Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes Jan-Jun 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON A PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting June 24, 1987 Chairman Larry 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: David Blake ley, 'Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel Peter Tol s toy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Otto Krou'til , Deputy City Planner, Dan Coleman, Senior Planner Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Greg Gage, Assistant Planner; Barye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Debra Meier, Assistant Planner* Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner, Karen Kissdck, Planting Commission Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Manner, announced that after extensive recruitment Karen Kissack will be replacing Jan Reynolds as Planning Commission Secretary. He also announced the printing of two new handouts of the Design Review Process booklet and the Planning Commission booklet® In addition, Mr. Buller requested the Design Review workshop scheduled July 2, 1987 on fast food standards be moved to July 1 th or, August bth. The workshop for Town Center is scheduled for duly 2, 1987 and to eliminate two workshops after Design Review, staff recommendation would e August S, 1987. After discussion, it was decided to hold the fast food workshop on August 20, 1987. Larry McNiel expressed sincere gratitude on behalf of the Planning Commission an commended Jan Reynolds on the excellent job she had done for the thorn. Planning Commission Minutes -1- gone 24, 1987 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion; Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolsty, carried, to approve the Minutes of April 22,' 1987 as submitted. CONSENT CALENDAR Dave Cooper, Representative of Crowell Brothers requested Item A be reproved from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 6- 5 - CITY OF eve oilmen o a corpora ion yar an wec e maintenance facility master plan on 5.69 ages of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea ), of the Industrial Specific Plan located on the south side of 9th Street between Hellman Avenue and Vineyard Avenue - APN 09-01 - 7 4. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-19 LENNON ARCHITECTS - e eve opmen o a gate nrrse industRaT 5u1lT1—nJ---of- 30,0 -; quare feet on 1.635 acres of land within the General Industrial District (Subarea 5) , located at the northeast corner of Turner Avenue and Sharon Circle - APN 09- 51-15. Notion: Moved by Chitiea;, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adopt Items B and C of the Consent Calendar. A. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR TIME EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION of --Vm6diffitation to a a can ion for utility un ergroun ng and a request for an extension of time for the project located at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Carnelian Street - APN 7-031- 8. (Continued from dune 10, 1987) . Dave Cooper, 51 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, CA representing Crowell Brothers appeared before the Commission stating that Crowell Brothers felt there wasn't any way they could absorb $127,OUO (+) in undergrounding costs. If this was to be one of the conditions, they would have to let the map expire. Request was made that they find another mechanism to finance the undergrounding since the burden was too great to finance. The only parcel left to be developed and contribute to the undergrounding is the parcel between; San Bernardino Avenue to Baseline. Larry McNiel stated the Commission has adopted a somewhat hard line approach to undergrounding since approximately 5C percent is underrounded and eventually all of the city would' be udergrounded. r. MtNi el indicated we have been working with the Chamber` of Commerce o develop a possible assessment district to help offset some of the Planning Commission Minutes - - dune 24, 197 exhorbitant costs. The probabilities of getting an assessment district were thin. Since there were no other public comments, the public hearing on Item A was closed. There are two resolutions to consider before the Commission: (1) The Resolution of Denial with respect to the undergrounding issue from two weeks ago and (2) Approve conditionally that undergrounding; be done. Applicant's position to obtain approval conditionally to underground and to have an opportunity to seek and create an alternate method of financing the undergrounding. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, suggested the Commission could approve the map with the applicant accepting the conditions and return with modifications of conditions if he could find another solution or mechanism to the undergrounding issue. Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated the minutes should reflect the intent of the Commission for this case. Commissioner Chitiea moved adoption of Resolution of Approval in conjunction with the minutes of discussion. Comissioner Tolstoy seconded the motion. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, ERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-04 - DONLEY --gENNrrT- ARCRITECTS - The aeve opmen of a neighborh—oo-d—coff-ve-r-cial- shopp ng center-consisting of five structures totaling 30,770 square feet on 3.8 acres of land, within the Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) located at the southwest corner of Haven and Lemon - AP 201-262-48. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Staff would recommend that the design of this building and the location of the lobe bays go back to the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of building permits. Subsequently, Staff recommends approval of the site plan and building elevations and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned whether the Haven Avenue access to the project is a shared access with Mobil . The access agreement was done by parcel map. Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 24, 1987 Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steve Connelly, Connelly-Bennett Architects, 11 Newport Avenue, Tustin, CA appeared before the Commission stating that the applicant will comply with the conditions of approval . lisha Olan, living west of the subject property,voiced her concern about safety, privacy, and what Connelly-Bennett would be doing abet the wall between the project and her property. .Steve Kellogg, 6340 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, living south of the project, questioned if the plan that is to be approved is consistent with what the applicant had previously presented to him* He was told that the southerly driveway would be lowered and that here would a 1 foot wall ., Steve Donnelly, applicant, in response to the revisions made to the grading plan, stated' that they went; through and lowered' the entire south end of the property two feet at the minimum to allow a six foot grade differential from top of the wall to the top of the paved surface. They have brought it within the tolerances of Mr. Kellogg's concerns. Landscaping issues would be addressed with neighboring homeowners. In response to Commissioner Chitiea's question of the design of the wall , the applicant state a concrete masonry wall with decorative block would be used. Commissioner Tol stay wanted to make sure that the wall on the south side will be at least six feet and no more from the finished pavement to the top of the wall . The westerly oral should be referred back to Design Review. Mounding and shielding should be utilized to mitigate the potential sound problem of the lute bays. Commissioner Emerick expressed concern about noise, hours of restriction of operation of the car wash, and the compatible use within residential district. Chairman Mc Niel reopened the public hearing for Mr. Conelly to respond to the issues raised; by the Commission. Mr. Donnelly stated that he and Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, had gone over the noise study done by an accoustical engineer with the following alternatives: 1) Constructing a block wall along the westerly side of the property of a sufficient height to cut down on the noise, ( ) Swing the tube function and the detail function to run north and south along the base of the " ". They could conceivable enclose the hack side of the building. The car wash bays would be running east and rest. Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes - - dune 24, 1987 Brad Buller, City Planner, provided the Commission with the following language as a condition to modify the resolution stating a combination of decorative walls and landscaping; blending with the existing residential development and the proposed center shall be utilized along the west and south property lines to insure screening of the shopping center from adjacent residences* The plant material along the west boundary shall include tall growing evergreen trees to provide such screening. Plans showing the above shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Notion: Moved by Tol stay, ; seconded by Emerick, to approve the resolution as modified. Motion was carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, EHITIEA, EMERICK, :MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87- - INLAND '---TB< a oar a c urc wi i n an exi s ng pre sc od facility-, or ids Only" on 1.18 acres of land in the Low Density Residential` District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located on the south side of Rase Line Road, east of Turner Avenue - APN 1 7-061- . Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Mr. Ray Smith, 3937 San Lorenzo River Road, Ontario, CA agreed with the report and recommendations of the staff. r. Pete Potasi , 7474 Ki nl ock Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, ,stated he had addressed his concerns with Howard Field, Assistant Planner,, with respect to the access of the; property. There is an ;emergency access gate at the end of Kinlock that "miraculously" opens and remains open,The gate was intended for emergency purpo es only and was to remain closed. r. Michael Boyd, 707 Arlington Place, Rancho Cucamonga, spoke for Inland Fellowship, in regards to the gate and the access on a Sunday. They were not aware it was to remain closed but agreed to not use it and would park only in the parking` lot off Base Line. Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Ehitiea expressed concern about the potential pedestrians crossing Base Line Road and if there is not enough parking within the ;parking lot. She also raise concern with potential parking in the neighborhood to the south. Planning Co mission Minutes -5- June 24, 1987 �I i Chairman McNi el agreedthe gate off of Kinlock should remain closed and referred this matter to staff. Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated the Commission could add `a condition to an addition to the Resolution prohibiting parking on the southern portion of :the lot and that the gate is to regain locked. The minutes will reflect Commissioner Chitiea's concern of parking on the opposite of Base Line Road and if jaywalking is occurring this could be grounds for reconsideration or revocation of this Conditional Use Permit, Parking into the southern neighborhood would be a concern. . Concern of the ' Commission is with the restricted parking, with regards to health and safety of the pedestrians and drivers. Commissioner Tolstoy moved adoption of the Resolution with the Condition that parking shall not be permitted on the southern portion of the site and that the gate shall remain locked at all times. He supported Commissioner Chitiea's concern with parking on Base Line and agreed if this does become a' problem i should` b rounds for p g revocation.Commissioner Blakesley seconded the motion. Motion was tarried by the following vote:` AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLA ESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICk, MCNIEL, T LSTOY NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried F. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-14 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW e rogues o mo - Y e approve acre as er FM y eliminating Buildings C and a and replacing with parking spaces, in the General Industrial District, (Subarea , located at the northwest corner of gth Street and Archibald Avenue - APN 209-021- ,17,05. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner,' presented: the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea asked if any more specific designs for pedestrian amenities had been submitted. Public hearing was opened by Chairman McNiel . Cheri Tar ington, 516 North Orange, Riverside, CA agreed to the conditions of the staff report. Since there were no other public comments, the public hearing was closed® Commissioner Chtiea recommended the plaza area on the northeast side of Building A referred to Design Review Committee for approval prior to release of occupancy for tenants in Building 4. Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 24, 1987 Commissioner Chitiea moved adoption of the resolution as modified, seconded by Commissioner Emerick, Motion carried by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EEAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOO STCY ROES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: HONE --carried Chairman McNiel suggested advancement of Item M, with the indulge rent of the Commission, staff, and audience, because their are many adolescents here for this item. M. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86- SOLOM N Appeal of staff's Fesion enrng a reques a oar a a eooard rare in ar area ofa single farily� silence located a 1C amanita e A�FN 01 g81-11. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. The staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and deny ;the appeal of Minor development Review 86- . Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Marc Solomon, 10007 Man anita Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA, appeared before the Commission stating he felt that the staff report was biased and unobective against this issue. He stated he has been trying to obtain city approval for two years. He has itaken steps to correct the problems addressed such as garbage, more people, traffic, privacy, and noise. Restrictions of the ramp would be made to comply with the neighbor's wishes such as shorter hours, limiting day use on Sunday, etc. Other issues Mr. Solomon addressed were disregard of neighbors, lower property value, commercial attraction, the 'ramp being an eyesore and privacy. Full safety equipment is required to ride the ramp in Mr. Solomon's backyard. None of the neighbors that opposed this issued were present at the meeting. Mr. Solomon feels he has broken no lawns, he has no ill intentions, and trys to comply with his neighbors' concerns. Commissioner Emerick ques,tioned the contest that was held last summer. About' 15 people with 40 entries were there. This was done to help raise money to buy materials for the ramp. Money is not charged for usage' of the ramp, only donations. 'Limits are now set for ten people, average about five to seven people. Mr. John Knickolopilus, 616 Glenlock, Alta Lora, CA expressed his favortism regarding the skateboard ramp, stating that it was well organized, well disciplined, no abusive language, and riders are required to wear safety gear.. He felt Mr. Solomon was providing a service in educating young citizens in citizenship. Planning Commission Minutes - - dune 24, 1987 Ms. Sarah Brock., 10007 Manzanita, Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, owner of the property, stating her son, Marc Solomon, has certain guidelines to follow in keeping the skateboard ramp. There is no alcoholic beverages, no smoking, no drugs, or foul language allowed whatsoever. All riders have to sign a release, if a minor, it has to be notarized and signed by parents. Since there were no other public comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick stated he did not see any of the writers of the letters opposing this issue at the meeting. Concerns of Mr. Emerick were noise, too many people, and cars. Liability is not a concern, applicant is taking the risk and felt the City is not sharing the liability. Commissioner Blakesley expressed his primary concern was unsightliness, yet was impressed with it being a well-organized civic activity. Commissioner Chi ties was impressed with Mr. of or m s speech and rebuttal and was surprised that the people who had written 'the letters Caere not at the meeting. The fact that it was unfenced' made it an attractive nuisance, and she was not sure that the chain across the bottom is adequate solution. Commissioner Tolstoy's primary concern was the non-fenced aspect of the project. In addition, he wanted to commend Mr. Solomon on the tremendous presentation of his case and wanted to support this issue. Chairman McNiel found only two problems: (1) Sound/Noise which is being mitigated; Q) Visual problem - sitting out in the middle of the yard.After two years in operation, neighbors who oppose the ramp did not express their opinions at the meeting. Commissioner McNiel suggested perhaps conditioning its use and to numbers of people. Referral to staff regarding the unsightliness of the skateboard ramp and landscaping was suggested. Brad Buller, City Planner, recommended the item be continued for two weeks to prepare a Resolution of Approval with conditions for the Consent Calendar. Staff would meet with the applicant to develop the conditions of approval . Commissioner Tolstoy moved, seconded by Commissioner Chitiea, to continue the item for two weeks to work with staff. Motion was carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -8- June 24, 1987 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried 8:40 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 8:50 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened G. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 87-01 - HARRY C'S - The review of proposed sc J&giy" dMg` VbZils ' i5a 51aying records nightly in conjunction with a restaurant/night club, located at 10877 Foothill Boulevard. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman cNiel opened the public hearing. Mr. Mike Miller, District Manager of Harry C's, questioned the uniformed officer condition of the Resolution. They do have four employees (lounge hosts) dressed in suit and tie for crowd control , would this be acceptable to the Commission. Mr. Coleman stated the ordinance provides for "a duly licensed and uniformed security guard at all times dancing is permitted or allowed". Mr. James Barton, 8409 Utica Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA appeared before the Co mission stating he was the owner of the property and further questioned the issue of a security guard. The restaurant supplies four security-type people and the presence of 'a security guard would be demeaning to the class of the establishment. He suggested the condition be waived. Mr. Coleman rebutted that neither the staff nor the Commission have the authority to waive the condition which is an ordinance requirement established by the City Council . Public hearing was closed by Chairman McNiel . Commissioner Tolstoy suggested the person be dressed appropriately with a badge with name and identification of his purpose. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the licensing refers to the state procedure set forth for security guards, a process which can be attained through security companies or individuals. The uniform indicates a visual presence which stands out from the customers. Planning Commission Minutes -9- June 24, 1987 Brad Buller, City Planner, further reiterated the Commission can not waive a condition that is required by the ordinance, but may take action as a matter of interpretation of the condition of what constitutes a uniform. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Mr. ,dim Barton further questioned the interpretation of licensed security guards. He felt that the City had not reached the paint of having an officer protect us in the restaurant/dance facility. �t Commissioner Emerick stated that where alcoholic beverages are being served, this particular ordinance is appropriate and supports Council #s action. The Commission agreed a uniform did not necessarily mean a police or security guard uniform. Chairman McNiel. closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tolstoy moved adoption of the resolution with the security ward licensed according to ordinance as interpreted. Commissioner mericR seconded the motion. Notion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY, C ITIEA, E ERIC , MCNIEL, TOLSTUY RUES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried H. ENIRUN ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITION USE PERMIT B `-� 1 reques o es ta b Irs a , square 0o c u wri 5 an existing 11,826 square foot multi-tenant industrial facility int he General Industrial Land Use District, (Subarea , located at 9507 Arrow Highway, Building 7, Suite N Cindy;Norris, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. r. Mark Rushing, 6905 Dakota, Rancho Cucamonga, CA , Pastor of Orangewood Baptist Church, appeared before the Commission stating that they have already met with Foothill Fire District and have received preliminary report which requires, panic bars and extinguishers. They are getting bids on panic bars and extinguishers at this time. Beyond that, they are in agreement with the conditions and provisions stated in the Resolution. Seeing no further comments, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes _10- June 24, 1987 i Commissioner Chitiea moved adoption of the resolution, Commissioner Emeri`ck seconded the motion. Motion was carried by the following vote} AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RLAIESLEY, CHITIEA, E E IC , MCNIEL, T LST Y DOES.?, COMMISSIONERS: ROVE ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS: ROBE --carried I. ENVIRONMENTAL SESS'ENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 7-11 - SUMITOMO ORMUCTIO e eve d en o i am un s n tTi "mod within the Medium Residential District -14 dwelling units per acre located on the north side of lgth Strut, 350 feet east of Hellman Avenue - APN 01- - . In addition, the applicant has filed a Tree Removal Permit'. Applicant has made a request continue to a date unspecified; Item I removed from the agenda. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT' 13441 - ILLI LYON en a roc su division o acres of an TRVo-"' 115- single family lots in the Low-Medium Density Residential District 1 -8 dwelling units per acre) within the Victoria Planned Community, located at the northeast corner of Victoria Park Lane and Kenyon Way - APN 227-011-07. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Md i el` opened the public hearing. Mr. Stephen Ford, representing the William Lyon Company, appeared before the CommissionA stating they accept the conditions outlined by the staff report. Since there were no further comments, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tblstoy moved adoption of the resolution, Commissioner Chitiea seconded the motion. Motion was carried by the following vote'. YES:' COMMISSIONERS: RLA ESLEY, CHITIEA, E ERIC , MCNIEL, TOLSTOY ES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried Planning Commission Minutes _11- dune 24, 1987 � w� Chairman McNiel stated Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan is designed to enhance Foothill Boulevard by expanding and beautifying it, in addition to increasing the property value. Otto Kroutil , Deputy City Planner, stated that furniture 'stores were specifically not included in the plan, but conditionally permitted clothing stores, and not wholesale, warehouse, or discount stores were in the language of the plan. 1 i Chairman M Niel reopened the public hearing. r. Jeff Seranka expressed a concern should the to "discount" stores be used. He believed it would be difficult to determine what is "discount". the determination and interpretation o the Commission of "discount" stores. The public heaving was closed by Chairman McNiel . Brad Buller, City Planner, indicated that the primary issue for the Thomas Brothers Winery site is Design and the desire to protect and enhance the historical nature of the site. A secondary matter' is the control on the type of uses permitted. The uses permitted are to support and not work against the strong design goals for the site. Otto Kroutil , Deputy City; Planner, indicated that additional information on median islands Will be placed in the appendix of the document. Commissioner Chitiea moved to continue Item K as modified to the duly 8, 1987 meeting for consideration of the adoption of the plan. Commissioner Emeerick seconded; the motion. Motion was carried by the following ;vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: HLA ESLE , CHITIEA, EMERICk ,' MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried L. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN review an Cons?der is rec'o en a i n or certification of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan project. The specific Plan consists of detailed land use regulations and standards for the development along Foothill Boulevard between Grove Avenue and Haven Avenue, between the I-15 Freeway and East Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes -1 - dune 24, 1987 Alan Warren, Associate Planner, presented the staff report on the EIR for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing; seeing no comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner TblstoY moved to continue Item L to the July B, 1987 meeting; motion seceded by Commissioner Emerick. Motions was carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLA ESLEY, CHITIEA, E EBICK, MCNIEL, T4LSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried NEW BUSINESS N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 2 - N NDI N propo;sIa o cons rue o ware Dose ings b a ing square feet on '6.25i acres in the General Industrial District, Subarea 5, located south ' of 6th Street adjacent to an A`,T.& S.F. rail spur west of Lucas Ranch Road - AP 210-a71-5 . Chris> Wes an, ; Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. He pointed out that in regards to Recommendation 5 in the Resolution, the Design Review Committee felt that with extra landscaping on the west property line of the adjacent property which is under the same ownership as the project site, it would be appropriate to waive the five yard setback. Chairman Mc Niel opened the public hearing. r. Mark Elliott, an employee of the Nalbandian Group, appeared before the Commission to answer any questions or address any comments. Since there were no further public comments, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tdlstoy moved, Commissioner Chtiea seconded adoption of the resolution. Motion was carried by the following vote. Planning Commission Minutes -14 June 24, 1987 AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BLA ESLEY, CNITIEA, EMERICK,; MCNIEL, TCLSTUY NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried' COMMISSION BUSINESS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced the cancellation of the Victoria Lakes tour on June 27, 1987. Two other date were discussed, 7/I8 and 7/ 5/87 for rescheduling of the tours. Mr. Harlan Glenn, consultant, would be available for the tour. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by T l stay, seconded by Emeri k, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 10:30 p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, B AdBuklle0r %&00� Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -15- June 24, 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION/STAFF WORKSHOP Friday, June 12, I987 Tolstoy Residence Commissioner's Present: Chairman Larry McNiel , Vice-Chairperson Suzanne Chitiea, !David Blaksley, Bruce Emerick, Peer Tolstoy Also present Mayor Dennis Stout Staff Present. Jack Lam, Brad Buller, Dan Coleman, Otto Kroutil Following is an outline of the discussion that took place between the Planning Commission and 'staff members. I. PERCEPTION OF ROLES Planning, Commission Staff policy maker policy implementor arbitrator educator negotiator researcher interpret policy public ombudsman balance public vs. private interest professional shoe./long range planning technicians permit processor set standards public representative non-political decision makers There may be overlap of roles between staff and the Commission. 11. OVERCOMING BARRIERS TO COMMUNICATION o Commission should focus on precedence/policy. o Need to understand surrounding land uses' - "context". o Staff needs to do a better job of educating council on what Planning Commission is doing, especially on appeals. o Communication between City Council and 'Commission needs to be improved. There should be a report back to Commission on what action of Council decision was and why. GROUP DYNAMICS Important Factors Setting Reports Common goal Clear/Up"to date Communication Respect CITY OF RANCHO CL JICNGA PC WORKSHOP - JUNE 12, 198 Page III. MEETINGS A. Conducting Meetin s 1. Chairman plays key role In controlling meetings. . Need to "formalize" slightly a. Don't debate with audience. b. Questions of staff should be limited to simple clarifications prior to public hearing. c. Don't state opinions until after public hearing don't "prejudge" d. Call staff before meetings for more detailed questions. e. Appropriate to ask certain questions to have answer stated into the record by staff.'` . Commission shouldn't weigh economics in their decision king. 4. Need to make consistent decisions to send clew messages to developers and public on policies. . Basis for the action. a Goals b Policies c. Plans (i .e,. General Plan) B. Expediting Meetings 1. Consensus not necessary on all matters. 2. Not everybody needs to say something. . Control public input. 4. Go through the Chairman. 5. Rules of Order.- Public Commission Hearin Discussion Structured Informal Open - but monitored by Chairman 6. Purpose of reopening Public Nearing should be to receive additional factual evidence, not to allow debate. CITY OF RANCHO CL 14ONGA PC WORKSHOP - JUNE 1 , 1987 Page C. ;Design Review Committee Meetings 1. Staff will start consent calendar at 5. 0 sharp. . Pre-review with staff is crucial . J. Staff should provide all information (i .e. - grading plan on the wall or table. . Function of CRC is design review not design! 5. ORC are the arbitrators and protectors of quality. . Shouldn't upgrade mediocrity. 7. Ways to deal with "tough" reputation: a. .Staff should let DRC know which approach to take depending wort applicant's attitude. b. Expedite process whenever 1possible by assessing range of projects - which tines really need to come back to RC vs those that staff can handle. . Staff must; be proficient in design in order for DRC to refer revisions back to staff to work out with developer. 9. Meetings should have an "air of authority" that gives Committee a psychological advantage. o. Meetings should be more structured: a. Start with formal introductions. b. City Planner/Senior Planner explain purpose. c. Staff Presentation d. Applicants Presentation e. Committee discussion f. Summarize 11* ion-participatory staff should be out-of-the-way. 12. Meetings have been too casual with people wandering around, eating, talking which creates distraction. IV. JOB FACILITY A. How staff can make Commission's job easier? 1. Make recommendations whenever possible. 2. Send clues/signals to Commission, especially where there i a' silent "human" factor involved. CITY OF RANCHO Ck 11CNGaA PC WORKSHOP - JUNE 12, 1987 Page . Show slides of project sites and surrounding area. 4. Emphasize context in reports and prior decisions in like situations.' . Improve communication from PC to CC - explain to Council the "why" behind the Commission's decision* 6. Report back to Commission ghat Council decision was` on appeal or policy matters. 7. Wait to be directed by Chairman to respond to questions by audience. g. How Commission can make staff's job easier: . Establish direction - what needs to be done? 2. Call staff before agenda to ask detailed questions. . 'Visit project sites whenever possible. 4. State reasons for decisions clearly and concisely, especially on items that are likely to be appealed. . Be consistent in decisions. Y. GOALS/POLICIES A. City Council sets goals by balancing differing community concerns. B. Planning Commission has discretionary power to establish policies to implement goads. C. One Council goal is to encourage commercial growth - up to Commission to determine the best way to implement goal through policies applied to specific projects. U. Commission should be monitoring their decisions constantly for feedback by touring new development. VI. ADJOURNMENT TO REGULAR DUNE `24 MEETING i CITY OF RAN C RANCHO CL� AMCNG PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting June 10, 187 Chairman Larry 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; David glakesley, Suzanne Chitia, Bruce Emer*ick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tl stdy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT .- Brad Buller, City Planner; Gan Coleman, Senior Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; Garrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, Bill Holley, Community Services Director; Russell Maguire, City Engineer; Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner; Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary; doe Stofa,' Associate Civil Engineer ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the going away luncheon for Captain John Futscher of the Sheriff' s Department would be held t the Magic Lamp on Friday, dune 19th. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Chtiea, seconded to Tols .oy, carried, to approve the Minutes of April 8, 1987 as submitted. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, carried, to approve the Minutes of April 29, 1987 as submitted. i CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87_05 - LUSK COMPANY - A proposal to bui 1 a 9,070 square foot speculative i ndustri b0 i rag on .69 acre of land in are Industrial Park District, Subarea 6, located on the north side of Trademark Street east of Center Street' - AN 210-881- 05. `' B. APPROVAL OF ADVERTISING SIGN FOR PROPOSED VICTORIA GARDENS REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER Motion: Moved by Tol stay, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to adopt; the Consent Calendar as submitted. PUBLIC HEARINGS C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86 37 - KEI "H COMPANY/LUSK C MPANY - The; developmnt of a MaRer P ab for a 79.17 acre 'industrial park consisting of 33 lots in an Industrial Park District, Subarea 16, located at the northwest quadrant of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN 210-062-02, 11`, 15, 26, 82 and B . (Continued from May 1 , 1987 . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND 11 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10898 - KEITH' COMPANY LUSK COMPANY - A subdivision of 79.2 acres of land into 33 parcels in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 16, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street - APN 210-062-13, 11, 02 26,; 83 and 52. (Continued from May 13 1987) . Chairman McNiel announced that the applicant for the above item was requesting continuation of the public hearing to September 9, 1987. He then opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Motion: Moved by Chitiea seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing ng for Environmental enta Assessment and Development Review 86- 7 and Environmental Assessment ;and Tentative Parcel Map 10393 to September 9, 1987. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 136 - WI LIAM LYON C MPANY A tote residential development of 806 con ominiu units on 24.67 acres of lard in the Medium 8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium-High (1 -24 dwelling units per acre)' Residential Districts within the Victoria Planned Community, ' located at the northwest corner o Victoria Park Lae and Milliken Avenue - APN 02-211-13 and 14. (Continued from May;1 , 19,87) . Planning Commission Minutes - - dune 10, 1987 Chairman McNiel announced that the applicant for this" item was withdrawing the application. E. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12902 - NRDIC ;- A request to modify a condition of approve requiring a Community Equestrian Trail on the west side of the drainage course for a custom lot subdivision,: of 28 lots on 39.7 acres of land in the Very Low Density Residential District '(less than 2 dwelling units per acre) , located at the southwest corner of Hermosa Avenue and Almond Street - APN 201-071-05, 06, 26, 26, 36 and 36. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Barbara 0rimley, '5360 Hermosa, Rancho Cucamonga, requested that a gate or fence be erected at the northwest corer of her property to prevent trespassers. Ms. 0rimley stated that she had contacted San Bernardino County Flood Control with respect to this issue. Chairman McNiel directed staff to assist, Ms. Grimley in an attempt to resolve this issue. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed, Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving the Modification to Tract 12902 Motion carried by the following vote: AYES- COMMISSIONERS: C IT'IEA, TOL T Y, BLA E9'LEY, 'EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS:: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 1 444 - BARTON' DEVELOPMENT _ A sub i vi si on bf 12.6 acres of l and into parse s in the Industrial Park (Subarea 7) , located at the southwest corner of Foothill` Boulevard' and Spruce Avenue - APN 208-351-23. Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jiro Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, concurred with the Conditions of Approval . Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 10, >187 There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental ` Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 10444. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS. EMERICK, 'TOLSTOY, BLAKESLEY, 'CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS NONE -carried; G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10295 - LEWIS HOMES m A subdivision of 112 acres `o land into 4 arc s in the Terra 'Vista Planned Community located on Elm Avenue, crest of Milliken Avenue - APM 1077-421-1 , 13. Joe Stow, Associate Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. John Melcher, representing Lewis Homes, ; concurred with the Conditions of Approval'. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative' Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 125. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLSTOY, RLAKESLE , EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE carried H. EN VIRONMENTAL E V1 ONMENTAL ASSESSMENT S EN T AND TENTATIVER TACT 146_ WILLIAMS PROPERTY CONSULTANTS «� A resi ent' al subdivision of S logs on 9.7 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located on the northeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Tryon Street - (In addition;, the applicant has filed a Tree Removal Permit) - APN 208.111-0 . Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -4- June 10, '1987 Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the feasibility of preserving the Magnolia tree on Lot 13. He felt that since the pad required elevation, it would not be possible to preserve the tree and it should be removed." Commissioner Fmerck stated that an arborit should study the preservation of the tree and that possibly a three foot well around the tree might be feasible. Con Miralle, representing the applicant, opposed the elevation of the building pad along Hellman Avenue. He indicated that he was told by representatives of FFMA that he could submit Mans to them and have the lots released from the Flood Heard designation. He stated that his engineers could mitigate the flooding concern on Hellman without raising the elevation of the pads. He indicated that the existing Magnolia tree could be preserved if the pads were not elevated. Mr. Berkowitz, project developer, opposed the utility ; undergrounding requirement. He stated that utlity, undegrounding would add approximately 30 ,000 to the cost of developing the project. He felt that this was an unreasonable condition in that there are existing poles along Hellman which would remain ;standing from Foothill to Base Line and his project only fronted Hellman for 630 feet. He supported the formation of an assessment district. He additionally asked that his project engineers be allowed to address that pad elevation issue. Diane Rionico, resident: on 'Hemlock Avenue, was concerned with the flooding along Hellman and requested that this project be required to install all necessary improvements. She was concerned that the grading of the project pads would further flood the existing ,homes on Hemlock. David Kay, 9420 Tryon;, Rancho Cucamonga, asked if the project was being constructed with alleys. Mr. Buller advised that alleys were not proposed for this project. Debra Estrada, 781 Layton, Rancho Cucamonga, asked if the existing 'wall between her property and the proposed development would be replaced by the applicant. Mr. Buller advised that a condition of approval required the construction of a foot high common masonry wall along the project' s eastern boundary. Mr. Miralle once again addressed the Commission requesting that his engineers be allowed to pursue the grading issue of the pads along Hellman in an attempt to mitigate the flooding, at which time he would submit plans to FEMA to have the Flood Hazard designation removed. Planning Commission Minutes -5- Tune 10, 1987 Russell Maguire, City Engineer, addressed Mr. Miralle' s request and advised that the appropriate position would be for the Commission to approve the Conditions as submitted. He stated that the requirement to raise the elevations of the pads was a direction of the City Council by Ordinance 240, which would have to go through a normal amendment. He suggested that the Commission continue the item until the Flood Maps are amended so that the City; could properly address Ordinance 240 and the section of the Code which places flood protection requirements on the City Engineer. Mr. Mi ral l e requested that the optional grading alternative" be left as a possible' solution at this time. Chairman McNiel stated that the Commission could not act outside the terms of the Ordinance since this would be in violation of the laws. He asked if Mir. M»Miralle would like a continuation of the public hearing to address the issue. Mr. Miralle stated he would prefer to have the conditions approved as written with the understanding that his engineers could come back; with possible' solutions. Mr. Maguire advised the; applicant that: his engineers could, continue to try and mitigate the concern.. The applicant could then submit these plans to FEMA and if FFMA, does indeed remove the Flood Hazard designation from the Flood Map he could request a modification of the conditions of approval. Thee were no further comments, therefore the pudic hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that because of the serious flooding problems which exist on Hellman and ;the existing Ordinance, he could not support the elimination of any of the conditions of approval . He further stated that he could not see any other solutions to the problem in lied of raising the pad elevations. Chairman McNi l concurred and further stated that the City could not place the lives of its citizens in jeopardy by eliminating the condition. He felt that the cost to the applicant of transporting dirt to the site to raise the elevation of the pads could not begin to compare with the cost of saving lives. Relative to utility undergrounding, he advised the applicant that the requirement to underground was a policy of the Planning; Commission and the City Council , therefore he could not support the elimination of th > pp_ e condition. Commissioner Emeri k supported approving the Resolution as submitted, with the understanding that if the applicant comes in with a >better solution he could seek a modification of the conditions. He felt that the applicant' should be allowed to work on a solution for preserving the Magnolia tree. Commissioner Chitiea concurred and recalled flooding of the street in the past which resulted in the loss of lives. She stated she would not be comfortable" I with any sort of berming considering` the force of the water unless it was absolutely proven to be a solution. The only way she would consider approving Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 10, 1987 the project would be with the conditions as written. She asked that staff further ' research the drainage of the lots which might affect the drainage on Hemlock to assure that they do not impact on the existing homes on that street. Her concern was that the pad elevations would be raised above the existing lets to the north. Motion. Moved by Tolst y, seconded by Em rick;, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution;' approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 1376. ' Motion carried by the following votes AYES; COMMISSIONERS: TCLSTCY, EMERIC , BLA ESLEY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: ' COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried . 5 p. . - Planning Commission Recessed B: S p. . - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present I. CONDITIONAL O E PERMIT 87-1 _ EO ARDS RANCHO CUCAMONGA` THEATER - The proposed—addition of 12 amusement devices' in an existing recreational facility located in the General Commercial 'District, 7988 Haven Avenue - ARN 1077-661-07, and OB. Cindy Norris, Assistant. Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman cNi el opened the public; hearing. Hugh Randolph, representing Edwards Cinema, gave an overview of the request. There were no further comments, therefore the public 'hearing was closed. Motions Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Blakesley, to adopt ; the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 87-18'. Motion carried by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, BLAKESLEY,' CNIT'IEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL` NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE' carried Planning Commission Minutes - - dune 10, ,'1987 J. TIME EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF CONDITIONS - PARCEL MAP ;57 C - CR NELL RR TITERS - A modification to add a condition for utility undergrounding and 'a request for an extension of time for the project located at the southeast corner of Rase Line Road and Carnelian Street - APN 07-031- N. arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea stated that based on non-compliance with conditions of an earlier Resolution, she could not support the time extension. Chairman McNiel questioned the applicant's absence from the hearing. Russell Maguire, City Engineer, pointed_ out that the Commission scion received a letter from Harry Crowell , which objected to the in =lieu fee for undergroundin . He stated if the Commission decision'wa to deny the request, staff should be directed to prepare a Resolution of Denial for the June 22nd agenda. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by' Emerick, unanimously carried, to direct staff to prepare a' Resolution denying Time Extension for Parcel Map 5786 to be plated on the June 22, 1987 agenda. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETI ANOA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 7- 1 - CITY UNT O NCH CUCAMONOA - An amendment to modify the Etiwan a fi Specic Plan as follows: Figure 5-18 "Community Trails" , by relocating the Community Equestrian Trail to the south side of 24th Street east of the Loop Road; Figure 5- 9 "Improved Sidewalks" , to eliminate the sidewalk on the south side of 24th Street, east of the LoopRoad; and Figure 5-3 " 4th Street,` East of Loop" , to show a 96 foot street right-of-way with a 20 foot Community Equestrian Trail on the south side parkway. Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.: Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Frost, 12996 Victoria, Rancho Cucamonga,' gave the history, of trail development during the Etiwarda Specific Plan process. Mr. Frost stated that the sidewalk should be required on the south side of 24th Street. Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the City should not be eliminating sidewalks to construct trails. He felt that the residents of the City who use equestrian trails are diminishing in numbers and cautioned that the City will eventually end up with a grail 'system that is abandoned and unused. Planning Commission Minutes - - June' 10, 1987 Prances O' Donnell , Rancho Cucamonga resident, was concerned that placement of the sidewalk on the south side of 24th Street would take her property. Mr. Buller advised that the right-of-way shown would permit a sidewalk® There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that the Resolution exhibit could be modified to reflect a 10 foot equestrian trail and a 4 foot sidewalk on the south side of 24th Street Commissioner Chitiea pointed out that this trail is part of the community trail system and is designed for multi-purpose use, not strictly equestrian use. She stated the amendment is` appropriate and supported the recommendation' to the City Council . Commissioner Tolstoy supported the concept of requiring the sidewalk on the south side of 24th Street. Motion: Moved by Ch tiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and Etiwanda Specific plan Amendment 87-01 to the City Council , with a modification to the exhibits to reflect a minimum 10 foot equestrian trail and 4 foot sidewalk on the south side of 24th Street. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHIT EA, TOLSTOY, B A ES EY, EMERICK, M NIEL NOES- COMMISSIONERS. NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carded NEW BUSINESS L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 7-1.0 - SOUTHWEST SAVINGS - A propose to construct a two-story office;�bank 6i7d ng of g,tIOO square feet in the Neighborhood Commercial District located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Archibald Avenue - ARN O - SIB. Can Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment* Albert CeOugliel o, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the Conditions of Approval * Where were no further comments, Planning Commission Minutes - - June 10, 1987 I a i Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea to; issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 87-10. Motion carried by the following vote': AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TCLST Y, CHITIEA, BLAKES`LEY, EMERIEK, M NIEL' NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE -carried M. CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN DESIGN Bill Holley, Community Services Director, presented the conceptual design for the Central Park Master Plan to the Commission and responded to questions relative to the design. Chairman McNil opened the public hearing. Jim Frost, 12996 Victoria, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the conceptual design and commended the open space proposed in the plan. Andre Sato, 7121 Parkside, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed the Commission on behalf of the surrounding residents who were concerned with the location of the; parking lot and also the proposed lighting. Tim` Masters, Rancho Cucamonga resident, supported Mr. Soto' s comments and echoed his concerns relative to the parking lot- location and proposed lighting. r. Holley advised that this design is conceptual and would be reviewed by the City Council on July 1, 1987. He dvi ed that the residents could contact his office with their concerns. It was the consensus of the Commission to forward the Central Park Master Plan' design to the City Council for their consideration on July 1 , 1987. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS N. RESULTS OF APRIL 29 198 UTILITY UNDER-GROUNDING` WORKSHOP Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. 1 Planning Commission Minutes _10- June 10, 1987 Don Miralle, representing Williams Property Consultants, suggested that the minimum length for undergrounding be increased to 1,000 feet and that the Commission also consider the nature of the street on which the project was located. Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the formation of an assessment district for which all property owners in the City would be assessed undergrounding fees. There were no further comments. Commissioner Chitiea stated at the last meeting she was unaware of the percentage of projects that would be exempt if the minimum length was increased to 600 feet and suggested that the 300 foot minimum be retained. She felt this minimum footage should be retained until such time as an assessment district is considered. Commissioner Tolstoy was concerned with not allowing special consideration for corner lots on small parcels and suggested that further study be done on that issue. He was concerned that the cost for a small parcel owner would prohibit them from improving or developing their parcel . Commissioner Emerick agreed and stated that this cost ultimately would be passed to future homeowners. His concern was that the policy would make it very difficult to develop in the City. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that utility undergrounding is one of those issues which more than likely will be brought before the Commission many times for modification. He suggested that the Commission act on the Resolution as presented with the understanding that any studies can be conducted. He pointed out that staff was seeking some direction to proceed in future review of projects. Barrye Hanson advised that the Resolution contains the provision that the requirements for projects could be modified. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving the revised policy for undergrounding existing utilities, with the 300 minimum footage for exemption retained. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKSELSY -carried Planning Commission Minutes _11- June 10, 1987 C. ' CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS BUDGET Russ Maguire, City Engineer, and Blane Frandsen, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the Capital Improvement report. ChairmaniMcNiel invited public comments. There were none. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to recommend approval of the Capital Improvements Projects to the City Council . DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ROTATIONS Beginning August 1, 1987, Commissioners Tolstoy ;and Emerick will serve on the i Residential Design Review Committee; Commissioners Chitiea and Blakesley will serve on the Commercial Design Review Committee. Chairman McNiel will serve as alternate. The next; rotation of the Committees will be January 1, 1988. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Eerick seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned to a June 12, 1987 workshop at the Tolstoy residence.; Respectfully submitted, w Brad duller Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -12- June 10, 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting May 27, 1987 Chairman Larry McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:10 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 Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry' cNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Debra Meier, Assistant Planner; Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the public hearing for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, Item F on this agenda, would be moved to the end of the public hearings. He additionally announced that Item N, Terra Vista Planned Community Street Improvement Implementation Plan, was related to public hearing Items E, G, and H; therefore would be advanced in the agenda to be heard concurrently with those items. Mr. Buller additionally announced that staff was recommending that the Planning Commission conduct a workshop to discuss agendas, actions of the Planning Commission and Design Review Committee. The date of Friday, June 12th was selected as the workshop date. The Planning Commission named David Blakesley as the alternate on Design Review. At the Planning Commission' s regular meeting of June 10, 1987, Design Review Committee rotation will be discussed. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-15 - THE NALBANDIAN GROUP - A proposal to construct 24,000 square feet of mini-storage buildings on 1.64 acres of land in; the General Industrial Area, Subarea 1., ' located at the northwest corner of 9tn Street and Vineyard Avenue - APN ' 207- -51. B. TRACT 10045 DESIGN REVIEW - MAYFLOWER HOMES - Design review of building elevations and pet plans for a previous y =recorded tract map consisting of ten single family lots on 5.3 acres of land in the Very Low Density Residential District Mess than 2 dwelling units per acre) , located on the west side of Haven Avenue at Almond Street - APN 201-42-19 thru' 28. C. TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 9192 - ENTEC CONSULTANTS - A division of 103 acres o an into 4 parcels within the aryn Planned-Community bounded by the extension of Banyan Street., Highland Avenue, and the extension of Rochester' Avenue - APN 225-1 1-24, 27, 8, 28 and APN 225-141-1 , 2, 3, 7, , 1 , 11, 12and13. D. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12643 - ENTEC - A request for Time Extension' for Tentative Tract. 126 , `a res ent al subdivision for the< development of 466 single family -lots on 19 acres of land in the Caryn` Planned Community (Phase 1I) , located on the north side of Highland Avenue, south side of Banyan` Avenue, vest side of Rochester Avenue,` east side` of Milliken Avenue' _ APN 225-141-0 , 1.2-16, 18, 22, ' 24, 26, 27 and 225-151-3, 7, '11, 13. Motion; Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emeric , unanimously carried, to adopt' the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE` TRACT 13305 - LENS HOMES The total development of a residential subdivision of 8.08 acres within the Terra Vista Planned Community (Lott-Medium Residential , -8 dwelling units per acre) into 48 lots, looted on the southwest corner of Terra Vista` Parkway and Mountain View Drive - APN 227- 51-1 . (Continued from April 22, 1987)' G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13304 - LENS HOMES - The total eve opr ent o a resi'dentia subdivision' o 1.13 acres located within the Terra Vista Planned Community (Low-Medium Residential , - dwelling units per acre) into 59 lots, located on the northwest' corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Mountain View Drive - APN 227-151-13. Planning: Commission Minutes -2- May 27, 1987 I H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13273 - LEWIS MIMES _ A total development rosidentlal subdivision of '15. ' acres within the Terra Vista Planned Community (Medium-High Residential , 14-24 dwelling units per acre) into 1 lot for condominium purposes for 256 dwelling units , located at the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Mountain View Drive - APN 22 -151- 1 . N. TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY - STREET IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENTATION POLICY Rarrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report for the Street Improvement Implementation Polley. Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report on Tentative Tract 13305, Tentative Tract 13304 and Tentative Tract `13273. Commissioner Emerick questioned the width of the walkways. Mr. Cook gave an overview of the project proposal . Chairman McNiel opened the public' hearing. John Melcher, representing Lewis Homes, concurred with the street policy and additionally stated concurrence with the Conditions' of Approval applied to each of the tracts'* Chairman McNiel asked the applicant to comment on the walkways. Mr. Melcher advised that the typical on-site sidewalk systems within< the apartment projects have been 4 feet wide. He indicated that he would agree to make the major north/south promenade sidewalk 8 feet wide; however, advised that he personally` would not like to make the other walk 8 feet` wide< since the width of 8 feet exceeds by 2 feet the width of the typical trail system walks within Terra Vista. He felt that widening the walkways created less landscape and more hardscape. Commissioner Emerick suggested a 6 foot walkway for the east/west walkway that connects to the park to differentiate between an interior walkway and a walkway that is meant to connect open space. Mr. Buller suggested that a condition could be added to the Resolution for Tentative Tract 127 . Mr.' Melcher indicated that this additional condition would be acceptable to Lewis Homes. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner 'Chitiea was concerned with the treatment of the north/south walkway of the central open space area. She suggested that a decorative treatment be used and that it be subject to Design Review approval . Planning Commission Minutes - - May 27, 1987 N. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to approve the Terra Vise Planned Community Street Improvement' Implementation Policy. E. Motion; Moved by Emerck, seconded by Chitiea unanimously carried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13305. G. Motion: Moved by E erick, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt. the Resolution approving Environmental ' Assessment and Tentative Tract 1304. N. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy,' unanimously carried, to issue aNegative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13273, with the following modifications to the Resolution of Approval : The walkway within the north/south central open space corridor shall be 8 feet wide. The east/west walkway in the southern portion f the project leading to the park shall be 6 feet wide. Additionally, the pavement' of the north/south walkway within the central open space shall receive a decorative treatment. The design details of the pavement treatment shall be included In the landscape irrigation plans and shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Design Review Committee prior to approval of said landscape plans. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7 15 - CALVARY CHAPEL A request to establish c a urc within a leased space of 5,040 square feet (Suites 812, 813 and 14) , of a new S acre' industrial park that is under construction,; in the General Industrial District Subarea 4, located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 7th Street - APN 209-211- 36and 47 Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked if staff predicted future parking problems when the remaining buildings are lease . Dan Coleman, i den orPlanner,'. ad advised that additional parking � l pa ng s available at the rear of the unit on the south side of the building. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Crate, representing Calvary Chapel , concurred with the Conditions of Approval .. Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 27, 1987 1 Commissioner Chitiea questioned why the church selected these units as opposed to suites 801, 802 and 803 at the opposite end where there seemed to be more parking. She also asked if the Fire District had seen plans for the proposed' suites. Pastor Orate indicated that the „suites at the opposite end of the site were not considered because of financial reasons. He stated that he had obtained an approved set of plans from Foothill; Fire District. Commissioner Tolstoy painted out that one of the conditions of approval was that if this operation adversely affects the neighboring businesses, it could be grounds for revocation. He advised that the applicant should consider this condition in the selection of the suites, Pastor Grate advised that the lease already had been signed contingent upon the outcome of this meeting.; He indicated that the property owner discouraged; the chinch from leasing the front three buildings because of their ' high' visibility. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Chairman; McNi'el stated that he did not foresee a tremendous parking problem due to the church" s hours of operation. Commissioner Chiti a appreciated the applicant getting plans approved ahead of time. She stated she was still a little uncomfortable with the parking situation and suggested that staff closely monitor the situation. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by 8lakesle , to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 87-15. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY,; DLA ESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13442 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY A real entia tract sub ivsTon of 9. 5 acres of and into 1ST single' family lots in the Low-Medium Density Residential District ( -8 dwelling units per acre within the Victoria Planned Community, located at the northwest corner of Victoria Park Lane and Kenyon Way - APN 7-011- , 03, 04, 07 and 7-081-08, 09 Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Murphy presented the Commission with revised conditions. Planning Commission Minutes -5- May 27, 187 Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steven Ford, representing the William Lyon Company, concurred with the Conditions of Approval , however, objected to the condition requiring front yard landscaping and stated he would prefer not to have it required of the; deel op 'ent. There were no further comments, therefore the public 'hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy thought that the answer to the planning Commission's concern relative to garage door streetscapes was addressed by this design. He felt that the 10 feet of landscaping from the sidewalk was very important to the development as well as the second story setbacks. He felt that it should be stated that a very sensitive architectural design must be used because of the new nature of this concept. He would not accept this type of project unless it had front ,yard landscaping. Commissioner Cmerick concurred and stated the importance of having the landscaping all done at once is to ensure continuity in landscaping. He concurred with the concept that at least 10 feet of greenspace be required along parallel walkways. Commissioner Chitiea agreed with the essential front yard landscaping and walkway. She felt strongly about the second story setback and stated it; should be a minimum of 15 to g feet. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed with the concept but was uncomfortable in naming a figure. He thought that the final product should go through design review and let the designer and architect be allowed to address the issue. Commissioner 'dlak sley was pleased with idea of removing the garage as the most prominent feature from the street.. He concurred that front yard landscaping must be required as well as a substantial setback. ' Chairman McNiel was concerned in establishing a minimum since it quickly becomes the standard. He stated he would want the applicant to be sensitive to the concern and come in with a product in the 15 to 20 foot setback range. He felt that a landscape allowance that the developer would install optional; landscapes provided by the developer in the package might get the homes landscaped to the satisfaction of the property buyer. He suggested that an optional landscape package be provided with the home sales and suggested that the landscape issue be referred to staff to work out with the developer. Commissioner Emerick commented that he would prefer' mandatory landscaping be required of the developer, The Commission concurred that front yard landscaping would be required; implementation of the landscape requirement would be referred to staff. Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 27, 1987 Motion; Moved by Tolstdy, seconded by Emerick, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt ; the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 144 ,: with amendments to the Resolution to require' a minimum` 10 feet landscaped area between the public sidewalk and the front of the dwelling unit or entry walk, and review and approval by the Planning> Commission of the two : story unit setbacks. Motion carried by the following vote. AYES: COMMISSIONERS. TOLSTOY, EMERIC , DLA .ESLEY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS. NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS. NONE -carried K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN' AMENDMENT 87-0 B - CITY OF RANCHO COCA ONGA � An app ication to amen . the Land` '0se E ement of the General Pan from, A. Heavy Industrial to General Industrial for approximately 10'6 acres at the future southeast comer of Arrow Highway and Utica Avenue to the future intersection of Arrow Highway and Milliken Avenue; and for approximately 52 acres at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue; and for approximately 1.1 acres on the southeast` corner of Etiwanda and Whittra Avenue; and B. General Industrial to Industrial Park for approximately 35 acres on the northeast corner of Arrow Highway and White Oak Avenue, and C. General Industrial/Rail Served to General Industrial for all areas currently designated as 'General Industrial/Rail Served, Alan Warren, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNi;el opened the public hearing. Jeff Schlosser, representing Schlosser Forge, supported the General Plan amendment. He asked hew the City would put potential neighbors on alert that the Schlosser Forge Company is a heavy industrial user which generates noise. Brad Buller,' City Planner, advised that staff was aware of the discussions that took place during the review of the Schlosser Forge Development Agreement and was notifying adjacent properties of the Agreement between the City and. Schlosser Forge, Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the amendment. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1987 Otto Krbutil Senior Planner, advised that the Commission previously requested' staff to incorporate specific provisions into Subarea; 8, on the north and east of this site, which would notify those properties of the potential conflicts and specifically highlighting the need for a sensitive land use transition. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that staff had discussed a mechanism which would accomplish' this notification with the developer of the adjacent site. He in dicated icated that the mechanism would . most likely be a disclosure statement to be signed by potential tenants . Motion: Moved by Chitiea,, seconded by Tplstoy, to recommend; issuance of a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental ' Assessment and General Plan Amendment 87-0B to the City Council . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLSTOY, OLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MC IEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE -carried Chairman McNiel announced that the following items were related and would be= heard concurrently; by the Commission. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 8 - 4 m SCHLOSSER FORGE CO.- A request to re uce t e number of paring spaces required for a manufacturing use, elimina te the requirement for trees to be planted I for every parking stalls,s and also eliminate the requirement r p g � u ement for trees to e q planted adjacent to structures, 1 for every 30 linear feet of building dimension, for the development of two new manufacturing buildings at an existing manufacturing facility on 17.4 acres of land in the Minimum' Impact Heavy Industrial Distract (Subarea 9) located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue - APN 9-111-17, 18. (Related File DR 7-09) . M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-09 _ SCHLOSS R FORCE - The development of two manufacturing bua dims iota ing 5 ,000 square feet at their existing facility on 17.4 acres of nand within the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 9) located at the 'southwest corner of Arrows Route and Rochester Avenue - APN 9-111-17, and 18. (Related File VA 87-04) • Debra Meier, ,assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman `McNiel opened the public hearing. Jeff Schlosser, representing Schlosser Forge, concurred with the Conditions of Approval . Planning Commission Minutes - - May 27, 1987 There were no further comments, therefore the public 'hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea thought this particular landscape plan meets the intent of screening, considering the unique and practical considerations of the site® Chairman McNiel agreed that landscaping within the parking lots creates a problem for the applicant' s operation and creates an inconsistency; with what` already exists. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, to adapt the Resolution approving Variance 87-04. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: T L TOY, CHI`EIEA, BLAKESLEY, EMERIC , MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 87-09, with inclusion of the conditions relative to phasing of undegrounding utilities as proposed by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLSTOY, BLAKESLEY,' EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; NONE -carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS O. BILLBOARD REMOVAL PROGRAM Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the 1987_8 budget has already; been distributed to the City Council ; however, it does not include monies for< billboard removal . He stated that the City Manager suggested that the item either be deferred to net year' s budget, or if the Commission established a priority listing it could be presented to the Council and if additional monies become available during this fiscal year it could be applied to the removal . It was the consensus of the Commission that the following priority list be established and forwarded to the City Council : Planning Commission Minutes 9- May 27, 1987 Priority One - The billboard on the south side of Foothill , east of Grove Priority Two _ The two billboards at the northwest corner of Foothill and Archibald Priority Throe - The three billboards at the southeast corner of Foothill and Vineyard Priority Four - The billboard at the northwest corner of Archibald and Hampshire Continued Public Hearing F. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN - A public hearing and workshop to consider the provisions of the (Draft' Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. (Continued from May 18, 19 7) Alan Warren, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, advised that the focus of the meeting would the the Permitted and Conditional Uses table. Chairman' McNiel opened the public hearing. Jeff Sceranka stated that in order for Specialty Commercial centers to survive they need the day 'to day foot traffic that is attracted by businesses such as dry cleaning establishments and banks with drive throughs. He advised that' banks with drive throughs should be allowed in centers and that very few banks would consider going into a center if they were not allowed drive through features. He stated that as a °member of the Ad Hoc Committee, he did not recall the Committee mandating that the MU/R designation was to be either all residential , all retail , or a mixture of both. The idea was that because of the difficult of the mix of uses and the configuration and the questions the Committee had about the type of project that might go there, they would allow residential or commercial ` or a combination of both. He felt it was appropriate to allow 'hotel/motels along Foothill with a Conditional Use Permit. Tim Beedle stated a concern with the number' of Conditional Use Permits required in the various use categories and felt` it would lengthen` the processing time which would deter many' applicants. He advocated the establishment of an administrative approval of Conditional Use Permits which would not require a formal review by the Planning Commission. Ted Hopson echoed Mr. Scerana" s comments relative to banks with drive through` tellers. He favored allowing banks with drive throughs under the Conditional' Use Permit process; Planning Commission Minutes -10- May P , 1987 Sanford Bloom reported that 94% of the property owners surrounding his site were now in agreement on the development of' a master plan. Ben Mackal advocated allowing banks and financial institutions in the Specialty Commercial designation with a Conditional Use Permit. The Commission made the following amendments to the Permitted and Conditional Use Permit Tables: Apparel (b) wholesale and Discount stores - removed from Specialty Commercial designations; CUP required in Subarea One, CC designation Auto Service (b) Rentals - CUP required in all Subareas Cleaning and Pressing Establishments - removed from the MU/R designation in Subarea Four Day Care Centers - CUP required in 0 designation of Subarea One Floor Covering Shops - removed from SC designation in Subarea Two Janitorial Services and Sup le - removed from the CC designations in Subareas One and Two, CO designation in Subarea Three Liquor Stores - CUP required in the CC designation of Subarea Four Music, Dance and Martial Arts Studios - CUP required in the SC designation of Subarea Three, removed from the CO designation of Subarea Three Fast Food uses separated between those with and without drive throughs - CUP required in the SC and CC designations of Subarea One, SC and CC designation of Subarea Two, SC and CC designations of Subarea Three, CC and RRC designation of Subarea Four Shoe Stores, Sales and Repair - Permitted in SC designation of Subarea One, removed from the 0 designation; Permitted in the MU/R designation of Subarea Four Sporting Goods Stores (a) specialty - Permitted in the MU/R designation of Subarea Three; removed from MU/R designation of Subarea Four Discotheques - CUP required in the CC and RRC. designations of Subarea Four Finance Services and Institutions - "Banks" added to the description and separated between with and without drive throughs - Without drive throughs permitted in the SC, CC, 0 designations of Subarea One; Permitted in SC, CC, 0, designations of Subarea Two; Permitted SC, CC, CO designations of Subarea Three, CUP required is MU designation; Permitted in CC and RRC designation of Subarea Four. With drivethroughs - Conditionally Permitted in the following designations SC, CC, 0 designations of Subarea One; SC, CC, 0 of Subarea Two; SC, CC, CO, MU of Subarea 3; CC and RRC of Subarea Four. Planning Commission Minutes May 27, 1987 Hotel Facilities, Ancillary Uses d) cocktail lounges - CUP required in PPC designation of Subarea Four. Staff was directed to prepare alternatives for the Commission' s consideration to allow hotel/motels in the MU area of Subarea B, with the requirement of a marketing study to show feasibility.; Additionally, a distinction was to be made between major and minor hotel/motel uses. Commissioner Tolstoy .stated that Regional Belated Commercial by definition is 1 ,000 square feet and questioned if square footage alone would be a sufficient definition. r routil Mated staff could expand the definition by adding language that this provision is intended to facilitate development of regionally related uses and these are type i fi d by large scale businesses which serve a market area significantly larger that those businesses which draw from a neighborhood' or community level . Mr.; ' routil announced that staff had sufficient direction to further modify the Plan and would bring the document back to the Commission on June 24. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan to the regular 'Planning Commission meeting of dune 24, '1987. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 11:55 p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, awo%�� Brad Buller Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -1 - May 27, 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting May 1 , 197 Chairman Larry McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:35 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, i 9161 Base Line Road, ` Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNiel there led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Blakesl'ey, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT; Brad Buller, City Planner; Barre Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, Russ Maguire, City Engineer; Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner; Janice Reynolds , Planning Commission Secretary-, Alan warren, Associate Planner CRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPRT EIR Otto Kroutil Senior Planner, gave an overview of the draft Environmental Impact Report and announced that staff would be taking public. comments on the draft document until dune 24, 1987. Chairman McNiel opened the hearing for comments on the draft Environmental Impact Report. Kay Matlock, representing Lewis Homes, stated a concern with the increase in commercial acreage, particularly the additional ;Regional Related and Community Commercial which could have an adverse affect on the community commercial center at Foothill and Haven. She asked that this issue be addressed in the Environmental' Impact Report. -Mr. Kroutil stated that if too much commercial is a concern of the Commission,; that should be addressed in the Plan itself; the Environmental Impact Report would merely point out the fact. I i Commissioner E erick stated that he would ;like to see additional staff study on; the Alta: Loma and Cucamonga School Districts' s comments relative to commercial development generating more impacts on school services than residential development. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN Mr kroutil gave an overview of the Plan process to date. Vary Stevens of Forma, the consultant for the plan, gave an overview of the design concepts of the Plan. Mark Broeder, Urban designer representing Forma, gave an overview of the Community Design; Concept and presented slides for the Commission' s consideration. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing on the Community Design and Architectural issues. Tim Beedle, Reiter Development, supported flexibility of design, but felt the Commission should be cautious with extreme use of design. He supported ambient lighting along the corridor that would be in character with the intent and theme of Foothill Boulevard. He stated that clear guidelines should be established for sign requirements. He additionally stated that flexibility should be given for landscape setbacks to allow setbacks up to 25 feet. Gil: Rodriguez stated concerns with the amount of landscaping setback required and with the concept of locating parking areas behind buildings facing Foothill . M . Rodriguez felt that exceptions for these requirements should be allowed for major anchor tenants. There were no further public comments on this section of the Plan. Commissioner Chitiea commented on Mr. Beedle' s suggestion of allowing setbacks up to 25 feet throughout the corridor and stated that that would diminish the concept of the urban centers. Regarding ambient lighting, she felt this 'would; be appropriate in the bounds of safety and felt that light standards at a; lower lighting scale might be possible. She concurred that there' should be clear guidelines on signage and they should be attractive and consistent throughout Foothill . Relative to Mr. Rodriguez' s suggestion to allow exceptions for major anchor tenants, she stated that the Plan was developed so that the City would be consistent and the some requirements would apply to all developments,' If exceptions were allowed for every major' tenant, there would be no plan. Commissioner Emerick felt that the text language which requires formal' landscaping in the Sycamore Inn area should be modified. He advocated informal planting of more Sycamore trees in this area. He concurred with Commissioner Chitiea' s Comments relative to the 25 foot setback area and liked the plan concept of having a treatment with fountain and pedestrian treatments Planning Commission Minutes ® - May 18, 198 at the intersections. He concurred with the use of a lighting system that would be softer and consistent throughout the corridor. Commissioner Tolstoy Mated it is important that there are relationships between architectural features within activity centers. Chairman McHiel stated he was a little concern with the identification of the Thomas Winery and Bear Gulch areas as a concept. He 'felt that what may happen; is other buildings that would be developed would make less significant those historical buildings that exist now that we are ;trying to accent. He was also concerned with the 5-foot setbacks at corners and felt that what would occur visually in the street is that those intersections are going to seem to close' up as apposed to open which would happen with the 45 foot setback on both sides. Commissioner Chitiea pointed out that the reason for the 5-foot setbacks was to invite pedestrians to cress the street. Commissioner Emerick suggested that native shrugs and bushes be emphasized in the Sycamore ' Inn and Thomas Winery areas. He also suggested that Crape myrtle trees be used in place of the Flowering plum trees He further recommended the use of river rock and rustic woods in the landscaping theme, particularly in the Sycamore Inn area. Commissioner Chitiea encouraged making transition areas so that there would not be a sharp definition between Bear Gulch and Thomas vinery,; She suggested that one way might be through; the use of consistent lighting standards throughout the entire boulevard ;to allow for the changes in landscaping and architecture and could maintain continuity and flow. Mr. Buller cautioned trying to develop criteria for intensity of lighting may cause liability problems for the City. He suggested that criteria could be established relative to the direction of lighting so that it is in the right` locution on the property, He additionally pointed out that the City may have to take over the responsibility for maintenance, which would require some sort of maintenance district. Commissioner Chitiea stated she would like' to look at the range of possibilities and to see the alternatives that right be suggested by the consultant and the type of cast that might be incurred in developing a maintenance district. Chairman Mc i el stated he would not like the City to assume the cost of maintenance since; however, concurred that staff should be directed to provide further information. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to ask if there should be some consideration of the types of lighting within projects that might be different from what is currently required ' such as lower: light standards. He felt the issue related to two types of lighting'; lighting along the public right-of-way Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 18, 1987 which is Edison maintained, and a lighting theme within projects that might be used throughout the boulevard and tying the two' to ether. g. �` g together. Mr. Kroutil asked for a consensus of the Commission relative to 25 foot setbacks at the activity nudes. It was the concurrence of Commission to accept the 25 foot setbacks at the nodes. Commissioner Tolstoy referred to the example drawings on page 8a14. He 'asked that this section be expanded to ;include more examples of things that could be used in activity centers, Commissioner Fmerick referred to the the activity centers of Sycamore and Thomas Winery and suggested that staff explore different streetscape furniture and lighting the areas between the activity nodes. Commissioner Tolstoy concurred that it would; be difficult to use street furniture that is consistent and did not think the same bench would be appropriate in all locations. Mr. Stevens gave an overview of the plan proposal relative to the streetcape. Chairman McMiel agreed with the plan concept to provide and allow for the architectural movement and ;the options to the developer to tie it together with the project. ' Commissioner Fmerick stated he would support dolor reference- throughout the corridor but would support a style reference within specific activity areas such as Sycamore Inn and Thomas Brothers, He felt here should be more similarity in those activity areas. SITE SPECIFIC LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Mr. K,routil gave an overview of the automotive uses within the corridor. Commissioner Tolstoy stated Foothill is going to be a heavily traffic boulevard which will deed to have service stations. Be felt if a service station is well designed and they want to do some car repair, the use should be allowed as well as a well designed car wash* He stated that major auto repair does not belong on Foothill ; however, auto tune ups which are done within the confines of the building should be allowed. Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing* Line Bucken, representing Fconb Lue and Tune, addressed the need for automotive service along Foothill Boulevard. He concurred that these types of uses could be properly designed and adequately screened to mitigate concerns . Steve Lucas , 9224 Foothill supported automotive uses within the corridor. Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 18, 1987 1 Jeff Scuranka stated that the issue is one of design, not one of use. He felt that this is an opportunity for the City to capture those uses for convenience of the _community as well as tax revenue# He supported automotive _uses along Foothill . George Adair, Rancho Cucamonga resident, supported automotive uses within the corridor. Corr Witt, 10040 Foothill , supported automotive uses and concurred that the uses were needed in the community. There were no further public comments. It was the consensus of the Commission that automotive uses should be considered within the Foothill Corridor; Specific locations and design criteria are to be discussed at a later date. r. Kroutil gave an overview of the Community Commercial District northerly' along Ftiwanda Avenue. Chairman Mc Niel opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. It was the consensus of the Commission to accept the Flan proposal , r. I routil gave an overview of the Specialty Commercial along the 'south side of Foothill in Subarea 1. r. Stevens gave an overview of the Specialty Commercial uses. ` Commissioner Chitiea stated that the Ad Floc Committee recommended additional uses within the Specialty Commercial designation which did not appear on the current plan. r routil advised that this apparently was an oversight and that staff would crake the necessary corrections. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. ' Jeff Sceranka stated that medical offices should be allowed within the Specialty Commercial designation as a support to San Antonio Hospital . There were no further public comments. Commissioner Chitiea recalled that the expanded uses for Specialty Commercial proposed by the Ad floc Committee were specifically for Subarea I' for those. pieces of property. Credit unions, finance companies, medical/dental offices and clinics, opticians were to be added to the use. Planning Commission Minutes -5- May I , 1987 It was the consensus of Commission ; o designate the property as Specialty Commercial with the expanded uses suggested by the Ad Hoc Committee.: SUBAREA LAND USE REGULATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Mr. Kroutil gave an overviews of the land use regulations and development standards for Subarea 1. It was the consensus to require a Conditional Use Permit for discotheques in the Specialty Commercial zone, as well as dance and music studios. Chairman McHlel opened the public hearing. Edward Hopson addressed the Sycamore Inn area and suggested that small one or two cinema theaters and dinner theaters be allowed in the Specialty Commercial' zone with Conditional Use Permits. There were no further public comments Commissioner Chitiea stated that parking is major issue and thought that it might adversely impact on the rest of the specialty commercial users. She did not consider a cinema to be appropriate due to the impacts of parking on homeowners above, as well as grading concerns. Mr. Kroutil gave an overview of Subarea 2. Chairman McMiel opened the public hearing. Larry Lazur, representing Sanchez Talaricho, asked that they be given to opportunity to work with staff on the appropriate uses for the Specialty° Commercial designation for the Thomas Winery site. It was the consensus of the Commission that the property owner be allowed to wok with staff on the appropriate uses which might be subject to conditional' use pewits. Staff was directed to prepare the necessary criteria for the Commission' s ' consideration. Jeff Sceranka referred to various uses throughout Subarea 2 and questioned why they wrerre not allowed in the Community Commercial areas. There were no further public io com en ts It was the consensus that the following uses be permitted within the Community Commercial designation of Subarea : Art, Music, Photographic Studios and Supply Stores; Hook., Gift & Stationery Stores; Ice Cream and Soda fountains; Television, Radio, VCR, Stereo & CD Component Sales; and Optician and Cpometrical Shops. Mr. Kroutil gave an overview of Subarea 3. Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 1 , 1987 'IJ i Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing. Sanford Bloom advised that he represented 13 property owners of lots on ;Helms and Malachite who were ,joining together to develop a master plan. He expressed a concern with the appropriateness and viability of the Mixed Use/Retail designation proposed for this property. Pete Pitassi presented a preliminary conceptual master plan for the site: addressed by Mr. Bloom. The master plan depicted a specialty commercial site. It was the consensus of the Commission that the property owners proceed with their mastery plan proposals. Specific comments were deferred 'until the project was formally introduced and staff given; the opportunity to review the proposal . Mr. Buller advised that the mixed use retail was intended to be a mix of residential and commercial . He stated that the plan does not stipulate what proportions that ' mix has to be; that would be at the discretion of the Commission after review of the master plan. He recommended that the Commission pursue the Mixed Use designation and that the property owners try to develop a plan that introduces some residential . He clarified that the intent was that this commercial area would service the residential area. el'dra Lovgren, property owner within the above-mentioned master plan area, did not think that residential was an appropriate use for this area. Bari westley was concerned with placing additional traffic on San Bernardino Road and stated that :Specialty 'Commercial with limited access might be the answer to the problems. Don Wood stated he would like to see ;jewelry and computer stores permitted in the Commercial Office designations. Mr. Kroutil advised that as you start making certain commercial users permitted you are going to get different kinds of buildings, i .e. store fronts and exposure. Jeff Sceranka' stated that the intent of' the Commercial Office designation was to allow ancillary commercial uses within the office designations. He suggested that if the Commission was concerned that the commercial uses would take over the office uses, a percentage be placed on the development. Mr. Kroutil Mated he would have a concern in that the Haven Avenue Overlay District dealt with large lots and large developments whereas the lots along Foothill might be very shallow, narrow strips. He pointed out that theintent' of the Committee was an office district with very limited retail facilities. 'I Commissioner McNiel felt that the permitted users should be those which would be ancillary to services that are required by people in offices. Planning Commission Minutes - - May 18, 1987 Commissioner Chitiea suggested the ancillary approach along with the establishment of a percentage. She suggested that staff be directed to return with recommendations. r. Buller recommended that staff work with consultants on this issue. Subarea 4 Mr* Kroutil gave an overview of Subarea 4. Chairman Mc Niel opened the public hearing. Tim Beedle, representing Reiter Development, stated; that the permitted uses< were narrow in focus and asked that the list be `expanded. Mr. Kroutil advised that this was the direction at the Commission' s previous meeting and staff would provide that information for the Commission' s consideration. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tol toy, to continue the public hearing; for the Foothill Boulevard Specific plan to the Commission' s regular meeting of dune 24, 1987. Motion carried unanimously. 1 r40 a.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Deputy Secretary i Planning Commission Minutes ®B- May 1 , 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM NGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting May 13, I98 , Chairman Larry McNil called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7*0 p.m. The meeting Was held at Liens Park Community Center, 9161 Rase Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. °riairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. City Clerk Beverly Auth let administered the oath of office to David Bakesey. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PROS NT David Blake ley, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Em rick Larry Mc Niel , Peter Tnlst y ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner Ban Coleman, Senior Planner, Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson,; Deputy City Attorney; Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner; Laura Psmas, Landscape Designer; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary; Chris We tman, Assistant Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tulstcy, carried, to approve the Minutes of February 25, ' 1987 with language modifications to page 16 by Commissioner Chitie * Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, carried to approve the Minutes of March 25, 1987 as submitted. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-18 - REITER - The development of three research/development buildings totaling 13 ,50 square feet on 6.37 acres of land, within an approved Master Plan, in an Industrial Park District Subarea G, located at the northwest corner of Utica Avenue and Bentley Street - APN 210- 1 -I a B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW" 85-29 - , GENERAL MARBLE - The development of a 45,000 square foot building addition to an e i sti rag 40,000 square foot building on 5.36 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea located on the north side of 9th Street between Vineyard and Hellman Avenues - APN 9- 1 -0 , 05, and 06. C. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT. 1 171 - STEPHENSON - A: custom lot subdivision of six 5 lots on 3.3 acres of land in the Very Lower Density Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest corner of Klusman Avenue and Whi rl awvay Street A N 105I-51.1-05 and 07 Motion'. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolsto , unanimously carried, to adopt the Consent Calendar: PUBLIC HEARINGS D. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE 'PERMIT 85- 3 - CHRISTIAN FAMILY FELLOWSHIP - An existing church within a 1 ,650 square foot space located in a General Industrial District on the east side of Archibald, south of Gth Street, in Subarea 4, of the Industrial Specific Plan - API 210-071-47 and 48. Chris Westman, Assistant 'Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing. Pastor Forrest Hindley addressed the Commission and stated agreement that this Conditional Use Permit should terminate. He advised that the Church was unable to complete the necessary improvements which were required to occupy the building and that the church would be moving to their new site at 898 Archibald on July 1, 1987 There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Ralph Hanson, Deputy; City Attorney, advised that the Resolution for this project should be modified to include the setting of the date for revocation in the Resolution title. Further, condition 84 should be modified to reflect the date of May 27, 1987 being set as the date for revocation of CUP 85 03. Planning Commission Minutes - _ May 13, 1987 Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that since the applicant agreed to the revocation it might be feasible for him to submit a letter to the City formally requesting a withdrawal of the CUP. Pastor Hindley stated he would be willing to comply with this request. Mr. Hanson stated he would be willing to work-with- staff and the applicant on wording of the letter withdrawing the application; however, would recommend that the Commission adopt the Resolution setting the revocation date. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea to adopt the Resolution setting May 27, 1987 as the hearing date for revocation of Conditional Use Permit 85- 8, Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK, CHITIEA, BLAKESLEY TBLST Y, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 8 - 8 -RANCHO EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH - A proposal to locate a church within an 'existing ,595 square foot professional building located at 818 Archibald within the General Industrial District (Subarea 4) - APN 09-'171-1 . Chris Westman, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing. Pastor Forrest Hindl y stated concurrence with the conditions of approval . He was concerned that the other facilities that were being leased by the church were not shown on the exhibits. He indicated the location of the additional suites on the plans. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that the parking calculations were based on the man "wsembl,y area, therefore, additional classroom and office space would not affect parking. Mr. Westman advised that staff was aware of the additional suites leased by the church, however,; since they did` not affect the parking ratio factor they were not included in the staff report. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed`. Commissioner Tolstoy -asked if staff had grade an inspection to assure that all fire codes been met. Planning Commission Minutes - - May 13, 1987 i 'I ,. i Mr. Westman advised that final; plan check by the Fire District will not be made until after the CUP has been approved. Once the church is ready to occupy the building, they would be required to submit their tenant improvements to the Fire District and the City' s Building and Safety Division for approval . He stated that staff had reviewed preliminary plans which appeared to meet all requirements. Motion: Moved ; by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 7-03. Motion carried by the following vote': AYES. COMMISSIONERS. CU TIEA, EMERICK, DLA .ESLEY TOLSTDY, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT '13440 - THE WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - A residential tract subdivision of 24 acres of land into 1I single >family lots in the Low-Medium Density ' Residential District (4- dwelling units per acre) within the Victoria Planned Community, located on the south side of Highland Avenue, northeast of Kenyon Way - APN 7_011- 67 Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Murphy advised that Highland Avenue should be added. to Standard Con- ­1on 'M-15 Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Dailey, representing the applicant, addressed Engineering condition C.D and stated ;the condition should be modified to reflect that the City would obtain offers of dedication from the easterly tract boundary to Rochester Avenue, He believed that it was the City' s responsibility and not that of the applicant. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, suggested a modification to the condition that the developer would arrange for the dedication and add that the execution of a three party agreement between the High School District, developer and the City would be necessary. Mr. Bailey stated he would be willing to accept the condition with the inclusion of the City and the developer arranging for the dedication. Commissioner E erick was concerned that the alternate alignment of the north/south street at the eastern end of the project did not adequately address the concerns of the Design Review Committee. The Committee felt that the redesign should reflect more of an ' "S" pattern and not be a straight alignment. Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 13, 1987 Mr, Bailey gave an overview of the alternate proposal . Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested ested the Commission direct the developer to y gg work with City staff to attempt a more curvilenear designed streetscape There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick questioned the proposed fencing material . Mr. Murphy advised that the perimeter fencing would be slump block wall , precision block was proposed along the east propertyline, and the fencing between units would be wood. Further, in the areas adhere there are trail connections coming out to the street, the fencing would be slump block with wrought iron to provide open area. He stated the fencing was consistent with previous approvals within Victoria. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tol toy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13440, with an amendment to Engineering Condition 63 to reflect that the City and. the Developer would arrange the offers of dedication and the execution of a three party agreement between the 'High School District, Developer, and the City, and the inclusion of Highland Avenue to Standard Condition M-15. Staff was directed to work with the applicant on the solution to the street alignment to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK, TOLSTOY, 'BLAKESLY, CNITIEA, MCNIL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT 13684 - WILLIAM LYON C MPANY - A ' total residential Development of 306 condominium units on 4.67 acres ;,of bond in the Medium 8-14 dwelling units per acre) and Medium- ;h, (14-24 dwelling units per acre) Residential Districts within the Victoria Planned Community, located at the northwest: corner of Victoria Park Lane and Milliken Avenue - APN 0 - 11-13 and 14. Chairman McNiel announced that the applicant for Tentative Tract 13634 requested a continuance of the public hearing to dune 10, 1987.` He then opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Motion:: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Vesting Tentative Tract 1.3634 to the Planning C !rm si on agenda of dune 10, 1987. Planning Commission Minutes -5- May 13, 1987 N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5- 7 , MODIFICATION) MASCAPCNAS m- A request to modify an approved conceptual Master Plan from one restaurant pad to the development of a 2,100 square foot fast food drive-through restaurant. and a 1,75E square foot retail building on 0. 4 acres of land within a 9.0 acre approved shopping center in the General Commercial District, located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive - APN 1077-401- . (Continued from April 8, 1987) . Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented', the staff report. Ms. Fong stated that Engineering Condition 1 should be modified to reflect in lieu fees for overhead utilities except for the 66kv electrical . Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Dan Richards, 8331 Utica"" Rancho Cucamonga stated concurrence with the conditions urged of the project. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cmerick stated that the design appears to address the concerns expressed at the previous meeting. By prodding the additional stacking distance which eliminated a couple of parking spaces, he felt this was an adequate trade off for the parking. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would rather see a miner exception for the parking rather than including the drive-through stacked lin=° as part of the parking requirements.; He was concerned that the inclusion of the stacking line for parking would become a matter ofcourse and in this situation it works out well , but in another situation it might not. Commissioner Chitlea stated that the applicant has worked hard to come up with architectural design compatible with the center and had done everything possible; however, she was uncomfortable with using drive-through stacking line as part of the parking requirements. She cited the severe parking poblemis in the other portions of the center and was concerned with the traffic movement through the center since this is the ma-in ingress and egress at the signal . She was additionally concerned with another fast food use located this close to Haven Avenue. Commissioner Blakesley stated he was also concerned with parking in the center and did not like the idea of counting stacked cars as part of the parking requirements since the stacked cars would be in addition to the requirement for the basic food establishment. He was also concerned that this building isolates the other retail establishment inside the traffic pattern of the drive through and on the other side from all the other retailers. He was not sure how many establishments could carry that kind of a burden. His basic opposition was the land use and stated he would much rather see the site designed as 'a full restaurant. Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 13, 1987 Chairman MNiel stated that the design had come a long way and he was not opposed to a properly designed fast food use on Maven Avenue: He supported minor exception for the parking requirement rather than establishment of a policy, Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, suggested an added condition making this approval contingent on the approval of a minor exception or a variance for the reduction of four parking spaces on the site. Motion: Loved by Emerck, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use permit 85-37, with the addition of Planning Condition 10 making approval of the CUP contingent upon approval of a Minor Exception or a Variance for the reduction of four parking spaces, and the staff modification to Engi nee '� u, Condition =1 excluding 66kv electrical From the in lieu fee requirement. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EM RICK, TOLSTUY, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS. BLS KESL Y, CHITIE ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS* NONE -carried Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that at a later date the Commission discuss design considerations of fast food restaurants within the City, particularly on Maven Avenue. Mrs. Buller suggested that the Commission discuss this topic in a workshop. 8 20 p.m. - planning Commission Recessed :35 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present Chairman McNiel announced that Item L would be advanced in the agenda to be heard coneJ °li nt y with Item I I . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10393 - KEITHJLUSK COMPANY - A subdivision of 79.2 acres of and into 33 parcels in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 16, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 4th Street - A N 21 -06 13, 11, 02, 26, 33, and 32. Related File DR; 6-37. (Continued from April 8, 1987) . Planning Commission Minutes -7- May 13, 1987 L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8E-37 - K ITNJLUSK COMPANY - The development of a Master Plan for a 79.17 acre industrial park consisting of 33 lots in an Industrial Park District, Subarea '16, located at the northwest quadrant of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN lO- O -0 , 11, 13, 26, 32 and ' 3. Related Ei'le: PM 10393. (Continued from April 8, 1987) . Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Ray decker, 6370 Magnolia, Riverside, representing the applicant, requested an exception to the City' s shared access policy. He felt that this project was unique in that it was a pure lot sales program, and would not be developed by one master developer. He felt that he had been able to address the staff' s traffic concerns with the exception of the internal circulation of the project. He gave an overview of the proposed project's access. He stated that the requirement for shared access restricts the potential pool o industrial users* There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick stated it is a public benefit to locate as much of the circulation internally in the project opposed to making traffic go out on the street to reach another part of the project. Chairman McNiel stated the condition needed to be retained- as a matter of policy and did not see this property as any more unique =than <any other in the City. Commissioner Chitiea stated it world be essential to resolve the =access problem. She stated the .situation has occurred because of the overall design concept of this particular development and that it could be redesigned in another way,. She was concerned that the triangular shaped parcel adjacent to this piece of property would become `a no man' s land. She was also concerned that the master plan did not address the overall design concept. Commissioner Tol stoy agreed that the master plan needs further refinement in terms of architectural guidelines. He concurred that shared access is very important because of the traffic problems and for aesthetic reasons, Chairman McNiel concurred and further stated that since' 4th and Archibald is one of the major gateways to the City, the master plan needs to address architecture with particular care. He stated from all indications from the Commission, it appear•~ed that the issues would need to be resolved before action could be taken on the project. He then reopened the public hearing for continuation purposes. Mr. Becker asked that the Commission be poled on the shared access issue. Planning Commission Minutes -8- May 13, 1987 N It was the unanimous consensus of the Commission that shared access be required.' Mr® Becker accepted a continuance of the project for thirty days. Mr. Buller suggested that the project go back through Design Review once more o address ;design matters. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the the triangular piece of: property was still of concern Mr. Recker stated that he would be willing to work with staff on this issue. Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Blakesley, unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and Development Reviews 86 -87 and Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 10393 to dune 10 1987. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-0 - RANCHO CAMONCA REALTY PROPERTIES II , LTD - A request to serve alcoholic beverages within an established 3,700 square foot restaurant within the Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) looted at the northeast corner of 1 th and Archibald (9740 19th Street) - A:PN 282-171-5 (Continued from April 2 , 197) • Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNi el opened the public hearing:. Bohn Luciano, applicant, gave an overview of the request and urged approval of the expansion and the request to serve alcoholic beverages. There were no further comments,' therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick supported the issuance of a liquor license. He stated he had observed the center and there seemed to be ample parking. He felt that staff' s ca'1 -41ations of 75 parking ; spaces for Carl ' s Jr. was excessive and felt there was a surplus of parking. ` He supported the expansion request. Commissioner Tolstoy supported the issuance of a liquor license. He had no concerns with the parking at this time; however, questioned what might happen when the users in the center change. Brad Buller, City Planner, concurred that there may be a problem in the future when uses change. He advised that staff had been reluctant to recommend a shared parking agreement since it places a leasing burden on the developer and also one on the City for enforcement. Planning Commission Minutes - - May 1 , 18 Commissioner Chitiea stated based on her own observation and previous public testimony the center has never been impacted with traffic and it is a center that over the years has not been particularly successful . She stated the size of the expansion is not particularly significant and would not have a negative impact on the surrounding businesses-or adjacent residences. Commissioner Bla esley agreed that 75 parking spaces was excessive for Carl 's Jr. and did not see a problem with the request Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, suggested a modification to Condition 5 relative to the serving of alcoholic beverages; Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Bla esley, to adopt the Resolution approving the serving;of alcoholic beverages and the 900 square foot expansion for Amici ' s Pizza N Muff at 9740 19th Street, with a modification to condition 5 to require the serving of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with the restaurant usage and the availability of full listed 'menu items. The sale and serving of alcoholic beverages shall cease when all such mend items are not available to customers. Motion carried by the following vote. - AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, BLAESLEY, EMERIC ,, MCNIEL, TOLSTY NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Chairman Mciel announced that Item M was related to this project, therefore would be advanced in the agenda. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 8 -09 - H. T. 1 CONSTRUCTION - Requests to ecrease the min'mu building setback and required landscape average along 8th Street, reduction of sideyard setback along railroad right-of-way and elimination of outdoor eating areas for a proposed multi- tenant industrial project located at the northeast corner^ of Baker Avenue and 8th Street - APN 7- 71-01.. (Related File. DR 8 -43) . M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86- T H. T. I . CONSTRUCTION - The development of 8 multi-tenant industrial buildings totaling q 38 58 square feet on 2.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1 , ;located on the north east corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue - APN 207-271-01. (Related File. VA 8 -09) I. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes 610- May 13, 1987 1 George Bryant, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project, Mr. Bryant ;agreed to underground all utilities that face his properties, but took exception to undergrounding the property to the east and the railroad communication lines. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea was concerned that the north side of the project which faces the railroad and is visible from Baker was not architecturally treated as is <normally required when visible to public view. She suggested that the color banding be extended around all buildings and the first two buildings which can be seen from Baker be sand blasted. Chairman Mc Niel asked staff to comment on; the utility undergrounding issue. arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that the Commission has required undergrounding of railroad property as a matter of policy. He noted that this particular ;project is not required to underground 600 feet of the railroad property, not the entire 2200 feet. Additionally, the developer would not be required to underground the lines but would pay one half in lieu fee through lien agreement. He clarified that the City would credit this developer for his in lieu fee for the railroad and undergrounding the additional 250 feet on the property to the east. Commissioner Chitiea reaffirmed the policy to establish a more aesthetic look for the City and did not think the requirement to underground utilities along the railroad should be eliminated. r. Bryant stated he was not opposed to entering into a lien agreement, but was concerned with the specifics of the agreement for the railroad property. He indicated that this property has encumbered as much as it can handle and gave are overview of the public improvements rude to date. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick asked if staff could provide a dollar amount for undergrounding. He was concerned that the undergrounding requirement would pose a har = p for the developer. Mr. Hanson stated that it would cost approximately $155,000 to underground the utilities including in-lieu fees and actual undergrounding. He noted that other properties which have developed in the adjacent areas had contributed a greater amount Commissioner Chitiea suggested that beaches ,be provided in the landscaped nodes of the project, as a minimum to the outdoor eating requirement. Planning Commission Minutes May 13, 1987 ........ Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review -43 with modifications to Planning Condition 2 stating that all north elevations shall receive an accent stripe matching that on the south elevations. In addition, the first two buildings visible from Baker shall be sand Mast finished. Condition 3 was added stating a bench shall be provided within the landscape area for each building location and type subject to the review and approval of the City Planner;. Motion carried by,the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS. CHITIEA, EMERICK, RLAKESLEY, MCNIEL, T'CLST Y NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emeric , to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Variance -Og. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA EMERIC , 3LA ESLEY, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES. COMMISSIONERS; NONE ABSENT: NONE -carried NEW BUSINESS N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87 1 - GENERAL DYNAMICS The deve lo ent of a' Eied Measurement Facility consisting of throe buildings that total 4,000 square feet on 3.72 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 10) located on the west side of Milliken Avenue south of the Atchison t a Topeka a and Santa Fe Railroad tracks _ AN g 7 O3 Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public cement. Dick Haddinger, representing the applicant, objected to the Engineering Condition requiring lien agreements, He advised that General Dynamics does not apply liens due to conflicts with government contracts. He asked that some other type of surety be required as opposed to lien agreements. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, suggested that other surety acceptable to the City Attorney and City Engineer could be substituted wherever lion agreement appears. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed: Planning Commission Minutes -1 a May 13, 1987 Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 87-12 with the substitution of; "other surety acceptable to the City Attorney and City Engineer" for lien agreements. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS; TOLST Y EME IC , HLA ESLEY, CHITIEA,-MCNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried 1 :30 p.m. Planning Commission Recessed 10: 0 p.m* - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 7-01 - DAMS DEVELOPMENT pr_opo_s_al to 'construct two medium wrr ofesa i tribotion faci 1ties totaling 150,E0 square feet in the General Industrial District Subarea on 6.5 acres of land at the northeast corner of Arrow Highway and Maple Place - APN208-961-12. Chris Westman, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Alan Tutland, representing the applicant, concurred with the conditions of approval There were no further public comments Commissioner Slakesley was concerned with the potential development of the adjacent par , and asked the approximate width. Mr. Ne tman advised that the parcel width was approximately ;1 5 to 19 feet, which should be adequate for development. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick to adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 87-01 . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY EMERIC , BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes - S- May 13, 1987 P TRACT 1082 -2 DESIGN REVIEW - U. S. HOMES - Design review of building elevations and plot plans for a reviously'approved and recorded tract map consisting of 99 single family lots on 14.2 acres of land in the Low 2- dwvellinq units/acre) and Low-Medium 4-8 dwelling units/acre) Residential Districts, located between Haven Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, north of Banyan Street - APN 201-53-0I through 5 , 201-E3-01 through 42, and 201- SB - 1 through 20. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. M1 hproject. Mickey Sanders, representing the applicant, gave an overviewof t e He asked for discussion of the slope planting requirements and felt that the planting of trees would exacerbate slope erosion. He Mated that the slope planting regui rements were excessive and would actually undermine the stability of the slope rather than provide erosion control . There were no further public comments. Commissioner Emerick: concurred that the number of trees required on the interior lots might be excessive and could be counter productive to slope erosion. He was concerned with planting 15 gallon size trees and noted that in many situations 15 gallon size tree planted into a pure slope condition do not take well and a B gallon tree is more amendable and will grower into the soil quicker. Commissioner Chi ti ea pointed out that the tree planting requirement was also based on aesthetic reasons. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the number of trees required would have to remain consistent with Code requirements. However, the Commission could leave the placement of the trees to the discretion of the City Planner. Commissioner Chitiea stated this would be acceptable; however, she would be willing to go back and reviews the requirements of the Development Code. Notion* Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to °adopt the Resolution approving the Design Review for Tract' 10827-2. Motion carried by the following vote AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CH EA, TOLSTOY, BLAKESLEY, EME IC , MCNIEL NOES- COMMISSIONERS: NON ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if the City Planner determines that the Planning Commission Minutes -14- May 13, 1987 number- of trees required is excessive, the plan should be brought back to the Commission for review. MODIFICATION, TO TRACT; 13058 DESIGN REVIEW - REPUBLIC - A request to modify the conditions of approval to permit wood fencing on corner side yards for Tract 13059 (Design Review) for 137 single family lots on 25.8 acres of land within the Victoria Planned Community (Low-Medium Residential , -8 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Fairmont Lane, north of the Southern Pacific Railroad - APN 0 - 11-13 and 38`» Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. i Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Roger Wilson, representing; the applicant, gave an overview of the request and presented slides for the Commission's consideration. Jim Bailey, representing William Lyon Company, supported the applicant's request and believed a variety of fencing would enhance Victoria. There were no further public comments. E Commissioner Emerick suggested the developer install the proposed wood fencing on the interior fences of all interior lots; however, he supported block walls on corner lots. He indicated that the slides presented reinforced his view that block walls still make good sense on corner lot locations where they are more visible from the street. Be stated block walls are more durable than wood fences and noted that wind is of particular concern, Commissioner Chitiea agreed the wood fencing, double stained, would e acceptable for interior use but block. walls- should be required for "'corner lots. t Brad Puller, City Planner, stated that Nor. Bailey brought up; good point relative t,J variety of fencing and suggested that the proper place to create a change would be in one of the larger super block areas as opposed to tract by tract basis. Motion Moved by Emerick, seconded by To stoy, to adopt the Resolution denying the request to modify the conditions of approval to permit wood fencing on corner side yards for Tract 13059. _ Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: EMERIC , TOLSTOY, BLA ESLEY C ITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS, NONE ASSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -15- May 13, 1987 Motion`: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to continue past the 1I: O adjournment time. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS R. VICTORIA LAKES - Oral Report Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, gave an overview of the status of the Victoria Lakes. He advised that staff would recommend a tour of lakes in surrounding communities to be held during the month of dune. S. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF ENTRY MONUMENT WALL LOCATIONS' Laura Psomas, Landscape Designer, presented the staff report. Chairman Mciel invited public comments. _- Judy McCaslin, representing the Bixby Ranch Company, stated her company was anxious to be able to construct their identification signs. She felt that the proposed monument .signs were more in keeping with residential projects than the high tech developments such as Bixby' s. Tim Beedle, representing Reiter Development, supported the gateway entry sign concept and indicated a willingness to work with the City. He voiced concern that the proposed design did not show any character to the approved sign for the Gateway project.' Henry Reiter urged the approval of a tastefully designed' sign, Russ Maguire, City Engineer•, reiterated staffs position that the review at this time was only for the locations for,City gateway signs. The signs, would still have to go through the Capital " Improvement program process and once that process is approved the full and complete designs will go through the full review process. These two locations were brought forward to give these two developers as much advanced information as possible. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned why Base Lane and 19th Street were not major entry way designations. M . Maguire advised that Base Line has been approved as a standard entry, and since 19th is a State Highway the most the City could> hope for would be an entry identification sign built off the right of way in a private easement. i Planning Commission Minutes -1 - May 1 , 1987 M . Buller suggested that staff meet with the Reiter and Bixby Companies on the sign designs after which staff would forward them to Design Review. It was the consensus of the Commission to forward to the City Council approval of the Haven and Milliken locations for the Gateway entry monumentations. T. REVIEW OF ON SITE CONSTRUCTION SIGN FOR THE PROPOSED VICTORIA GARDENS REGIONAL SHOFPINO MALL Jack Lam, Community [development Director, presented the staff report. DuncanDuddinger, representing the Hahn Corporation, presented an overview of the sign design After review, it was the consensus of the Commission to forward the sign design to the Design Review Committee to address concerns relative to the scale and mass of the sign and the pilasters and the type of lettering to be used. After review by the Design Review Committee, the sign design will b placed on the Planning Commission' s consent calendar. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 1 Da a.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, A201W �M Brad Sullen Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -1 - May 13, 1987 MICROFILMED k CITE OF CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting April 30, 18 Vice Chairman Suzanne Chitiea called the !Adjourned 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. She then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALF COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Fmeric , peter Tol soy ABSENT: Larry Mciel I STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planners Barre Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer;; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner; Janie Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary; Alan Warren, Associate Planner Otto Kroutil Senior Planner, gave an overviews of the the Foothill Specific' Plan process. Van Stevens, Forma, the plan consultant, gave an overviews of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Mr. Stevens then presented the Design Concept, Land Use Economic Concept, and Overall Traffic System sections of the Plan. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the ;public hearing. Cary Mitchell , 9330 Base Lire Rind, Rancho Cucamonga, member of the Foothill Specific Plan Ad Hoc Committee, gave an overviews of the Committee process'. On behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, he relayed a concern expressed by small and medium business people of how the plan may affect their businesses and business opportunities. He felt that the implementation policies were critical to the overall success of the land; uses for future development. Jeff Sceran a, member of the Foothill Specific ;Plan Ad Hoc. Committee, stated, that he saws an opportunity with this plan to capture' the tax dollars that are currently being spent in other communities. He `indicated that the land use in the area of the Ilevore Freeway was ;of particular concern because Foothill Boulevard and the Devore Freeway is a major intersection with a regional shopping center proposed on the northwest corner. He felt that this plan provides the potential for additional; semi-regional uses that are consistent with almost every major shopping center in Southern California. he felt that it was important that not all of the commercial uses be given to the regional shopping center. He stated that one of his objectives was to see that the City balance commercial uses along Foothill from the west boundary to the regional` shopping center on the east. Tim deedle, Reiter Development, 'expressed the reed to be able to articulate particular types of uses throughout the corridor with an emphasis toward both design and economic vitality. Joe yancy, 12752 Foothill , Rancho Cucamonga, expressed concerns with medians and median breaks- along Foothill , tax increases to pay for these median breaks, and a concern that there will be adequate support for commercial centers. There were no further public comments on this section of the presentation. E Commissioner Fmerick commented on the Corridor% Design Concept and disagreed with the consultant' s recommendation of a formalized treatment of the Sycamore Inn and dear Gulch areas. Additionally, he was concerned with traffic and agreed that the functional portion of the traffic issue must be dealt with first. Commissioner Tolstoy seated that the gateway design elements are an important feature of the Plan. He supported the activity centers and stated they give special treatment to special boulevards. Regarding the Overall Land Use/Economic Concept section of the; plan, he commented that the regional related activities from I-15 to the eastern border are important. He questioned the possibility of having more commercial than is viable. Traffic was of concern and he felt it was; a major issue to be deaf with. Vice-Chairman Chitiea stated the overall design concept is a very strong one. She supported the use of activity centers and felt the gateways are essential . She agreed that traffic was of tremendous importance and commented that the median breaks would be designed with traffic circulation being the major consideration. She had concern with the slightly excessive commercial use and felt the City, must be careful not to dilute the market. She stated that the regionally related uses in the eastern portion of the City would enhance the regional center as it develops. The Planning Commