason to support the variance. She was additionally concerned that the split might set a precedent in ;the area. Commissioner Bla esley felt the split might need substantial grading.; He stated that on tracts the minimum lot sizes are allowed, but the Commission preferred the average. He saw no reason to support the variance. Commissioner 'Tolstoy felt that as residents move into an area that is sparsely built, they must be aware that open space may vanish as parcels are developed. He indicated that other property owners might wish to split 'their 1- or 2-acre lots in the future and he felt it would not be fair to deny lot splits Just because of a loss of open space, Because the two lots met the minimum lot size requirement, he "felt it would be unfair to block the split. Chairman McNiel felt the measurements seemed contradictory because a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet is required, but the average size should be 22,500 square feet. He felt it would be difficult' to deny the application when it met the minimum lot size and just fell short of the average lot size. He saw no mason to disallow the split and felt to do so would cut into the rights of property 'owners who wish to split their parcels. Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 8,' 198 Commissioner Ohitiea indicated the smaller parcel would be subjected to traffic lights coming into it from the Friedman tract and would require additional grading. Chairman Mc Niel stated the width of the smaller lot would be 103 feet, and it would be comparable to others lots in the area. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that whoever bought the lot would have to design the layout in order to overcome the site difficulties, and those difficulties would be addressed at that time. Mr', Coleman stated that under Planning Commission Administrative Regulations, a tie vote means no action, which constitutes a denial with no Resolution either approving or denying the project. Therefore if the item was appealed to City Council , the minutes would constitute the record. Lion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by McNiel to adopt the Resolutions' approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11780 and Environmental Assessment and Variance 88 I5. Motion did not carry by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, ONITIEA ABSENT, E ISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN, COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK 5:40 P.M. - Planning Commission Recessed 9:00 P.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLANAMENDMENT goes o change thi propose ocat on of' 19 Rea Hill oun ry Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard intersection,; as shown in the Specific Plan, by the realignment of Red Hill Country Club Drive to approximately 400 feet east of the present intersection with Foothill Boulevard, based upon an in-depth engineering study. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. He suggested rewording Condition 5 to indicateat the Planning Commission recommended approval . Commissioner Tolstoy asked to see the drawing of how the cul-de-sac would be placed. Planning Commission Minutes -9- February 8, 198 ' Commissioner Chitiea asked how the Magic Lamp driveway would be impacted. r. Rougeau stated the Magic Lamp should widen their driveway for better access. Commissioner Emerick asked how many vehicles would be able to make a left turn from Foothill going north on Red Hill Country Club Drive during peak' traffic. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Joe Foust, principal of Austin-Foust Associates, Inc., the firm which prepared the feasibility study, stated the current count is 208 vehicles per hour making left turns during afternoon peak hours. It was felt that this included both residents and through traffic. They estimated that with no left turn arrow 2` - 4 vehicles would be able to :make the turn per cycle, equating to 160' left turns per hour. Commissioner Einerick asked if the number of vehicles making the left' turn would be decreased as westbound traffic on Foothill increased. r Foust indicated the number of vehicles making a left turn would then drop to I - 2 per; cycle, thereby decreasing the hourly number. Commissioner Emerick asked if that would be enough to serve the residents of Red Hill . r. Foust stated they felt that would be sufficient for resident traffic. Commissioner Blakesley asked why a short-duration left turn arrows was not being recommended. r Foust indicated their experience has been that if left turn arrows are unduly short, many drivers ' merely continue to turn after they receive a red light. r. Rougeau indicated that with a left turn arrow, some people speed up to try to make' te arrow. r. Foust suggested an all -red interval at the end of the yellow light, with no left turn arrow. Chairman Mckiel felt there would be more accidents with no left turn arrow. r Foust felt that an all red signal would provide the cushion to prevent accidents. He felt that if a left turn arrow was installed, it would add to the through traffic using Red Hill . Commissioner Blakesley preferred a left turn arrow. Betty Anton, 7611 Buena Vista, Rancho Cucamonga, stated her two main concerns were traffic control on Red Hill and the ability to turn left onto Foothill from Red Hill Country Club Drive.. She wanted eastbound traffic routed to the Planning Commission Minutes 10 February 8, 1989 Sycamore Inn, where it would make a U-turn. She felt only residents would willing to make a U-turn at the Sycamore, as it would be shorter for through traffic to continue on to Vineyard in order to go north. Tom Francis, 2241 Michel torea, Los Angeles, stated he owned property across from the Sycamore Inn. He asked if the traffic flog study had considered' traffic' all the way to Baker. Chairman McNiel stated that it had. Michael List, 771 Alta Cuesta, Rancho Cucamonga, stated safety on Foothill Boulevard and the amount of traffic on Al; Cues should b considered. He did not; feel any of the proposals addressed the Alta Cuesta traffic. He asked for the elimination of the curve on Red Hill Country Club Drive. He suggested going further east on Foothill and making a road opposite the trailer park; entrance on Foothill . Chairman McNiel felt that would create a greater problem for Baker Street. r. List suggested another option would be to construct the road north of Baker, entering the new tract on the front of the hill , and going north; from there to Red Hill Country Club give. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, felt that the -1 slopes in the area would make it very difficult to construct a street. Mr. List was concerned about the cars stacking to make a left turn in order to go north on Red Hill Country Club drive. Chairman McNiel stated a median island would be constructed to separate the traffic from westbound traffic. Ben Mackall , 9956 Hemlock Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he represented Nay Cramer Mackall the owner of the parcels involved in the proposed realignment. He stated they were concerned and felt their remaining lot would become undevelopable, and they therefore n d adequate compensation from the City. Elizabeth lve , 8166 Foothill Boulevard, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she was the owner of the service station at Red Hill Country Club Drive and Foothill Boulevard. a felt ralign nt was a was of taxpayer money that the alignment should remain as is. She felt that prohibiting left turns onto Foothill Boulevard from Red Hill Country Club give would solve any current problems. She expressed concern that with the realignment, traffic would rely cut through the service station. Joshua Warren, 7893 Alta Cuesta, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had lived on Alta Cuesta for the past eighteen years. He was concerned about the increase in traffic` using Alta Cuesta. He felt eastbound traffic on Foothill should not be able to make a left hand turn onto Red Hill Country Club Drive. He stated that morning traffic going ; south on Alta Cuesta was gust as bad as evening traffic. Planning Commission Minutes -11- February 8, 1989 Chairman McNiel stated the traffic in the morning going south would be the same as the 'traffic in the evening going north. He said he was instrumental in getting the stop sign installed at Yale Vista some years earlier, and he felt that had helped to slow traffic. He said the Sheriffs were also active in the area. Mr. Warren felt the speed enforcement by the Sheriffs was very sporadic because the City did not have the money to ;provide for continual enforcement. Dale Frisby, 7904 Valle Vista, Rancho ' Cucamonga, commended the traffic engineers and agreed that Alternative 4 was the best solution. However, he did prefer a green left turn arrow of short durations, because he felt without' one traffic would back 'up toe far. Bob Brown, 7624 Alta Cuesta, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he thought 2,200 cars per day currently use Red Hill . He felt not that much over-the-hill traffic would be eliminated, He also thought the Sheriffs should ticket more people. Pat Lewis, 8335 Camino Sur, Rancho Cucamonga, liked the engineering study. felt Alternative 4 was good and felt a left turn arrow could be installed later if necessary. Emanuel St olman 8433 Valle Vista Place Rancho Cucamonga,n a felt it was a fair _ solution. He wanted to know how soon the City would start condemning the property and how soon the construction would take place. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, stated it was preliminarily scheduled to begin' this fiscal year through the Cal-'brans process. However, because of the lawsuits, the schedule was pushed back approximately ten 'months. He felt the program would be started through Cal-Trans in June with design work beginning' in December, and; acquisitions and right-of-way negotiations beginning the following June. Mir. Stolman asked how the City would deal with property owners to obtain title to the property. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated the City would try to negotiate with the owners , but if necessary they could condemn the property and pay fain market value. r. Stolman asked how soon the City would be dealing with the property owners. Chairman McNiel stated it would be necessary to deal with the appropriate agencies prior to commencing negotiations. This meant that the City would require approval of Southern Pacific for the railroad bridge and Cal Trans. Therefore, the process could take a long time. Don Bollinger, stated he represented San Antonio Hospital , and they appreciated the City "s willingness to reconsider the originally proposed realignment through their property. He felt Alternative 4 made better traffic and economic sense, He stated they now could go forward with the planning and development of their property. Planning Commission Minutes -1 - February B, 1989 Gordon Zwisler, 7879 Sierra Vista, Rancho Cucamonga, felt the alternative made the most sense. He indicated that Red Hill Country Club quite often has dinner 'parties or meetings 'which meant that many cars sometimes would need to make a left within a short period of time. Nearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Blakesley felt from a symmetry point of view Alternative 2 looked the bent, but he felt it was unacceptable to impact the Sycamore Inn. He felt Alternative 4 was a goad compromise. Commissioner Chitiea was also not willing to tamper with the SycamoreInn or its trees. She felt it s not appropriateto put a street rough the middle o kin l a r o She thought r parking t. oug t ;Alternative native 1 was too costly and would impact future devel'opment too much. She favored Alternative 4, but felt installing left turn lane without a signal would be a safety hazard. She supported the proposal with a left turn arrow of reasonable, not minimal , length. Commissioner Tolstoy felt Alternative 4 was the best solution to a weighty problem and he agreed with Commissioner Chitiea regarding the green arrow. Commissioner Emerick supported Alternative 4, but was not sore regarding the left turn arrow. He felt the traffic engineers were more knowledgeable in the area, but he was afraid the engineers may :have been placing too much emphasis on cutting down through traffic. Chairman McNiel stated he liked the original concept of cutting through to Grove because it would reduce the traffic on Foothill Boulevard, Of the current proposals' he favored Alternative 1 because' he felt it would better service Baker and Red Hill Country Club Drive, but he felt the cost was too high. He felt the alternatives cutting ;through the Sycamore Inn were not acceptable. Therefore, the only viable alternative was 4. He did not like the idea of a non-signalized left turn lane, even if it meant more through traffic. Commissioner Chitiea stated she felt that safety had to be a higher concern than the amount of through traffic. Lion. Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Amendment 89-02, with modifications to state the Planning Commission was recommending approval . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS.- BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES: COMMISSIONERS.- NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: N -carried Planning Commission Minutes -13 February 8 1989 DIRECTOR'S REPORTS K. REVIEW OF CONCEPTUAL PARK DESIGN; FOR TWO TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY Dave Leonard Park Project Coordinator, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the fencing prevision. He asked if it would be temporary fencing and who would set it up. Leonard stated that permanent fencing would be installed, and it would only be necessary to lock the access areas. Commissioner Tolstoyasked if there would be any means to control the water outflow. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated there would be an inlet/outlet structure located in the lower 'basin with a restricted outflow to keep the flog below the limits set by flood control , He said there would be approximately four pedestrian access gates as well as vehicular maintenance access gates, with the vehicular gates normally being kept closed: He said the lower basin would probably be closed off during the storm season. Commissioner Chitiea asked the design and height of the fencing. Mr. Leonard stated the specifics had not been designed, but they envisioned columns with wrought iron, probably 6 feet high. Chairman McNiel asked if there would be grass in the ponding area. r Silva responded there would be grass in that area and ground cover on the slopes. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the ponding site was a stop-gap measure until another flood channel was constructed. r. Silva responded it was meant to be permanent. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the field would be lame enough to have games in the summer. Commissioner Finerick questioned the land use compatibility between the volley ball court and nearby residences. Leonard responded there was an elevation differential and the area would not be lighted at night. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Tom Dellaquila, Lewis Homes Landscape Architect, felt the area would be unusable only during storms. He stated they had retained Professor Perry from Cal Poly to be sure the plants selected were suitable. He felt the field Planning Commission Minutes -14- February 8, 1989 would be suitable for passive uses and stated the park was designed to work in conjunction with the YMCA Park, Chairman McNiel stated the YMCA Park was subject to change and would be considered in a workshop in the future. n Thompson, Lewis Homes, stated they were willing to make changes which the City requested, Commissioner Finerick asked what kind of soil would be in the ponding section of the park, r, Dellaquila stated it would be sand with rocks, There re no further public comments. Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated the Planning Commission was being asked to provide comments regarding the land use issues. Co issioner Tolstoy hoped passive park use would be encouraged. Commissioner Blakesley requested that there be shading of the tot lots and adult seating areas surrounding the tot lots. Commissioner Chitiea asked that they be sensitive to seating for visibility of the tot lot, She felt it was important that the YMCA are a and park be designed together and: asked if the YMCA had been given an opportunity to comment on the La Mission Park, r Leonard stated YMCA had been involved, r. Leonard suggested that when park lands are moved, it sometimes makes it difficult to find large enough areas for ball fields. Chairman McNiel stated that there o schools of thought regarding parks,' with people thinking that every small park needs a ball field and another group which 'thinks the City needs a large proactive park with all kinds of ball fields. He felt small , passive parks were_needed in this area. Co' issioner Chitiea indicated there werelots of reasons for parks, and not all included ball fields, PUBLIC HEARINGS J. TRACT 13273 - LEWIS HOMES - A request to modifycondition of approval o a _060 ous i-p proved and recorded one-lot tract+ for 256 condominium units within the Medium-High Residential District (14-24' dwelling units' per acre) of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Mountain View iDrive - A ® Z -1 , Planning Commission Minutes ' -15 February 8, 1989 Debra Meier, Associate: Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Borg Thompson, Lewis Homes, stated that they volunteered to switch the site at the YMCA and add more land to the park, but approval of the park Mans would' now take much longer than approval for a green way trail . He requested the Planning Commission approve the modification to allow then to obtain building permits prior to approval of the park plans, but indicated they would build' the trail system concurrently with the homes. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel felt the request was reasonable. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, asked for clarification on the Resolution condition regarding release`of SA of the units. s. Meier stated the SC% release referred to occupancy. Linn: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving the modification to Tract 13273, with modification to state the greenway sidewalk shall be constructed and landscaped prior` to release o occupancy for 50% of the units. Motion carried by the following vo AYES: COMMISSIONERS.* BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TBLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS- NONE ABSENT: C ISSION S: NONE -carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS L. TENTATIVE TRACT 13886/CBNDITION USE PERMIT N -01 - N B BI /'CHI eview o' propose roo r a or a -unit fo-Wnfi6iiFe project and a 9,000 square foot commercial center, located at the northwest corner of Base Line Road and Etiwanda Avenue - APN. 7-5 2 01, 02, 03, 04 and 27- S 1-65. Ban. Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Mark Elliott, Nal band in/Chian, stated he wanted to emphasize that the light fight of the Cal-Shakes was necessary or they would have to redesign both the interior and the exterior of the'commercial building. He pointed out that the material was twice as ,expensive as concrete tile, He stated the developer's intent was to create a building similar to the Christian Farmers' Market. He stated concrete the could be used on the condominium units without redesigning the units. Planning Commission Minutes -16- February 8, 198 Commissioner T'olstoy asked about the wind load factor. Mr. Elliott stated it was rated 70 pounds, Commissioner Tolstoy asked if that meant 70-pound wind load would be the II maximum that would be experienced. Stove Miller, Cal-Shake, presented a catalog showing pictures of Cal-Shake' applications, an International Conference of Building Officials i1CBO) report, a letter from Los Angeles County approving the use of Cal-Shake, and article regarding Cal-Shake. He indicated they had an; application which withstood a typhoon with winds in excess of 100 mph. He gave a brief history of the; product and showed samples. Chairman McNiel asked how the material stood up over time. r# Miller indicated they had applications in Hawaii over ten years old, and that wood snake roofs generally only last seven years in that climate. He stated the product may tend to lighten slightly as it ages. Chairman McNiel stated the ICBO report and the Los Angeles County letter did not comment regarding aging. He said his concern was that with the high wind' conditions that Rancho Cucamonga experiences, the roof aright not last. He stated that because of its light weight, the product implied it might not be strong. He was also concerned because if the roof material did not worm out, the only alternative might be asphalt shingles, because the structure would not support a heavier, the roof. Mr. biller stated there was a 30 year warranty on the roof. He stated the product had been installed in paler Springs, which has higher winds, and they haven't had any problems . Chairman McNiel stated warranties were not worth much. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how the roof was attached. Mr. Miller responded that it was attached with staples. Commissioner Chitiea asked how the iron oxide roof coloring would be repaired when the roof became scratched from someone walking on i t, r* Miller responded that the roof came with a touch-up ;kit. He stated the roof would normally have a scuffed up look, which gives it more of a look of wood shakes. Jorge Garcia, 7161 Cambridge Avenue, stated he was an architect. He felt Cale Shake was an excellent material , and would be better than concrete because of the light i ght and the fact that it could be more firmly attached with additional staples, whereas with concrete file you cannot add additional' nails, Planning Commission Minutes -17- February 8, 1989 Chairman McNiel wondered if the Cal-Shake material might not become wind borne; like a frisby, instead of merely falling to the ground like clay and concrete tiles. ; Commissioner Tols'toy thought Cal-Shake ties might withstand someone walking on them better than brittle tiles. r. Garda agreed the Cal-Shake would probably be better. Chairman McNiel asked about flexible strength of Cal-Shake. r. Miller stated so long as it was installed 10 inches or less, it could be walked on with no damage. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Chitiea stated> than so far the product seemed to be working, but the guarantee would be only as good as the company standing behind it. Her major concern was; that if the product did not work, the building would not bei strong enough to support a concrete the roof, and the City would be 'stuck with a less attractive roof`. She also did not really care for the look of the Cal-Shake. Commissioner Emerick felt the Commissioners were not comfortable with Cal- Shake because they had not seen an application. He stated he would like to see an application and would like to see how it weathered through a season. He felt the main problem with roofs is how they are attached, and problems had been experienced in one housing tract with tile roofs because the developer did not use long enough nails. He felt the roof would not blow off so long as it was fastened correctly. He felt that from the ground the Cal-Shakes would give the appearance of a wood shake roof and the pictures satisfied his concerns regarding aesthetics. He was willing to allow the application on the commercial building, but would prefer not to have it on the residences. Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that if the ' roof were built to support al ternate material , he woul d be wil 11 ng to al low the use of Cal-Shake. He was willing to use it on the grouses because 'their structures would support the heavier the if it was necessary to replace the roofs. He was a little apprehensive about experimenting with the large commercial building, and then perhaps' being forced to accept asphalt. He felt the Cal-Shakes looked better than a wood shake roof. Commissioner Blakesley indicated his initial concerns were more with aesthetics and he felt' that from a distance it would look fine. He felt that if the developer had proposed a straight industrial building, they would be using a hot-mopped asphalt roof and the Manning Commission would be satisfied. However, because the developer was proposing a commercial building to be compatible with the residences, the Planning Commission was being more selective in the roof material . He was willing accept the Cal-Shake roof. ' Chairman McNiel felt the building interior could be changed to support the the roof without affecting the exterior. He asked Mr. ,Elliott what kind of roof was used on the Christian Farmers ' Market. Planning Coninission Minutes -18- February g, 1989 . Elliott stated that the roof on the Farmers' Market was fiberglass shingles, ' stated that in order to support the heavier 'roof the exterior of the building would have less glass and it would need a larger amount of sheer wall expanse. Chairman McNiel stated he was reluctant° to approve the use of Cal-Shake because of lack of history. He asked what others options there would be on the I� commercial building if the Cal-Shakes did not work. r'. Elliott stated there are other manufacturers with other products. There were no further public comments. I Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to see the whale project use Cal- Shake, including the residential ' s tion. Commissioner Emerick stated he was willing to allow Cal-Shake on the entire project. Lion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, to approve the Cal-Shake material for both the residential and the commercial portions of Tentative Tract 1' BS6/Conditional Use permit 88-01.. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, TOL ' CY ES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Motion: Moved by Blakesley, seconded by Tolstoy,' unanimously carried, to continue the eting beyond' 1.-00 p.m M. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Bg CT A. W. DAVI E.S - A request to add BUC squaFe eet o office space o an Mitifig' FuTMng and warehouse totaling 4,560 square feet on 3.82 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the southeast corner of 9th Street and Helms Avenue_- AP : 209-0 I and 64. Brett rner Assistant Planner, ;presented `the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Charles Cokow, 222 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, attorney for the applicant, felt it was unfair to require $ 50,UU0 worth of improvements in order to bring the property up to code when they only wanted to add bCC square feet of office space, He felt the Nolan court case supported their contention that Citifies do not have the power to rub out all non-conforming uses, They felt the only lawful requirement was the need for additional parking. Planning Commission Minutes _19- February 8, 198 Jorge Garcia;, project architect, felt the conditions would; be justifiable on a full development review, but were not justified for a minor development view. He felt better guidelines should be spelled out in the ordinances to ever what constitutes a miner development review and what leniency p staff was allowed to exercise in addressing improvements required. He also complained that eight months had elapsed since they applied for the building permit and they still were net able to start construction. Chairman McNiel stated that when a non-conforming use has been in place for a very long time and the balance of the area has grown and developed i into what the zoning requires, the only chance the City has quire property be; brought up to present'codes is when the owner wishes to ke changes to his property. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated there was another alternative. He stated the non-conforming section of the Development Code, does not allow discretion by building officials, City planner, Planning Commission, or City Council to waive mandatory standards contained in the City Code. However, the Planning Commission may allow an expansion of the use if the expansion meets two conditions: (1) the use must comply with the General plan, and i the use must not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of neighbors. Any expansion would require a public hearing, at which time the Commission could decide which improvements to pursue. Commissioner Chitiea stated that in looking at the chronology it did not appear that the City had delayed the applicant, but rather the applicant had allowed appeal periods to 'lapse without acting. Therefore,, she felt that representations that the City was slowing down the process seemed inaccurate. Commissioner Blakesley stated the project was an eyesore as well as a non- conforming use, but he felt a conflict with requiring improvement of the whole lock with the small office addition. Doskow stated that the use itself was not non-conforming, there were other aspects about the site that were non-conforming. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Emerick felt perhaps phasing would be acceptable to allow the applicant to improve the property, without quiring him; to come up with all the money immediately. Chairman McNiel stated that the property did have a large street frontage. Commissioner Emerick stated that on November 10, 1988, the applicant had proposed phasing of the improvements, and he felt the City should perhaps accept phasing He felt the proposed three years for screening might be too long; rBuller stated that at one point in time the applicant was willing to phase, but their most recent application indicated they did not wish to make any of the required improvements. He said that from a fire code perspective, Planning Commission Minutes February 8 1989 the building was non-conforming with the current lot lines, He stated if a certificate of compliance lot line adjustment was made to bring the building i into compliance with fire code regulations, the lower parcel of land could be excluded from the parcel . Bill Silva stated that under the Municipal Code, once the requirement for improvements is triggered, the improvements must be made. Therefore, the only opportunity available for phasing would be to split off the southern lot. Commissioner Blakesley didn't think phasing was appropriate. Commissioner Tolstoy felt a 600 square foot expansion on that large of a building did not warrant the lame expense for improvements, even though he felt the building and; the site was an eyesore. Commissioner Chitiea felt it would be appropriate for the City to require the improvements to ;bring it into conformance with present development, or i might encourage the applicant to find another property. Chairman McNiel felt the property was fast becoming too valuable for the applicant to merely sit on it. Commissioner Blakesley felt a 600 square foot 'expansion would not perpetuate the under-utlization of the property . He felt if they were requesting a larger office expansion, it would make more sense to require all the improvements. Commissioner Chitiea stated that as recently as November 1988 the applicant had been willing to make the improvements on a phased basis. She felt the City should try to do as much as possible to clean up the'area. Commissioner Blakesley felt screening the property from view would be appropriate and desirable. Chairman McNiel asked Mr. Davies when he estimated they would move to another location. A. W. vies, applicant, stated he estimated the life of the project to be 3 - years., Chairman McNiel asked if it would be possible to adopt the Resolution with a time line condition. r. Hanson stated an agreement could be adopted which would state when improvements would be completed. However, forcing compliance would involve going to court and convincing a Judge to use injunction' powers to force the action. + He recommended against bonds on private improvements. He stated there could be a cash bond, but if the applicant had the money they mould do the improvements now. Chairman McNiel stated that options 1 approve the application with conditions listed, (2) deny the application, or ( ) continue the item to hold a public hearing to consider allowing an expansion of the non-conforming use, He invited the applicant's comment. Planning Commission Minutes - - February H 1989 Mr`, Doskow stated they would prefer the third approach. rR Davies felt it was unfair for the City; to require improvements 'or such a small expansion, when he had been a businessman in the City for 28 years and had neighboring properties which were ,dust as ugly as his.; Motion: Moved by Blakesley,, seconded by Emerick, to continue Minor Development Review 89-07 to March 8, 1989, to conduct a public hearing.' Lion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EM RICK, TDLSTQY NOES: COMMISSIONERS.* IMCNIEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Chairman McNiel stated he opposed the continuance because the applicant did not showy a willingness to compromise. r.. Buller asked for guidelines from the Commission as to negotiation parameters. He asked if they wished to negotiate only on phasing, or the physical development of the site also. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the objective was to try to clean up the neighborhood ' as best as possible. He felt the parking was critical and perhaps landscape screening. Commissioner Chitiea asked if this was fair to other developers who had to bring their properties 'up to code when making changes to their properties. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that any requirements should be potentially useful for the new use when Mr. Davies sells or redevelops the property. Commissioner Chitea stated she would like all the improvements, but was willing to consider phasing.;' Commissioner Emerick wanted the 3 feet of dedication for street right-o -way on Helms Avenue. He suggested a wall should be required on 9th' Street. COMMISSION BUSINESS N. DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Commissioners Chitiea and Tolstoy were appointed to the Commercial/Industrial review team, and Commissioners Emerick and McNiel were appointed to the Residential review team. Commissioner Blakesley will serve as alternate. Planning' Commission Minutes - - February 8, 1989 Brad Buller, City Planner, distributed maps to the Tolstoy residence'. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this t,ime. J R ENT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adjourn, 1 40 A.M. - Planning Comission adjourned to a workshop February 9, 1989, at the 7olstoy residence, 9540 Hillside, Rancho Cucamonga, to discuss iwork programs Respectfully submitted, A Brad B 11er Sep re ta ry Planning Commission Minutes - 3- February 8, 1989 ' � �� �r������ ���; c �p� ti �� ,�}�� ��u � �. �� r ,:, �,�: " : ���x� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting February 3, 1989 NORTH ETIWANDA PLAN WORKSHOP Chairman McNiel called the adjourned February 3, 1989 meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 4: 0 p.m. at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga The purpose of this meeting was to allow the Commission and staff to comment on concerns regarding the preliminary draft of the Etiwan a North Specific Plan* ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS.- PRESENT, David Blakesley, Suzanne Chiti a, Bruce Emerick, Lamy McNiel , 'Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner-, Larry Henderson, Senior Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior, Planner; Miki B'ratt, Associate Planner; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Bruce Abbott, '; Associate Planner; Beverly Nissen, Assistant Planner; Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner; Jeff Gravel , Assistant Planner; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, 'Barry Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Betty Miller, '; Assistant Civil Engineer. Larry Henderson, Senior Planner, made a brief introduction, outlining the; course of the workshop, stressing that the meeting would not require a recap presentation from the Caryn Company and Land Plan Design Group Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, began by indicating that the Specific Plan should expand its text, describing the architectural types and their specific elements. He said it should also include signs that designate neighborhoods and garages and their types and locations on the individual lots. Commissioner,, Blacesley suggested that the architectural types be described and their locations indicated in the plan area. Commissioner TolstDy agreed. Joe DiIhrio, President of the Caryn Company, explained that only the most neighborhoods.la styles from each type o architecturewould be mixed in particular _ For example, styles from h p o s y s each :type of architecture which may have similar structural or aesthetic elements would be l a d in their own neighborhoods. Planning Commission Minutes -1- February 3, '1989 Jess Harris Land/Plan Design Group,, indicated that the materials to be used in the particular neighborhoods would be provided in the Specific Plan. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested they investigate the concept of the use o alleys. He said he would like to avoid the look of garages dominating residential street frontages. Commissioner Chitiea was concerned with neighborhood wall types and asked what type of materials would be used and would they be associated with the entry portals. She stressed the impor ne of using natural stone and real brick rather than synthetic materials. Mr. Tolstoy ;asked if the entries of the neighborhoods would contain the names of the individual; neighborhoods.' r. Ci lorio said these possibilities were boding' considered. He said currently they were including the names of the neighborhoods at the entries. He said they would provide a graphic detail of what had been planned. Brad Buller, City Planner, asked if the names of the neighborhoods should be on entry monuments or if the entry monuments themselves should identity the neighborhoods through their design and use of materials. r. Ci ldrio said they would' have some graphics prepared to represent the types of walls they are thinking about and show them at the next workshop. r. Buller voiced a concern about the mix' and variety of architecture proposed. He suggested that the plan clearly state the mix and variety for each neighborhood. r. ai lorio suggested using the ratio provided in the Etiwanda Specific Plan to determine the number of architectural 'types; needed. He stated he had not tried using 'this ratio yet on the new project- however, an analysis would be made and a conclusion would be presented in the future. Commissioner Chitiea said there should be a minimum number of architectural elements per architectural type and that the plan needs to address the types of material used on the side yard fencing. r. McNiel said that developers would capitalize on the minimum standard. He suggested it probably would not be a good 'idea to have a minimum standard. r Buller indicated the Commission still needed to review the .subdivision standards s such as setbacks, building separation, and lot width' and depth. r. McNiel questioned lot widths and what width would accept side-on garages. - r. Ci orio said there would be a :variation of lot widths throughout the project and in each area a certain percentage of the lots would have the width to provide side-on garages. Commissioner Tolstoy said the agenda of the next workshop should discuss the canyon areas and the bog. Planning Commission Minutes - - February 3, 1989 Henderson added there was a need to discuss commercial standards in the project area. t was agreed that the next workshop would be scheduled for March 2, 1989 at 4:30 p.m. before the Design ;Review Committee meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ABrad�Bul r Sec re ta rr Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 3, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting February 2, 1989 TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER WORKSHOP Chairman Larry Mckiel called the special: workshop meeting to order at g:C P.M. at the Ranch Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT. David Blakesley, Suzanne Chi tiea, Bruce erick, Peter Toltoy, Larry McNiel STAFF PRESENT. Brad Buller, City Planner, Ban Coleman, Senior Planner, Debra Meier, Associate Planner TARGET STORE Michael Moorman, project architect for Target Stores, presented three alternatives to the gent elevation of the Target structure in response to the comments generated at the January 19, 1989` workshop. e Commission preferred Elevation Scheme B. Of the many items discussed on January 19, 1989, this elevation specifically included the following item which were of concern to the Commission: 1. The use of the had been eliminated within the arch over the main entry doors. Mr. Moorman now proposed the use of polished stone, 2. e vuss'oi r around i the main arch will also he polished stone. 3. The building plain will "telescope" back from the front wall to the entry doors. 4. A column was selected to be used on each side of the entry arch. 5, The' blind cut-outs on either side of the entry will include Polished stone against the back wall , and the wainscot planter in foreground. 6* A semicircular painted metal grill will set in front of the polished stone over the main entry. 7. The cut-outs east of the garden center will have polished stone against the wall matching the cut-outs around the main entry. Planning Commission Minutes -1- February 2, 1989 8. The garden center entry will simulate the main entry, using a similar arch and grill pattern on a smaller scale. g. Vines will be planted to climb up the arbor. In addition to the revisions noted above, the Commission discussed the overall elevation and reached a consensus with regard to the following design details. 1. The the medallions shall be made of one color )tile (dark blue) rather than two colors. 2. The narrow rectangular cut-outs on either side of the entry arch are to be deleted. . The stucco surface between the stone vussoir and the edge of the arch will be a lighter' color than the main wall 4.' All metal gill material shall match the dark blue tile the extent possible. 5. The entire front elevation shall include a the wainscot. The tile wainscot shall be included on the building face behind the trellis/planter feature. 6. The screening material used behind the gates into the garden center should be of a somewhat opaque nature to screen views of garden supplies. e Commission approved the elevation as revised, incorporating all comments as noted above, UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM Tom Bond, Architects Pacifica, ?presented the aspects of the sign program that remained unresolved from the January' 5, 1989 workshop. 1. Project Identification Monument Sign: In response to the previously propose 11 12' x 19' iWiFuiFen s gns, the architect presented a low profile wall WO" maximum height) that is located on each side o e main entry drive from Foothill Boulevard. The identification of Terra Vista Town Center will be displayed on the central portion of e wall (white letters on a blue the background). Near the street frontage will be a 416" x "0" plaque identifying Edwards Cinema. A secondary wall sign of smaller scale will be l a d on either side of the entry from Haven Avenue. This wall will identify "Terra. Vista Town Center"' only (White letters on blue file background) . 2. Major Tenant; Identification: These will include three monument signs anti Y ng or iia su jor tenants.'' Two will be placed at secondary entry ``drives from Foothill Boulevard and one on Haven Avenue, south of the project entry drive. These signs are o"B" in Planning Commission Minutes - - February 2, 1989 height and 9'8" in width, and will identify two majors on the signs located on Haven and the westerly Foothill Boulevard entrance, and one major and two sub-majors on the easterly Foothill Boulevard entr y. r Y All signs are to include internally illuminated letters, as well as soft flood lighting of the ;sign structure. A maximum of two letter colors will be permitted on ;any one sign. The monument signs will be stucco with finish and 'color matching the buildings. 3. Tenant 'Wall Signs:: The Commission agreed to the following hierarchy of a er sizes: Major tenant - 4'3" maximum (Target's bullseye would be 5'0" dia.) Subsequent major tenant signs shall not exceed the square footage of the Target sign. Sub-major tenant 'U" nominal height Retail shop - 18" maximum letter height 4. Restaurant ignage: A basic rectangular monument sign has been esTabilShed for use by the restaurants along Foothill Boulevard. The size presented was acceptable The Commission wanted to add a stucco cap to be consistent with other monument signs. In addition, the Commission wanted a ' clause added that would allow deviation from this bane form and material through the design review process in conjunction with the review of the building architecture. 5. Theater 'Marquee. The Commission did not reach a consensus regarding size are ayou of the marquee. The architect will be redesigning the sign based upon using a 6" marquee letter height# Commissioner Tol stay was concerned that the marquee, in its ;proposed size, would not be readable to motorists traveling on Haven Avenue. tither Commissioners were unsure of increasing the size of the sigh, but were willing to consider it upon reviewing the alternatives. With those changes, the Commission approved the Uniform Sign Program for Terra Vista Town Center. e meeting concluded at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, A grad gu; 1 er Secretary Planning Commission Minutes - February 2, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 25, 1989 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7: Q P.M. The meeting' was held at Lions Park Community Center, 91611 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California, Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry Niel , Peter Tol stay ABSENT. David Blakesley STAFF PRESENT* Laura Bonaccorsi , Landscape designer; Miki Bratt, Associate Planner, Brad Buller, City Planner; pan Coleman, Senior Planner; Jeff gavel , Assistant Planner, B r ye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes, Assistant 'Planner; Brut Horner, Assistant Planner; Chuck' Mackey, Associate Civil Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, Dino Putino, Assistant Planner; Gail Sanchez, Secretary; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer; Chris Westman,, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that David Blakesley had the flu. Mr. Duller announced that he had received a letter from OAS Investors, the applicant on Item V, requesting that the item be movediforward on the agenda, as they had to travel back to San Diego ifollowing the meeting. Mr. Duller announced that staff was recommending continuance on Item F. r. Buller announced that staff had received letters from the applicants on Items and T requesting the items be withdrawn. Mr. Duller announced there would be a free Sign Workshop on January JO from 7:00 - 9:00 P.M. at the Lyons Center. Mr. Duller* announced that this evening's meeting should adjourn 'to a workshop on February 2 during Design Review to discuss the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and the elevations for the Target building in the 'Terra Vista Town Center. Chairman McNiel stated that in ;light of the long agenda for this evening's meeting it would be inappropriate to move any items around on the agenda. Commissioner Emerick felt Item V might be a lengthy item and he was not in favor of moving it forward on the agenda. APPROVAL CE MINUTES Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstdy, unanimously carried, to approve the minutes of January 11, 1989. PUBLIC HEARINGS E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8 - SMITH The aadit5h 6f seven apar n un s an sting apart complex consisting of 63 units on 5.33 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Church Street - APN: ' 1077-3 - S. (Continued from December 1 , 1988. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing to ask if anyone was present to speak regarding the item. ` Hearing no testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tol stoy;, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Development Review 88- S to March 8, 1989, as requested by the applicant. C. ENVIR ONMENTAL ENTA ASSESSMENT CONDITION USE PERMIT H - - EGGHEAD e miquest to esta-Bliifi i Z6ip-VFeF c as room and office in a ease space of 1,000 square feet within an existing multi-tenant industrial park on 4.01 acres of land in the Haven Avenge Overlay District, located at 9170-9190 Haven Avenue - APN: U9- 6 -17. (Continued from January 11, 1989. ) OLD BUSINESS T. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-10 - DIVERSIFIED The o eve nt o Phise I I I o I f a he g or o cd ercia opp ng center consisting of two retail buildings totaling 14,800 square feet on '1 .96 acres of land within an approved shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at the northeast corner of Haven and Highland Avenues - APN: 0I- 71-b5 and 71. (Continued from October 26, 1988.) Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to honor withdrawal requests for Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit Sd 48 and Environmental Assessment and Development Review 'HH-1O. Planning Commission Minutes - - Januarys 25, 1989' CONSENT CALENDAR A. VACATION OF JUNEBERRY DRIVE - FONTANA STEEL INC. - A request to vacate une erry rive, oca lout o rrow ou , approximately D feet wide and 710 feet long. APNi: 9-11-35. B. VACATION OF A PORTION OF ALMOND AVENUE - CARYN COMPANY - A request to vacate a por ion Of mon venue, oca South of 24th Street of Etiwanda area, approximately 23 feet wide and 1,812 feet long. APN; -' 111-D1. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13541 - PRID A ® The design review of building e ova 65o ind detaiTeds-1-te plan or of 12 single family 'lots of a< previously approved tract map on 4.42 acres of land in the Low Residential District '( -4 dwelling units per acre), located on Sierra Vista, north of Red Hill 'Country Club Drive - APN: 7 2-D1. D. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 11606-1 - EL CAPITAN DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. eMw o Me pan and building a ova iot-s or a previously approved' tract consisting of 41 single family residences on 11.3 acres of land in; the Low Residential District' ( -4 dwelling units per acre) , located east of Mango, south of Victoria Street - APN* 0 -771®d1 thru 41. E. TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 9431 - BRIMAR INDUSTRIES _ A division of 2-.-9F4--­ac­r6s7 into 4 pares in thi cry ENdwelling units per acre) Development District, located on the east side of BerylAvenue, south of Hillside Road.. APN: 10 1-611-D4. Bill Jahn, President of Pride mark, request removal of Item C from the Consent Calendar. Lion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to approve Items A, 8, D, and E of the Consent Calendar. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13541 - PRIDEMARK Chairman McNiel opened the public heaving. Bill Jahn, President of Pride mark, 2030 East Alosta, Glendora,' requested that he be allowed to use wood fencing instead of masonry in the side ,yards and rear property line. He stated that they purchased the property as finished lots and there was no mention in the conditions of approval for the finished' lots regarding masonry walls. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea stated she would not object to allowing wooden fencing between the lots, but she felt masonry should be used in side yards exposed to public view. She felt it would be consistent to require masonry along the back of the lots where it backed iup to existing 'lots. Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 25, 1989' Commissioners Tol stay and Emerick concurred`. Brad Buller, 'City Planner, stated that Planning Commission policy has been to require perimeter masonry walls except where a masonrywall already exists. Chairman McNiel reopened the pudic hearing. r. Jahn sta d they would put masonry walls along the back of the bats and in the return areas. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. r. Huller suggested rewording the condition to allow the applicant to 'work with adjacent property owners to avoid double walls between lots. Motion. Moved by EmericR, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review for Tract 1541, with modification to allow the applicant to use City Planner-approved wood fencing on interior property lines not subject to public view, Motion carried ,by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHIT EA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, T LSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RL ESLEY -carried PUBLIC HEARINGS H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 9- 1 t PI ASSI reque amend' e seraT_ PMT-lana use ROM LOW e 1 ent1a -4 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential 4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 4 acres of land, located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Vintage Drive - APN' 5- 51-4 . I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT D DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT d- 'PTTASSI - rem dw es� en a p ees oo n s roc-. wel ling units per acre,) to Low-Medium residential (4-8 'dwelling units per acre) for 4 acres of land, located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Vintage Drive - APN: 5- 51 47. Dino! Putrino, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. He indicated that on Friday, January 20, the applicant applied for a Conditional Use Permit for an extended care facility for -110 beds® Commissioner Tolstoy requested clarification on the intended use of the proposed facility. r. Putri o confirmed that it was to be a congregate care facility for ambulatory senior citizens. Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 25, 1989 Brad Buller, City Planner, stated there were two type of senior projects in the City. The project was closest in concept to the Villa Del Rey project on Baseline. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. George Hawthorne, CMI Investment Properties, stated he performed a market study and found a need for senior care facilities. He provided a handout which described facility types, and indicated they were proposing a congregate care facility, which would provide three meals a 'day and transportation for the facility residents. He stated that type of facility would best be suited to a residential environment as opposed to a commercial area, because most patients would not be fully ambulatory to walk to offsite locations. He stated his company conducted two to three field surveys to ask nearby homeowners their concerns; and s ons s indicated sidents were concerned with possible loss of view, increased traffic, and type and quality of the development. He said they conducted a neighborhood meeting, which was attended by two residents who stated they were representing their neighbors. At the end of the meeting, the residents stated they would support the project. Pete Pitassi , applicant, stated' the eight; acre site was currently owned by the Episcopal Church and was in escrow to CMI Properties. The current plans called for developing the northern four acres as a congregate care facility and the southern four acres would be developed for church use. He stated a congregate care facility 'does not need proximity to shopping because those facilities are provided within the building. He said rooms are designed smaller than a hotel . He indicated twomailings- had been sent to homeowners to announce' the neighborhood meeting. He said the two residents who showed up said they were representing some of their neighbors who could not attend. He said they had researched the Caryn Specific Plan and if the land was zoned Low-Medium, the City could easily get 5,000 square foot lots, which was the average for the area. He stated seismicity was addressed in the soils' report and the property was not 'within the special zone for concern. He asked for direction from staff on why additional seismicity information was being requested. He requested the Planning Commission to allow additional time to address the issues and perhaps delay the General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment so that the project could go through Design Review` simultaneously with the Plan Amendments. Chairman McNiel asked why the site was selected. r. Pitassi responded that a congregate care facility should be located in a residential area, because the seniors feel more comfortable and safe in a residential aoea than a commercial one. He felt ' that' because many lots of today are too small to add rooms for elderly parents, relatives prefer to place their parents in a neighborhood setting.' He said that Villa Del Rey was 90% occupied within 15 months, 'an that indicated a need in the community for this type of facility. He proposed seeping the scale of the buildings down to be more compatible with the surrounding homes, and allowing more open, common area. Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 25, 1989 The following residents spoke in opposition to the project: Fred Deaux, 1106 Shaw Street, Rancho Cucamonga Patricia Ernst, 6323 Mt. Wellington Court, Rancho Cucamonga Ron Herman, 11577 Mammoth Peak Court, Rancho Cucamonga Larry Mayfield, 110 Mt Wallace Court, Rancho Cucamonga Don Baer, 11572 Mammoth Peak Court, Rancho Cucamonga Frank Munoz, 6621 Kern Place, Rancho Cucamonga James Krager, 111405 Mt. Wallace Court, Rancho Cucamonga Lour Garcia, 6400 Eagle 'Peak Place, Rancho Cucamonga Lydia Mayfield, 110 Mt. Wallace Court, Rancho Cucamonga ,toe Lauer, 6348 Mt. Wellington Court, Rancho Cucamonga They expressed concerns' about the congregate care facility becoming a ho l , usage and architecture not being compatible with the surrounding no park ark or shopping. within walking distance for the seniors, increased density, increased traffic, and no guarantee that the facility would be built or that usage wouldn 't change. They stated they had been told the site would be used for a church, park, or school , and they objected to any other usage. Six of the residents stated they had never been contacted regarding a survey or the neighborhood meetings. Vivian Clubb, 11351 Mt. Wallace Court, Rancho Cucamonga, presented a petition which opposed the , plan changes and was signed by 29 residents of Vintage Highlands. Berl Eldridge, 11419 Mt. Wallace Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had not been con,tacted previously and asked how the process worked. Chairman McNiel give a brief explanation of the Plan Anendment and Design Review processes. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that anyone signing in this evening would be added to the mailing list to receive notice of the City 'Council meetings. gentleman (unable to determine name because he did not sign; in) stated he was representing residents of the Windsong tract south of 19th Street and asked how to add an item to the agenda to protest closure of Highland. Ralph Hanson, City Attorney, stated that under state law the Planning Commission was prevented from responding to any matter not on the agenda. He indicated people were welcometo speak during the Public Comment time, but the Commissioners could not respond. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested a representative from the group could submit a letter requested to be added to the agenda for a future meeting. He then met with a group of approximately 30 residents in an adjacent room and explained the status of the realignment. Paul Rougeau, Senior Civil Engineer, de` himself available to answer questions. Planning Commission Minutes - - January 25, 1989 Mr. Pi tassi stated the mailing list had been put together from!the assessor's tax reds. He ' stated they were willing to cooperate and have future neighborhood meetings with the residents, He felt shopping centers did not need be close because van service would be provided. He said the project would not be a resort environment, it would only be designed to provide the needs of the residents. He felt traffic volume would be increased only slightly because of the type of residents. He ' requested the Planning Commission continue the items to allow time to address the issues' with the residents. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman McNiel asked for clarification on the request for additional seismicity studies. Mr. Putrino stated the geotechnical investigation report did not address where earthquake faults might be located on the .site and did not state how deep the soil borings were performed. Chairman Mc Niel asked now far the site was from any known fault lines. Mr. Putrino stated the i was approximately half a mile to a mile north of the designated fault area. Chairman Mc Niel asked if it was common to request seismicity studies of applicants. Mr.' Coleman that reports are required for all projects within the City - designated Aluist-Priolo study zone for the referred Red Hill fault. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the issue before the Commission dealt with a ` change in density and did not encompass what would eventually be built on the site. He stated that if the land use designation was changed, there was a possibility the church or the congregate care facility might, not be developed, and an apartment !house could then be built on the site. He felt' the City needed the type of facility being proposed, but it would be out of character with that neighborhood. He thought the zoning should be -4 dwelling units per acre to be compatible with the neighborhood,' and that allowing the site to be designated for 4-8 dwelling units would result in spot zoning, which he felt was inappropriate. He felt' the proposed facility could not be compared to Villa Del Rey, because Villa Del Rey has a park and shopping centers near it. Commissioner Emerick stated the General Plan was prepared to allow people to obtain a general idea of what would eventually be built, and the City should' encourage people to feel they can rely on the document. Therefore, he felt applicants bear a' heavy burden to show good justification for General Plan Amendments. He did not feel the applicant had shown good cause for changing the density. He liked the project, but preferred see it moved to an area. already appropriately zoned. i Planning Commission Minutes; -7- January 25, ;1989 Commissioner Chi ti ea felt the reference to Villa Del Rey was not valid because Villa Del Rey is adjacent to active facilities and residents of that project have expressed that they life the site because they feel they are part of the neighborhood. She felt seniors need an opportunity to interact with the neighborhood and this would not be available without a park or other destinations within walking distance. She felt the development`was good from an architectural and community need, but was not appropriate for the area in question Chairman McNiel felt there was not enough room for church facilities to be built on the remaining 4 acres of the site. He felt the City heeds the type of facility proposed, but it did not appear to be the right location. He stated that if the density designation was changed opportunities would abound for other types of development to be built. Lion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolutions recommending denial of Environmental Assessment and General ' Plan Amendment 89- 01A and Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendment -0 . Lion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS.- CHITI' A, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES. COMMISSIONERS.- NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. BL ESLEV -carried 8c30 P.M. - Planning Commission Recessed 8:44 P.M. - Planning Commission Reconvened J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT B9-01B - WILLIAM LYON - re es o aaren o sites o e an use map-of e enera an ithin the Victoria Graves (west of Milliken on 9,3 acres) and Victoria Vineyards (east of Milliken 12.9 acres) Villages, located on the south east and wrest corners ofHighland and Milliken Avenues. The request proposes changing the designations from Medi -Ri gh Residential (1 -24 welling _1 n uni ts its per sore) to Neighborhood Commercial on the east ::site and Neighborhood Commercial to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) on the west site - N. 227-011-2 ' and 202-211-4 . K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 39-01 - reques o 'amen a an use es gna ions w n e Victoria roves (west of Milliken on 9.3 acres) and 'Victoria Vineyards (east of Milliken 12.9 acres) Villages of the Victoria Community Plan, located on the south east and west corners of Highland and Milliken Avenues. The request proposes changing the designations from Medium-High Residential (14-24 welling units per acre) to Neighborhood Commercial on the east site and Neighborhood Commercial to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) on the west site - APN: 227-011-22 & 202-211-48. Plannieng Commission Minutes -8- January 25, 1989 Jeff Gravel , Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. . Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Bailey, Manager of the Victoria project for William Lyon Company, stated they had addressed neighborhood concerns and he felt that surrounding residents now supported the project. Fred Deaux, 110 Shaw Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had discussed the project with ny of his neighbors and they were in agreement with the reduction in density. Geoff Reeslund, SGRA Architecture & Planning, San Diego, representing Hughes Investments, stated they would develop the Neighborhood Commercial site. He said they have three major tenants prepared to occupy the property - a supermarket, drug' store and service station. He stated they had done site studies on both sites and if they were forced to use the smaller site, the service station would not fit and there would be inadequate parking for the other tenants. He stated they would submit a Conditional Use Permit in March if the Amendments were approved Hearing ;no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea felt the project now addressed the needs and concerns of the neighbors and she supported the project. She requested the center be developed at the same level of quality as the Terra Vis Village Center. Lion. Moved by Chitiea seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolutions recommending approval of Environmental ss nt and General ` Plan Amendment' 89-01B and Environmental Assessment and Victoria Community Plate Amendment 89 D1. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MINI , TQLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS:S: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY' -carried L. VARIANCE 88-2 - CASTLE - A 'request to allow a room addition to encroach into the requi-red-- inte41or side yard setback by 5 feet for a single family residence in the Low Residential District ( -4 dwelling units per acre) , located at 9868 Cypress Court - APN: 01-503-15. Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public heading. Randy Castle, the applicant, stated he was available to answer questions. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. i Planning Commission Minutes -9- January 25, 1989 Commissioner Chiti'ea felt the 20 foot averaging met the intent and the addition did not seem to encroach on the neighbors. She supported the Variance. Commissioner Emerick felt the intent of the 20 foot setback was to avoid the look of too much building mass. He felt the view from the street would show n intrusion of the building into the open space, but as the neighbors did not appear to oppose to the project, he would support the variance. Lion. Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Variance 88- 7. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY -carried M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1898 - NINE A residential su ivs5n o sing a family lots on 2:47 a s ­5T' land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) , located at ` the northwest corner of Lemon and London Avenues - APN: 201-251-57 and 58. Scott Murphy ,' socia Planner, presented the staff report. He recommended deletion of Lemon Suet under the list of required street improvements, because the work had been completed under a City contract. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Henry Nunez, applicant, thanked the staff for their professionalism` and courtesy. John Wong, 5436 Valinda Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, owned the property to the north and stated that Liberty Street originally was south of his property, but . when the developer` to the east built their lots, they moved the street north 10 feet. He did not want the layout proposed with the cul -de-sac curving up into his property. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated` the issue of alignment of streets within the property to the north was not the issue being considered tonight. He said the the only street issue being considered was the amount of street dedication being required from the northern lot of the Nunez property. Chairman McNiel asked the width of the lots. r. Murphy responded they were 55 feet wide except for lot 1 , which was 150' feet by 131 feet. Planning Commission Minutes _10- January 25, 1989 Commissioner Chitiea stated that even though the homes to the west on Archibald were the same zoning, in reality they were on larger lots. She felt the narrow lots seemed out of character with the adjacent ' existing neighborhood.' Commissioner Tolstoy asked what the ingress would be for the lot to the west of ±lots �4, S, 6, 7`, and 8. Mr. Buller responded that they have an easement to the north of lot 8 and wound have access off Liberty Street. Dan Coleman, nior planner, stated that Liberty{ Street was not being constructed as part of this development, and the existing dirt road would remain as access for the western lot. Commissioner Tolstoy asked why Liberty was not being constructed. Mr.' Hanson responded that it did not meet the minimum width for maintenance, but a fee would be collected from the applicant for future development. Chairman Mc Niel did not feel there was a conflict with the lots on Archibald, but felt there appeared to be a conflict with the lets across London Avenue. He felt one lot should be eliminated, because wider lots would make' the tract re compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Coleman pointed out that the 'lots to the east of London Avenue were Crider but shallower, with the square footage being approximately the same as the proposed development. Commissioner Chitiea felt the narrower lots would still give the appearance of a higher density, and she agreed that one lot should be eliminated. Commissioner Emerick felt increasing the setback could mitigate the density feeling. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to ;ask Mr. Nunez if he would be willing to request a continuance to allow time to resubm,it' the tract map. Mr.i Nunez stated he felt he could set his houses back to relieve the dense' feeling. He stated he planned to subdivide and build the homes. Chairman McNiel stated' that if he could provide homes that would give an air of space there s a chance he could keep eight lots. r. Nunez stated the square footage of the lots was similar to those across London Avenue, and he felt nice houses would be more attractive' than the perimeter wall across the street. Commissioner Tolstoy said he preferred elimination of one lot, but was open to looking at the designs. Co issioner Chitiea stated the larger lots to the west are equestrian, which can be in conflict with non-equestrian smaller lots. Planning Commission Minutes -11- January 25, 1989 Mr. Buller stated :that it would take two months to go through Design Review process. r. Nunez stated he was willing to waive the time limit and requested a continuance to allow him time to return with elevations. Lion; Moved by; Tolstoy, seconded by McNiel , to continue Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13898 to March 22,, 1989. Motion carried by the following vote. AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL, TOLS° OY NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS: BL ESLEY carried N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT -O C - CITY OF r'eques a s a o parse s approxima y TO7.a`c_r_e`sF_oT_We _General ;Plan land use map from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4 8 dwelling units per acre),; for those parcels located on the south side of Lemon extending approximately 1,100 feet 'east of Archibald Avenue and the parcel on the north side of Highland extending 780 feet east of Archibald 'Avenue - AN: 01.- 5 -01, 03, 04, 21, 22, 39,' 40,,41, 4 , and 43. Jeff Gravel , Assistant planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Lawrence Gaiefsky, 6393 Jadeite Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, favored the Amendment. He felt lowering the density would help cut future traffic congestion.. Scott Anderson, 9848 Liberty, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the change to Low- Medium. Hearing no further th e b testimony, public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adapt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and General plan Anendment 89-0E. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BL ESLEY -carried Planning Commission Minutes -12- January 25, 1989 O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND; INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 89-01 request to modify-- e lociistreet circa a ion pattern within Subarea 8, located north of Arrow Route, between the I-15 Freeway and Etiwanda Avenue, necessitated by a proposed MWD power generating plant at the northwest corner of Etiwanda and Arrow. P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT rogues o i e egona Re-Tate Commercial an ' use 60066 from APN: 9-021 59 and 9-03.E-1.5, and show access points for the block bounded by Foothill Boulevard on the north, Arrow Route on the south, I-15 Freeway on the west, and Etiwanda Avenue on the east, necessitated by a proposed M O power generating plant' at the northwest corner of Etiwanda and Arrow. Chuck Mackey, Associate Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened` the public hearing.' Nearing no testimony, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Mc Niel asked for clarification of the issue. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated the issue was traffic circulation. The intent of the suggestions was to amend the Industrial Area Specific Plan' to delete proposed streets which connect Etiwanda Avenue+ Arrow Route and provide a loop street with an option for future land development as either Light Industrial or Regional Related Commercial . Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded; by Emerick, to adopt the Resolutions recommending ;approval of Environmental Assessment and Industrial Specific Plan' Amendment 89-01 and Environmental Assessment and Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan Amendment 8941. :Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CNITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BLA ESLEY -carried Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA' COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 88-0 vas on an use an rc cia a ion a ot eng' approximately acres'' for Phase One of the Village of Victoria Lakes South, bounced by Rase Line Road to the north, Miller Avenue to the south,; the easterly boundary of the Victoria Planned Community the east,, and the Southern California Edison corridor° to thewest; and various amendments to land use and circulation to reflect "as-built" conditions within the Villages of Windrows, Vineyards and Groves.' Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea questioned the trail recommendation of 12 feet wide, to allow patrol vehicles. Planning Commission Minutes -13- "January 25, 1989 Commissioner Tolstoy felt the purpose was not to have routine patrols, but to allow for patrol in the event of an emergency. Commissioner hitiea felt 12 feet of paved surface was toe wide for aesthetic reasons Commissioner Emerick wanted some way for people to in ract with the water, and suggested paddle boats or a fountain element allowing people to get wet might be appropriate. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Bailey, Manager of the Victoria project for William Lyon Company, stated they would do whatever the City wanted regarding the use of the lakes, so far as allowing boats, swimming, or whatever. Chairman McNiel questioned if softening could be dope on the corners of the street intersection at the north 'side of the lake to reduce the impact of the hardscape. Mr. Bailey stated the plaza was set in such a war that people would be looking t the lakes from the area, He said the plaza included enhanced paving. Commissioner Emerick thought a more formal promenade area with night lighting fight be nice along the lower lake, He thought the walkway along the lower lake should go all around the lake. Mr. Bailey stated the restaurant pads 'were designed at a higher elevation than; the; trail to allow people on the trail to walk by without interfering with the views of the diners. He said the trail was currently a natural setting, but they would make the area more formal if the City wanted. Commissioner Emerick liked the idea that the lake area was' dedicated to public use rather than private. Mike Robbins, representing the Nichiren Temple, stated the Temple had not been asked to provide input. He expressed concern that the Temple would have to improve a road that would not benefit them. He liked the concept but felt changes were proposed without allowing Temple input. . Coleman stated the major concern appeared be Victoria Loop bounding the west side of the Temple property. He stated the alignment had not changed from the original plan, He said William Caron Company would have to improve both sides of the street, including curbs,' gutters, sidewalks, etc. He felt the Temple might have to put' in some trees or perhaps a street light or two. Mr. Robbins stated the Temple had always operated on the concept that the entire road would be constructed on William Lyon Company property. Hearing no further` testimony, the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes -14- January 25, 1989 1 Commissioner Tolstoy felt the development would be an exciting addition to the City. He requested that a distinctive trail system be provided to allow' people to go all the way from the Town Center to the Regional Mal I . He wanted staff to consider such a trail when 'looking at proposed developments in the area. Chairman McNiel suggested the recommendation be forwarded to the Trails Committee. Mr. Coleman stated that a part of the 'proposed Amendment included the addition of trail connection along Miller Avenue. He stated Lewis had been advised of the need to connect trails out to Rochester Avenue within Terra Vista. Commissioner Chitiea felt the quality of the project was very good. She felt the plan met the intent of the Victoria Community Plan and would be a nice enhancement to the City. She felt the easterly lake trail should be narrower than 12 feet, and could still be wide enough to allow for maintenance and/or security vehicles. She thought perhaps security vehicles could be of a smaller type. r. Buller suggested the minutes could reflect that further review of design of the iitrail material and width' should be subject to review and approval by, the City. He said a note could be added to the illustration on the street intersection north of the lake stating that the 'intersection shall be designed to soften and reduce the impact and amount of pavement through landscaping or changes in pavement material . Chairman McNiel wanted notation added regarding the potential trail line around the west side of the lake Commissioner Emerick requested that the plan be returned to the planning' Commission before going forward to City Council if the Parks and Recreation Committee recommended substantial` changes. Mr. Coleman stated staff had been reviewing the plan with the Community Services Director and his staff. They were trying to set up a special meeting of the Parks and Recreation Committee in early February' before City Council had their first reading. Lion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and Victoria Community Flan Amendment NB CS. Motion carried by the following vote: AWES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BL ESLEY -carried i Planning Commission Minutes -15- January 2 S, 1989 R. VARIANCE 87-11 - CUCAMONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT - A request to reduce the mint um equi ra co avege an spe se ac ,' an allow a -foot block wall in the required setback , within the Utility District of the Foothill Boulevard Specific plan, located at the southeast corner of San Bernardino Road and klusman Avenue - AP'N -1 - 9 072 C , IC 11, and 19. Brett Horner, Assistant planer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Cline, Cucamonga County Water District, stated that technically the 5- foot setback presents a hardship to the District. He felt a reduction in the landscaping would benefit the community because it would cut the necessary water consumption. He felt the intended use of the property was exceptional because there are no other public agencies with a combined use of office and corporate ,yard within the City. He said the block wall would help to hide the daily yard activity. He felt the Variance would not set a precedent for future development within the area because there is no similar intended use. He felt the Variance would allow the site blend in better with the older properties in the area. Lloyd Michael , General Manager of Cucamonga County Water District, stated their headquarters and 'yard had been in the same location for more than 30 years, He said they needed to expand the location to meet the 'demands of the basin. He felt the buildings and facilities were aesthetically pleasing. He said they sent a . letter to each homeowner and business surrounding them and they had received two letters of support. lie said no one had contacted them to oppose the Variance. Charles west, member of the Board of Directors of Cucamonga County Water District, stated the block walls; on surrounding properties did not meet the required setbacks because they have been there for a long time. He felt the reduced setback would allow Cucamonga County Water` istrict facilities to better fit in with surrounding properties. He also felt water conservation was important. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick did not feel there were any compelling reasons to grant the Variance. ; Commissioner Toll ; y felt the 5-foot setback would help to spruce up the neighborhood. He also thought the landscape area would be an excellent place for the District to showcase attractive water conservation landscaping ; concepts. Commissioner Chitiea agreed the neighborhood needed improvement. She encouraged the use of drought-resistant landscaping materials. She felt public agencies should set an example by meeting City standards. She saw no anon to grant the Variance. Planning Commission Minutes -16- January 25, 1989 Motion. Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution denying Variance 7-11. Motion carried by the following vote. AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY DES. COMMISSIONERS.- NONE AGENT: COMMISSIONERS: RL ESLEY -carried S. ANNEXATION Hg D1 - NOTICE OF PREPARATION CE A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE ETIWIWOA NORTH PROjECT-IMEW-7- A request y thi Cityy o anc o LUCamonjA o s u a easy i y o annexation and development of approximately 6,000 dwelling units on approximately 5,640 acres of land under multiple ownerships in the unincorporated area of San Bernardino County. The project is generally bounded on the north by the National Forest, on the south by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, on the east by the City of Fontana, and on the nest ;by the extension of Milliken Avenue. A Specific Plan will; be prepared for this project area. The public hearing is being conducted for the purpose' of defining the scope of the Environmental Impact Report, Mike Bratt, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Fred Ileeaux, 11016 ha Strut, Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned that the base Environmental impact Repot EIR s completed a long time ago and would not be adequate o address additional annexation. He felt the EIR` should address the changes which have occurred dining the past 5 years. He felt the annexation would have a great impact on sewer and water facilities and requested that sewers be mandated. He felt the annexation encroached on the territory of indigenous wildlife. He requested that 'drainage, emergency facilities, and school district impact be considered.' He wanted density to be limited to 4-8 dwelling units per acre. Chairman McNiel stated the area would be developed under County control if the City did not annex. He felt annexation would allow the City to have' more control over the development. stated the purpose of the hearing was to establish parameters for the EIR. Joe Di Iorio, President of Caryn Company, stated that when the City first drew up its boundaries prior to incorporation, it was envisioned that City boundaries would go north to the national pare However, 'City boundaries were cut back because of Fire District concerns. He stated the base E+IR was not one that went back to the ity 's General Plan, but rather a series of EIRs starting from the Foothill Community Plan and including all the various EIRs required by the City and County for projects since then. A number of items had been identified as needing updating, and those items would be updated. He said septic tanks were not being planned for the area. indicated the developers were sensitive to the desire for open space going up toward the I Planning Commission Minutes -1 - January 25, 198 foothills, and therefore approximatelyhalf f of the area would be set aside as open space, including CS acres in Day Canyon alone. He said the drainage plan is a continuation of the Day/Etiwanda/San Sevaine system. He stated the eastern part of the City has better drainage than the western; portion. He said the EIR would address emergency facilities and the Etiwanda School District would not be impacted. He felt the proposed commercial density was sup ortable. He said residential densities are quite low and match the Etiwanda Specific Elan, averaging 1.59 units per acre gross: Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy indicated he would like the EIR to address wind impacts, with regard to lot orientation, building footprint configurations, and windbreaks to mitigate windy conditions in the area. Commissioner Emerick felt EMS should be used as design tools prior to designing, instead of merely being used to support projects alma dy designed. He wanted the EIR to address critical open space areas. Commissioner Chitiea felt the EIR elements listing was comprehensive with the additions suggested. Chairman McNiel stated the annexation was an 'ambitious undertaking on the part of the development consortium, the City,; and the Planning Commission. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that wind impacts should b added to the proposed listing of items to be addressed in the EIR. COLD BUSINESS U. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88 87 UTMAN-MACDONALD & PARTNERS � The development of a os cry square o0 o ce u' 'n on }D8' acres of land in the Haven Avenuererlay districtSubar"ea C ' , 1 aced` at the northeast corner: of Haven avenue and aoia Street � AP ADD- DID Continued f_ r om danuar, lI lg 9' 8 Chris Westman, Assistant Planner, 'presented the staff report and suggested adding standard, conditions. Commissioner Chitiea asked to see the old and new elevations. e Planning Commission looked at both sets of elevations. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Clark Davis of Gilbert Aja & Associates, project architect, stated they had been through Design Review three times. He presented a photograph of their corporate headquarters in Irvine and stated the proposed building would be similar. He felt the project would enhance the Haven streetscape. Planning Commission Minutes -18- January 25, 1989 Dan Mc David, Gilbert Aja, stated the building, has more glazing than their corporate headquarters. He said they increased the amount of glass on the Acacia and Haven corner to relate closer to the existing project to the south. Commissioner Chitiea stated the additional enhancement previously requested at the entry way was " still missing. She felt the building imparted a feeling of heaviness because of the concrete at the top. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that in discussing the screen for the roof; equipment, an option had been discussed to extend the entry way glass above the parapet. Commissioner Chitiea stated increased glass banding was also discussed. Mr.' Buller indicated the applicant had chosen not to add hose concepts. Mr. Davis stated the roof screen was set back from the edge of the building. e stated the roof screen would not be seen close up. He said the entry' element was a triangular projection and would not give a feeling of heaviness. He stated each corner would have a feature.. said the corner on Acacia was enhanced with expanded' glass and a column feature. Chairman McNiel stated that because of the s l l sire of the building and the exposure;, he felt the building was acceptable. Commissioner Chitiea stated the eroded edge concept was not new. She said that even though the roof screening would not be seen from the entry, it would be 'seen from adjacent projects and the street. She felt the main entrance had no 'focal point but created a parking lot feeling. She felt the building would be prominent because of its location and she wanted the building to have significance. Commissioner Tolstoy felt comfortable with the building. Commissioner Chitiea felt a more significant entry could be created by pulling the glass up to the parapet. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the band of concrete at the top of the building showed strength and he liked' it. Mr. Davis felt the concrete band gave continuity to the building and moving the glass up would fragment the design;. There were no further public comments. Chairman McNiel agreed with Commissioner Chitiea that increasing the amount of glass at the entry way would' better pronounce the entry. Commissioner Emerick agreed with enlarging the glass area. Planning Commission Minutes -19- January 25,' 1989 Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 8- 7, with a modification to raise the triangular glass entry element to the top of the parapet and add the standard conditions. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: C ISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY -carried V. , UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR THOMAS WINERY PLAZA - OAS INVESTORS Scott Murphy , Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Niel did not like the generic' lettering because the center s unique, in that the majority of the buildings were all different. Commissioner Chitiea felt a large plaza logo was ' not necessary on every building. Chairman McNiel did not mind 24" logos on the buildings. Commissioner Tolstoy felt small logos were acceptable but he did not like the letters "A" . 118110 HCH, etc. on each 'building. Commissioner 'Chitiea felt putting the logo on each side of the tower would make it look too much like clock' faces. She felt the logo would look better on only two sides and lettering should be used on the other two sides. Chairman Niel invited public comment. Rudy Stroink, OAS Inves rs, stated the lettering "A" , "B"s ,ACII, etc. were being used for building identification on the directory and for emergency agencies. He suggested removing the letters and instead placing the building addresses on ;the end of each building. He said they were in agreement with staf's recommendation to remove the monument sign at San Bernardino Road and place it with the project logo on the rock wall at the driveway entrance. On the still building he proposed using lettering reading "Thomas Winery" with "City of Rancho Cucamonga" or "Rancho Cucamonga" beneath. He said this would be presented the Historic Preservation servation o ission. He wanted the major Hants to have a choice of six colors instead of the City-proposed th ree. He supported Souplan `lion's design of their logo. Bob Garrett, Director of Marketing for Souplantation, stated, they wanted to use green channel letters instead of white. He wanted to be sure their name would appear on both sides of the one monument sigh. He said they would` prefer to have their name on the monument sign on Foothill instead of the one on 'Vineyard. He wanted to keep the logo vertical on the west elevation> because their corporate logo is generally shown in all advertising with the logo below the name. Planning Commission Minutes January 25, 1989 Brad Buller,; City Planner, requested that if the Planning Commission should approve the wider variation of sign colors, it would be important to state the reasons. He pointed out that some recent centers have been limited to a maximum of one or two colors. He stated if the decision was, not specifically addressed to this center; i .e., its historical significance or architectural style, it would be difficult to restrict the number of colors on future' centers. Commissioner Tolstoy was inclined to reduce the number of colors because he felt the signs should not be garish. He felt signs should be subdued. Mr. Murphy stated that the signs were smaller than in many other centers. Chairman McNiel stated that.; the whole center would not be visible from either Foothill or Vineyard, while most icenters have total exposure from the streets. Commissioner E rick stated the buildings reminded him of cannery row with each building having different architecture. Wherefore, he felt that was a' reason for allowing additional colors.' Mr troink suggested using white for the winery and thereby limiting the' fors to only three. Therewere no further public comments. The consensus of the Commission was that three colors would be acceptable because of the difference in architecture and the lack of total visibility from the street. Chairman McNiel felt that the Soupla'ntation sign of 4-1/2 feet high on the western elevation was too large and took up, too much of the building side. Commissioner Emerick felt the sign should be reduced by one-third, to a' maximum of 36 inches high. The Planning Commission reached a consensus to reduce the Souplantation sign height to a maximum of 36 inches. The Commission discussed the monument signs and reached a' consensus that they were satisfactory. They agreed that "A", "B" , a "C" numbering should be replaced by building street addresses. Chairman McNiel suggested painting "Thomas Winery" and "Rancho Cucamonga" on two sides of the 'still building and "using the logo on the other two sides. The Planning Commission reached a consensus to forward that suggestion to the Historic Preservation Commission. Mr.' Buller indicated than the item would be returned to the Planning Commission only if the Historic Preservations Commission had a different recommendation. Planning Commission Minutes - 1- January 25, 1989' " DIRECTOR'S REPORTS W. TERRA VISTA TREE MASTER PLAN _ Presentation of street trees for Terra Ts Laura gonaccorsi , Landscape Designer, presented the staff report along with a booklet depicting the revised designated street trees. Commissioner Emerick asked about the ability of the trees to withstand wind. s. Ronaccori responded that staff had scrutinized the trees for wind resistance. Commissioner Chitiea asked if staking standards had been changed. s. Ronacorsi indicated that staking standards now called for more stakes, stronger ties, and arbor guards. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if some areas of Terra 'Vista going to be retrof itted. Chairman nNi 1 invited public comm ent. Tom Dellaquiia, landscape architect for Luis Homes, stated they had approached the City with a proposal` to upgrade the landscaping, and had budgeted $100,0 . They felt the eucalyptus was a poor* choice for residential areas because of tendencies to be messy, easily wind-damaged, and surface root. There were no further public comments. Ms. Ronaccorsi indicated that with the City-required 15-gallon minimum size trees, eucalyptus trees do not establish too well . Chairman McNiel felt the City should perhaps look at minimum tree size standards. Commissioner Tolstoy indicated smaller container trees grow better and faster than the 5-gallon` sizes. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, stated the City was currently using 5-gallon replacement trees. e consensus' of the Planning Commission was that the Terra Vista Tree Master Plan was a good concept. X. CARYN (VINTAGE HIGHLANDS) FENCING - Discussion of possible amendment requl re enc ng o cu -' a-sac streets from the paeo trail system. m. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner', presented the staff report and showed a video depicting Mammoth Peak Court and another typical paseb. Planning' Commission Minutes - - January 25, 1989 Chairman McNiel invited public comment. The following residents spoke in favor of allowing Mammoth Peak Court to gain fenced off from the paseo* Ron Herman, 11577 Mammoth Peals Court, Rancho Cucamonga, Ed Robinson, 11595 Mammoth Peak Court, Rancho Cucamonga Con Baer, 1157 Mammoth Peak Court, Rancho Cucamonga The residents felt there were special circumstances regarding the paseo connection at Mammoth Peak Court. They felt Mammoth Peak Court was adjacent to n isolated, wild area, and removing the fence would allow coyotes enter their street. They felt Banyan was an ideal place for burglars to congregate. They 'stated the paseo behind Mammoth Peak Court would be like a boxed-in canyon because there was a drop of approximately 10 feet from one of the lots down to the paseo, which would cause a safety hazard* They indicated the paseo acted as a catch basin during rains, and a child might drown. They were concerned that a wind tunnel effect might be created by removing the fence. They felt that because the Caryn development did. not have any parks, the intent of the paseo system s compromised. They stated that when residents bought their 'homes they were not told about the paseo concept by the builder and they assumed that they lived on a cul -de-sac street, which would have only one access. Chairman McNiel stated the area would not be isolated once the Caryn ' annexation to the north was complete. e' residents stated they had called police several times over the summer because of cars parked on Banyan. They felt the situation as it currently exists was unsafe.' Chairman McNiel stated he had spoken to John Fisher, Department of Fish & Game, 1 ) 90- 1 , who stated a fence would need to exceed six feet in height and be one foot into the ground in order to stop coyotes.s. stated r. Fisher said the only way to ! effectively reduce coyote intrusion s for residents to manage the area by keeping small animals inside, not allowing dog ' food sit out, and controlling trash:. Commissioner issioner Tols ' y asked what would happen if the trail was blocked off at Banyan. Mr. ; Coleman stated the Community Trail on Banyan would then be blocked off from the residents to the south. Commissioner Emerick felt future residents of Whitney Court would want to use the; paced to reach friends on Mammoth Peak Court. Chairman Niel stated the paseo concept was to provide for mini-parks in residential areas and the Planning Commission felt strongly that the concept! was a good one. In regard to securing the cul-de-sac to allow children to play in the cul -de-sac, he stated the City should not be legislating child management by blocking off access to peseos. Planning Commission Minutes January 25,i1989 W ' • � «� a li. "` *' t M t m �„ • � � . a �' ! .�� �.... � � .. „.. � � � � �. ! • � ��"..a �, t � � a;.. # : '. " �, e � 1� e � � . »,, � e � 4 M . , � �i r Chairman McNiel and Commissioner hit as volunteered to review the elevations on Wednesday, February 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 1:40 A.M. - Planning Commission Adjourned to a field trip of the North Etiwanda Sphere beginning at 11:00 A.M. on Sunday, January 29, 1989. Respectfully submitted, A��d ���� Bra Buller Sec re to ry Planning Commission Minutes -25- January 25, 1989 CITY OF C CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting , a nua ry 23, I3'8 NORTHETIWANDA PLAN WORKSHOP Chairman McNiel called the adjourned January 23, 1989 meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at S* C p.m. in the office of Jack Lam, Assistant City Manager, 94 Base Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the preliminary Etiwand4 North Specific Plan. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, tarry iei , Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT: Larry Henderson,, Senior Planner; Betty Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer; Karen Emery-McGuire, Associate Perk Planner; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Brad Buller, City; Planner; Jeff Gravel , Assistant Planner, doe Schultz, Community Services Manager; Miki Bratt, Associate Planner; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer Brad Buller, City Planner, made a brief introduction ;and asked everybody to introduce them elves. iki Bratt, Associate Planner, made a short presentation ov rvie ing the content of the Specific Plan.` Ms. Bratt continued with an update of project status using a time line chart. Mr. Buller suggested the Planning Commission may wish to hold a separate meeting to discuss the issues of the Specific Plan. The Commissioners agreed. Commissioner Emerick, commented that there should be plenty of time view the issue of parks and open space, especially the area of Upper Day Creek e Canyon Karen Emery,, Associate Park Planner, said the Parks Commission could include the Etiwanda North project on their agenda. r. Buller commented that the schedule is very aggressive. Chairman McNiel expressed his concern about the tightness of the time line.- Mr. Buller replied the schedule was tight but achievable. Joe Dilorio, President of the Caryn Company, id that the schedule was feasible and could 'be kept. He said that he had to keep a schedule with University of Californian which did not leave him any extra time when processing. i Iorio indicated that the Coussoulis property was in the process of changing hands of ownership. Kevin' Manning, Landmark Land Company, future owner of the Coussoul'is property, indicated he is interested in the Etiwanda North project and will not process in the County. Jess Harris, .and/Plan Design Group, said they want the University Crest project EIR to follow its natural course of review. However, they will hold p the process of the tentative map. r. Dilorio and Mr. Harris began to outline the process of putting the Specific Plan together, They stated the document would outline how the plan was formulated and would demonstrate consistencies with the City`s General Plan. Also, they indicated an EIR would be prepared. Commissioner Tolstoy' indicated than: there should be a section in the plan that describes, in detail , the different types of architecture. Mr Harris replied, that not only would the architecture be detailed, out also the themes and entries of the neighborhoods. Harris suggested that portions of the ttiwranda Specific Plan may have to be amended to conform with the concepts of the new plan. He`'continued with an overview of the plan proceeding with the different sections. Dan Coleman, Senfor ;Planner, asked when the formal plan would be submitted. r. Harris indicated February 3rd. ' r. Harris continued with what would be discussed using the exhibits which just arrived from his staff, including the open space concept, architectural types, and neighborhood themes. Pete Dangerman, open space consultant, also with the University of California, presented the Open Space concept in 5 aspects: normal park; golf course; ) riding` and hiking trails; 4) the natural landscape; and ( ) streetscapes, paseos, right-of-ways. He discusser how the five aspects would interrelate with one another and with other elements. Also, he indicated that they were meeting with e Utility companies and discussing the use of utility right-of-ways. Commissioner Chitiea said there is a need for a public equestrian center. r* McNiel asked why the Golf Course would not be feasible? Planning Commission Minutes - January 23, 1989 . Dilorio replied he thought the Department of Fish and Game right have a problem with a Golf Coarse® Commissioner Tolstour and Commissioner Emerick both; commented on how important it is to preserve the natural habitat of some of the delicate canyons. Dilorid suggested that the Commissioners break rap into subcommittees to review specific elements of the plan . Pr. McNiel agreed with the suggestion. i brio began the presentation on community design. He talked about the different neighborhoods and their identifying el ents, indicating their locations on the colored reaps. Also, he spoke of the types of architecture which would be contained in each of the neighborhoods. Commissioner Blakesley asked what type of landscaping would be in the median strips, and asked if there would be palm 'trees the full length of 24th Street. Harris answered with a brief overview of the type landscaping they are considering. 8ilorio, continued discussing types of architecture which are being planned in the project area. He said six types were to be mixed throughout the project. The different types of architecture which are the most closely related would be located in particular neighborhoods, therefore, creating a common theme in each of th Commissioner Tolstoy had concerns about grading' and property management, indicating these should be taken into careful consideration . Buller concluded the workshop, recommending that there be a minimum of three subcommittee groups. He confirmed that the next workshop would be on February 2, 1989 at 4.30 p.m. He said the Commission would discuss the design concepts of the plan at that workshop. The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, A Arad 8u l ers Secretary Planning Commission Minutes - January 23, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting January 19, 198,9 TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER WORKSHOP Chairman McNiel called the adjourned meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 11-00 p.m. at the Rancho± Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Peter Tolstoy, Larry McNiel ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner Mike Moorman, project architect for Target Stores, presented the elevations and construction details for Target. Vice-Chairman Chitiea stated that the Commission should review the original renderings for Target and their expectations for Target. She stated that it was her expectation that Target, as the first building in the center and because of its location, should be the crowning jewel oft Town Center. She further listed the following design elements that should be incorporated into Target's design: - Accent vussoir around the main entry arch - Glass and awnings in the cut-outs flanking entry arch - Round columns at in entry and garden center entry - Vines climbing on arbor columns - Full height glass instead of tile underneath main entry arch Vice Chairman Chitiea also stated her objection to the use of the within blind arches. Commissioners Tolstoy and erick agreed that the Target design as presented by Mr. Moorman was inconsistent with the initial conceptual renderings presented by Architect Pacifica and the Commission's expectations. Planning Commission Minutes 1 January 19, 1989 . Moorman explained that the taller void arches flanking the main entry arch were changed because of mezzanine offices. A similar: appearance could be created using colored hard surface. He also stated that awnings were unacceptable to Target because of bad experience. Brad Buller suggested spandrel glass and awnings in the blind arches consistent with original artist's rendering. There was consensus of the Commission to follow Mr. Buller"s suggestion and continue wainscot treatment into these areas. Mr. Moorman reviewed possible options which included full height the (no wainscot) or the introduction of planters in the blind arch areas flanking the main entry arch. Vice-Chairman Chitiea repeated her desire to see a vussoir treatment around in entry arch and glass move entry doors. There was discussion of the Commission which resulted in a consensus for the following revisions to the Target building.- 1. Eliminate the over main entry doors. The Commission's preference was glass or some other quality material in this area. . provide "pleated" or "telescoping`" effect around the main arch.' . Provide accent vussoir around main arch. . Provide round columns flanking main entry arch. half-round or three- quarter round' columns were acceptable. . Revise blind arch cut-outs to include wainscot and a quality stone, spandrel' glass or some other quality material above. The Commission did find the acceptable. . If grillwork is still contemplated at the main entry arch, it needs to reflect the level of' details presented in the Architect Pacifica"s concept drawings. The Commission determined that the grillwork was not necessary' and could' be eliminated. . Tile treatment within cut-out areas on southwest corner of building should match blind arches flanking main entry arch. 8. Garden center entry needs to be redesigned to be more reflective o the in entry details to be approved. g. Plant climbing vines on arbor. The Commission recommended that the architect revise the elevations as discussed and return for approval to the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes - January lg, 1989 ADJOURNMENT i The meeting adjourned at 1:3U a.m. Respectfully submitted, Arad Bu er Sec re to ry Planning Commission Minutes - 3 January 19, 1989 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 11, 1989 Vice-Chairman Chitiea called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 P.M. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Vice-Chairman Chitiea then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Peter Tolstoy, Larry McNiel (arrived at 7:45 P.M. ) COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson; Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner; Brett Horner, Assistant Planner; Russ Maguire, City Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Gail Sanchez, Secretary; Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer-,' Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer; Chris Westman, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner announced that Dan, Coleman, Senior Planner, was Employee of the Month for January. Mr. Buller announced that a Sign Workshop would be held on January 30 from 7:00 to 9:00 P.M. at Lyons Center. He stated the workshop was being presented by the Chamber of Commerce and the City jointly and that this was to be the first of a series of workshops on signs. Mr. Buller announced that this evening's meeting should adjourn to a workshop at 5:00 P.M., Monday, January 23 on the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. Mr. Buller requested that the Commissioners schedule a workshop to prepare the 1989 - 1991 work program in preparation for the budget. Mr. Buller announced that staff had received letters from the applicants requesting continuance on Items G and J. Mr. Buller announced that staff was recommending continuance on Item N for two weeks and the applicant had consented to the continuance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blak sley, carried with Chitiea abstaining, to approve the minutes of December 28, 1988. CONSENT CALENDAR A. SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT GUIDELINES - CITY OF RANCHO CU ON A - Staffrequest 'to a n e main nance ' sec un e eguy a I nes r the purpose of consistency. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88- 2 - CARNEY-THEODOROU - e eve dp n an in a rya a Ong td a ing , square ee on 1.55: acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1:4) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the east side of Hyssop Drive and north of 4th Street - APN 229- J1-02. C. ' DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13444 - PULTE HOME CORPORATION; - The Design Review of buildiifj`s_4­n_d___ etailed site pan for 120 Tots-_within a previously ' approved subdivision of 156 lots on 29.4 acresof land within the Low Density Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Planned Community, located at the southwest corner of Victoria Park Lane and Kenyon Way - APN: 227-551-1 thru 32, 227-551-1 thru 4 and 61 thru 76, and 27-511 thru 58. D. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 122 - CRISTI O - A custom lot resfidentia su Avon o lots on approximate y acres of land in the Very Love Residential District (less than 2 dwellingunits per acre), located on the east side of Haven Avenue north of the Hillside Drainage ' Channel -' APN. 201-121-24. E. SAPPHIRE TRAIL Motion. Moved by Blakley° seconded by Emerick, carried to approve Items A through E of the Consent Calendar;. PUBLIC HEARINGS G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14055 - AV ESS The eve; op n o ' town base uni s on acres o ann t e Medium Density Residential > District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) , located north of Arrow Highway and east of Baker Avenue - APN: 207-201-32 and 12. Vice-Chairman Chitiea stated that Item G would be removed from tonight's agenda, based on staff's recommendation, pending completion of the application. Planning Commission Minutes ' -2- January 11, 1989 I J. ENVIE110NMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 88-48 EGGHEAD rye 11e 1 nor �' asroor� an Ice 1n a ease spaace of 1,000 squarea ell wiCthin an existing multi-tenant industrial park on 4.01 acres of land in the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at 9170-9190 Haven Avenue -- APN: 09- 6 -'1 . OLD BUSINESS N. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 88-3 - UTMAN-MACDONALD $ PARTNERS - The development of a wo-s r^y square o0 o ice a tng on .09 acres of land in the Haven Avenue Overlay °District Subarea o , located at the northeast or of Haveh Avenue and Acacia Street - APN: 09-401-0I. (Continued from December 14, 1g88. ) Motion, Moved by Blakesley, seconded by EmericE, continue Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 88- and Development Review 88-3 to January 25, 1989. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHIT EA, CMERICK, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NIEL -carried PUBLIC HEARINGS F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP11934 - L. A. CH CO, su �vs ono acres o ann parse �n t e e um en ` ty Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, approximately 150 feet south of Lemon Avenue - APN: 201- S '-0 . (Continued from December 14, 188. Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer, presented the staff report and recommended deletion of Special Condition .a., which o the City for cost of strut improvements on Archibald ufronting Parcels reimbursementired 1 and 2. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the pudic nearing. Albert Dayton, Pfeiler & Associates Engineering, stated they were happy with the conditions as stated. He requested reimbursement for one-half the cost for undergrounding utilities ' along Archibald Avenue when properties were developed on the opposite side of the street. Lawrence Oaief ky, 6393 Jadeite Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, asked for verification that project density would be no more than 4-8 dwelling units per acre. Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 11, 1989 Otto Kruti 1 Deputy City Planner, stated a General Plan Amendment was in process and scheduled to be heard at the January;' 25, 1989, Planning Commission Meeting. He stated the Amendment contained a; series of land use changes, including lowering density for this area. Connie Corcoran, 9859 Cypress Court, Rancho Cucamonga, asked if the General Plan Amendment would change this project. r. Stofa responded that Parcel 2 would become part of Tentative Tract 141 , currently in the review process. He stated the developer was showing 11 lots on 2.21 acres. Ids. Corcoran asked if the lots were for single detached family homes. Mr. Stofa confirmed they were. Ms. Corcoran asked if she could be notified of any future action on the project. Brad Buller, ,City Planner, responded that if her property was within 300 feet of the project she would automatically be notified of any future public hearings. Hewing no further testimony`, the; public hearing was dosed. Motion: Moved by Blakesle , seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 11934, with deletion of requirement to reimburse City for Archibald street improvements fronting Parcels 1 and 2. Motion carried by the following vote AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, TDLSTQY NOES: COMMISSIONERS.- NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL -carried H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13930 - WINBR DK DEVELOPMENT resi i6tial s6bdivision o sing a family lots on acres o land in the Very Lowy Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per; acre) , located on the east side of Hellman Avenue at Wilson Avenue - AP : 106 -071-1 and. 13. Chris Westman, AssistantPlanner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there was enough right-of-way available for Wilson street and the parkway to continue to Amethyst. Mr, Westman responded 20 feet would be available for most of the trail . Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 11, '1989 Rust Maguire, City Engineer, stated that reduced standards would be required in one spin where the right-of-way jogged. Mr. Westman stated that the width went down to 12 feet at that point. Rill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, stated d t a separate acquisition would be required to widen the trail to 20 feet, Commissioner Tolstoy asked if it could ' realistically be done. Mr. Silva responded that it could physically be done. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the public hearing. Jim Carlile, Winbrook Development, 99 North San Antonio, 00, 'Upland, stated he was available to answer questions. Joe Quinn, 2031 Praedst, Riverside, stated ' he would be developing the houses and he felt the revised elevations they had submitted were compatible with the desires of the Technical and Design Review Committees. Elizabeth Gun;, 5678 Amethyst, Rancho Cucamonga, asked if a block wale would be constructed. garrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated the plans did not currently cl,1 for a block wall , but the final design was not'-comple , and the City would look at the need for a wall . s. Gun stated that the City had assured her last year that here was a 95 chance that a block wall would be put up. She stated her bedroom would be right up against the project. Hearing no further testimony, the' public hearing was closed. Vice-Chairman Chitiea expressed appreciation for the developer's willingness to work with the Trails and Design Review Committees. r. Hanson suggested adding a provision to allow the Developer to requesti reimbursement from future development for one-half the coat of undergrounding electrical on Hellman Avenue. Vice-Chairman Chitiea reopened the public hearing to ask if the applicant was agreeable to the changed conditions. r. Carlile stated the conditions were acceptable. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolutions' approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13930 and Design Review for Tentative Tract 13930, with modification to allow the Developer to request reimbursement from future development for one-half the coat of undergrounding electrical on Hellman Avenue`, Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes ' - - January 11, 1989 AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, T LST Y NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL -carried I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL, MAP 12057 - WESTERN STATES subdivision of 1.81acres of landIn o Pare or condominium purposes in the Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea 3), located at the northwest corner of Peron Boulevard and Helms Avenue - APN. 209431-57. garrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the public hearing. Rance Cleus, Lee & Associates, Mated he was representing Western States Development and was available to answer questions. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Motion. Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by glakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 12057. Motion carried by, the following vote. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHIT , EMERICK, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT.- COMMISSIONERS: NIEL -carried K. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-05 - CROSS AND, CROWN LUTHERAN I host amend e site pan ah uj ing a ova �bns on a proposed 6,200 squarefoot sanctuary on acre s of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, +located at 6723 Etiwanda Avenue - APN; 7-061-0 . Tom Orahn, Assistant: Planner, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the public hearing. William Runyan, Runyan Engineering, project designer, concurred with Design Review recommendations. Commissioner Chitiea asked what was being proposed to be placed in the bell wer. Mr. Runyan stated that originally they had planned to leave the tower vacant Until the church could afford the bolls,' however, now they intended to install simulated bells,. Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 11, 1989 Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked what kind of material would be used. Mr. Runyan stated they would be working with studios and he thought they might be made of fiberglas with a plaster weight to give mass. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Vice-Chairman Chitiea asked what type of roof material was being used and if the roof structure was capable of supporting tile. Mr. Grahn stated the approved material was Cal-Shake and it had been approved by Design Review. Lion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, to adapt the Resolution approving Modification to Conditional Use Permit 8 -05. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, TDLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE` ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NIL -carried Chairman McNiel joined the meeting. Brad Buller, City Planner suggested skipping to Item M because the applicant for Item L was not present and would.. be ,joining the meeting shortly. M. VARIANCE 88-25 - KEN RUBY CONSTRUCTION COMP A request to +allow on- si to lightTiFg sta ar excee a 15 f6otheight requirement for a proposed shopping center in the Community Commercial District, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Ramona Avenue - AP : 208- 30 - , 15, and.. 1 . Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing Dennis Dickerson, Ken Ruby Construction, 11845 Nest Olympic 'Boulevard, Los Angeles, stated that when motorists enter the shopping enter from Foothill they would receive a glare from 15-toot light fixtures. He stated their lighting engineers recommended 25 feet as the optimum, so he was requesting 20 feet as a compromise. George Guidera, 7363 Garnet, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had participated in the Foothill Corridor Study. He stated the property owners knew when they bought the lot that it was recessed and they should accept that. He stated he Planning Commission Minutes - - January 11, 1989 had questioned the candlepower maximum in the City Code and was told that the Sheriff's department determines if lights are bright enough. He asked the Commissioners to take into account that the project backed up to a residential area and that higher light standards might effect adjacent homes. he felt the City lighting ordinance was too vague and should address candlepower: Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner ssioner Blakesley stated he could' understand why applicants don't f want to put in extra' fixtures, but he felt the 1 -foot height would work if care was taken with placement of standards and landscaping. He felt the Commission needed to be sensitive to light pollution and agreed that it would be good to review the light standards and perhaps look at candlepower'. Commissioner Tolsoy agreed- that 15 feet was the preferred height: and that fixtures could then be kept under the tree canopy. Commissioner 'glakesley felt the applicant had the burden of proof to support a' variance, and he did not feel the proper findings could be made to support the variance. Commissioner Chitiea agreed. Motion: Moved by Tol;stoy, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolution denying Variance 88- 6. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA,; C ICK, MCNIFL, TaL TOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS. NONE' -carried L. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8 - - OAS INVESTOR - A request` to delete builai5jwitfiifi i previous y ap,provia s upping center (Thomas Winery) , located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 08- 1-10 and 11. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tol stoy asked if design ' changes in the planter and tree wells' would be brought back before the Planning Commission. ra Murphy responded that they could be. Commissioner Chitiea asked if any consideration had been given to redesigning the parking or circulation layouts when it was decided to delete the building. She thought perhaps a better flow and more landscaping could be achieved. Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 11, '1989 Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Rudy Stroink, CAS Investors, 2081 Business Center Drive, 90, Irvine, project manager, stated there would only be one user for the winery building; - a' restaurant. He said the building would not have split uses of restaurant and retail space'. He said they had .studied the parking area and felt the proposed layout was the best they could achieve. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what was planned for the still building. Mr. Stroink stated they had not located a tenant as yet, but felt perhaps a small flower shop might work well . He said the building still had the distillery equipment nt inside and they hoped to >keep the equipment as part of the decor of the building. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tols;toy felt deleting building J would be beneficial to the project, but he wanted the project returned to Design Review to consider additional enhanced paving and landscaping because of the increased parking area. Commissioner Chitiea concurred that additional parking would be beneficial and that enhanced paving might add to the project. Commissioner Tolst y felt that the parking situation was becoming critical at many centers in the City. He felt it might be a good idea to initiate a work study program to look at upgrading City parking requirements. Commissioner Emerick asked if bake racks were provided 7n the center and if not, could they be added. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to ask if the applicant had considered bike racks. Nor. Stroink stated bike racks were already provided in a different phase of the project and they could be added to this phase as well . Commissioner 'Tolstoy felt attention should be paid to pedestrian circulation around the distillery and winery buildings.'; r. Stroink stated that the restaurant was considering ;using the back area near the still for outside seating. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was 'closed. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution; approving Modification to Conditional Use permit 8 - 6 with a modification to turn to Design 'Review for approval of detailed site and landscape plans. Motion carried by the following vote : Planning Commission Minutes -g- January 11,; 1989 v AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried NEW BUSINESS O, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW B- 9 - CASTILLO COMPANY, development--ofan o -ic u n in , square eet on Z.J4 acres of land in the industrial Park District (Subarea ) , located at the southeast corner of Milliken and Sth Street - APN 9-341- 10. Steve Hayes, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea asked to see the color board. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if planters were enhanced in the drive-through area. r. Hayed responded that they had been:. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. David Parker, The Castillo Company, stated he had not received the staff port. Mr. Hayes provided him with a copy of the staff report. Hearing no further; testimony, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea felt the color was too intense. Brae! Buller, City. Planner, stated a full palette had been approved for the project and this color was one of the approved colors.. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the color was consistent with the surrounding buildings. Mr. Hayes responded that the buildings to the north were cream and teal . Commissioner Chitiea asked if the color could be toned down. Chairman 'McNiel reopened the public hearing, Mr. Parker sated the color was approved in the Bixby Business Park Master Plan. Commissioner Chitiea suggested something in the same range, but more muted. Planning Commission Mina _10- January 11, 1989 M r. Parker thought they dad been trying match a building in Bixby park. He felt the applicant might be willing to change. Hearing no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. Lion. Moved by Emerick, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review -29 with a modification to require sign Review approval of a revised color board prior to the issuance of building permits. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RLAKESLEY, CHITI A, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TCL`STpY HOES. COMMISSIONERS: HE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS ETIWANDA NORTH ANNEXATION - Staff requests direction on revision of the work program. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the Planning Commission had held several workshops; regarding the Etiwanda north area and the proposed annexation by a consortium of property owners, led by doe Di brio. He indicated a letter had been sent to doe CiIorio with an annexation time schedule, proposing annexation within a month ; period. Because the accelerated schedule would take concerted effort on the part of staff, a meeting had been held with all departments to ascertain if the schedule could be met. He said the City had entered into the schedule outlined with the understanding that the developer would not proceed ahead with project reviews through the County. He said it would take the City additional time to process County projects, such as the University Crest project, along with processing under the City. He felt the Planning Commission had shown good faith by meeting with the developer for several workshops. He requested feedback regarding the Planning Commission's position on this matter. He asked if they supported this effort to annex and the time and effort it would require over the next b months ' to accomplish ithis. He suggested the 'Planning Commission might want to consider several assumptions before moving ahead with the project: (1) ` Have the developer agree to not process projects 'simultaneously with the County (including the University Crest project) and (2) Have the developer agree to conduct a traffic study using the; City i Engineer's traffic modeling concept, or have the developer bring his proposed study method before the Planning Commission and have the Commission decide which method would be '1 appropriate. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how the developer wanted to conduct the traffic stu Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, responded that the City wanted to use computer modeling techniques in order to project volumes and patterns. The City Council had just approved an outside consultant to conduct such a study Planning Commission Minutes -I1- January 11, 1989 on a City-wide basis, but that would take fro'm 4 6 months. Mr. Di brio proposed doing the study by manual distribution and the City felt the area was so large that manual distribution would not take into account the impact on the surrounding areas or answer such questions' as ghat would happen if the Foothill Freeway is not built. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the impact on the entire City had to be considered and the computer modeling concept should be required. The consensus of the Commission was that the computer modeling concept would be necessary.: Mr. Buller stated that the time schedule only called for one Planning Commission hearing. However, for Specific Plans for other areas, multiple meetings had been held. He asked how the Commissioners wanted the components to the Specific Plan presented. Chairman McNiel stated in the past there had been community meetings, information gathered, and rough drafts considered before the final plan was adopted. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that community meetings were necessary to properly accomplish the annexation _ Commissioner Chitiea felt more pudic input would lead to a better project. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that when the Planning Division work program was devised, this project was not envisioned, an he felt it was imporant to look at other; program items to see ghat needed to be deleted. 1t was the consensus of the Commission that they supported the annexation. Commissioner Emerick did not want to see the City compromise substance for speed, He felt it was important to identify the open space. He wondered i f r. DiIorio would process under the County if an impasse on concerns` was ached. Chairman McNiel felt that the longer the process of annexation took, the fewer opportunities the City would have because more projects would be processed through the County;. Commissioner Chitiea did not want to rush too much because the end product would be inferior. She had concerns about the trail system. She felt if the developer was not willing to cooperate on such items as open space, trails, the traffic study, etc. there was no point in rushing to annex the area. Chairman McNiel stated that Mr. Ci brio had made a statement that he was making are effort to bring the consortium together in order to annex the whole area, but in fact it appears he will be piecemealing the project ;for those properties he controls. He questioned whether the consortium was aware of how a piecemeal approach can affect the timing and success of the annexations He felt nothing was to be gained by delaying the process_. Planning Commission Mind -12- January 11, 1989 Commissioner Blakesley agreed with Chairman McNiel regarding a concern with piecemealing `and stressed that it appears the timing is right for considering annexation. Chairman McNiel stated than he heard that the Commissioners were in favor of the annexation schedule as discussed, with stipulations that projects not be processed through the County simultaneously by the consortiums or any individual property owner, and that the C'ity's traffic modeling concept be followed. Commissioner Tolstoy asked at ghat point a feasibility study would be done for the City's review. r. Henderson stated one was being done as part of the Environmental impact Report being prepared by the consortium's consultant. He said a lot of the environmental documents were initiated last year under the County auspices for the university Caryn project. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the City could accept the consultants already selected. Mr. Henderson stated that City Council would have to approve the consultant. Commissioner Emerick stated that the traffic study would impact the cost/benefit analysis study. Commissioner Chitiea reminded the Commission that the County had recently !made ' a number of changes to make it more difficult to bypass Cities in development, such as raising fee structures. Otto k t to ro i1 ut Deputy City Planner, stated...... that th e o . Cat needed p y y � yannex the area, but that it was important not to go into negotiations with the attitude that the City would annex no tter what. Commissioner Blakesley asked how much influence the City had in the County process. Mr. Henderson stated that the County process does not permit enough time for staff to bring the proposed projects to the Planning Commission for input before comwnting.; said recently the Couny's posture has been to look at City requirements and if City requirements are way beyond County requirements,, they ignore City requirements. Chairman Niel stated he had recently read an article in the 'newspaper that County Supervisors had directed County staff to pay closer attention to City requirements within spheres of influence. Commissioner Chitiea stated she wanted to go on record as standing firm and that the City should work with the consortium only if the consortium worked with, the City. Planning Commission Minutes -1 - January 11, 1989 Mr. Buller stated that on January 23 these concerns could be discussed further t the workshop. He recommended that the ithree community meetings mentioned earlier be scheduled into the annexation program. He felt staff could look at the schedule to see whe the meetings could be fit in, but they should be before the Planning Commission review'. He proposed that the first planning Commission meeting be only an introductory presentation with no discussion, the second meeting be the actual public hearing, and that the third eti ng be tentatively set as the meeting at which find action could be taken. Mr. d M Henderson stated that staff had with t w _ the other property owners in the n r co so tidm and they e; 1 n t y are looking forward to annexation', as they ;have committed many dollars to the process. COMMISSION BUSINESS r. Buller stated the City will be preparing a two-year budget and staff needed to meet with the`'Commissioners to discuss the work program. The consensus of the Commission was that a meeting will be held. on Thursday, February g at Commissioner Tbls y"s home, beginning at :00 P.M. r. Buller invited the Commissioners to attend the sign workshop being held on January 30 at the Lyons 'Center. Commissioner Chitiea expressed concerns about the Terra Vista Town Center plan reviews. She requested that a workshop be conducted to ascertain if all requested elements have been included. The consensus of the Commission was to adjourn to a workshop following; the January 19 Design Reviews meeting. Commissioner Tolstoy asked that staff review all required patio furniture for plazas to be sure it is of a <substantial and permanent nature. Chairman McNiel stated that patio furniture should not be solely defined as seat walls around planters. Co `issidner Chitiea stated that Design Review should be reviewing patio furniture during review of the project. Mr. Henderson stated that patio furniture would be included in a design criteria guidebook currently 'being developed. 'I Planning Commission Minutes -14- January 11, 1989 Mr. ; Buller stated he would circulate an administrative memo to all staff regarding patio furniture, to be sure permanence and compatibility with architecture are considered. He stated the subject would also be covered in the design guidelines being developed and perhaps the 'Industrial' Specific Plan should be modified to include the subject. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the fire alarm system installed in the Lyons Center looked tacky. PUBLIC COMMENTS Fred Deaux, 11036 Shaw Street, felt that every effort must be made on the part of the Planning Commission to indicate that Mr. Dilorio needs' the City, not that the City needs Mr. DiI'orio. He stated that City Council had recently gone on record that they may look at an overall growth management process, and therefore Mr. DiIorio seemed to be trying to push his annexation through before the City enacted growth management standards. He felt the City should not trade substance and quality for speed. He felt the City is running out of infrastructure to support growth and annexation and needed to look at available water supplies before allowing annexation. Mr. Deaux supported the Planning Commission decision to deny the variance for light standards higher than 15 feet. Mr. Buller stated that Councilmember Brown had requested that an item be added to the next City Council agenda regarding the Carlsbad Growth Management Plan. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Tdlstoy', seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried to adjourn. 9;40 P.M. - Planning Commission Adjourned to a January 19, 1989, workshop at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center following Design Review to discuss the Term Vista Town Center. Respectfully submitted, 'g� P&P I Brad Bu ler Sec re to ry Planning Commission Minutes -15- January 11, ' 1989 CITY OF;RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting January 5, 1989 TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER SIGN PROGRAM WORKSHOP Chairman McNiel called the adourned meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 10:01 'p.m. '' at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway, Rancho Cucamonga. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the Terra Vista Center Sign Program. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Bla esle , Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce` Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None' STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman, Senior planner; Otto Kroutil , Deputy city Planner; Brett Horner, Assistant Planner Tom Bond, Architects Pacifica, presented an overview of the revised sign; program. The monument signage concept was changed from' tower elements to 1 ' x 181 ground mounted' signs. David Sutherland, design consultant representing Target stores, presented heir reasons for redesigning the monument sign and explained their concept for a five (S) foot high wall sign. Mr'. Bond distributed copies of the latest monument design which was developed that afternoon through discussions with Target; representatives. The Commission reviewed the proposed sign program and gave the following direction to the applicant: 1. The monument signs as proposed were deemed unacceptable. The Committee stated that the monument signs should identify "Town Center' rather than advertise the major tenants (Target, vyn 's, etc. ). f The sign Program should be revised to include two lower wall monuments identifying "Town Center" on either side of the main' entry drive off of Foothill Boulevard. No tenant signage should be allowed on or near those signs. Planning Commission Minutes - 1 - January S, 1989 3. The major tenants could be provided with street-side; signage on smaller scale monument signs along Foothill Boulevard. If proposed, these monument signs should be located between the restaurant pads along Foothill Boulevard and spaced a sufficient distance from any restaurant monument sign and outside of the storm drain easement and 'strutR.O.W. . Fields of tile on the monument signs was discouraged. . The proposed sign colors may be acceptable if the size of the letters was reduced. 5. A theatre marquee at the corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center drive may be acceptable it the sire of the sign was' reduced significantly. A ground-mounted monument sign was suggested with some type p t e of protective cover`' over the _ marquee letters. Identification of the Entertainment Center was encouraged over identification of the theater only. "Edwards Entertainment Center" was suggested. . The maximum wall sign height for major tenants was discussed but a precise size was not approved. A 4 foot high maximum sign was, however;, the preference of the Commission. 8. The sign program needs to clearly present the hierarchy o signs with the primary focus being on the entry monuments identifying the "Town Center. 9. ` Comments 3-7 from the October 20, 1988 sign program Ming remained unchanged. The meeting concluded at 12: 14 a.m. Respectfully submitted, /�5Brad ul l er Sec re ta ry Planning Commission Minutes - 2 January 5, 1989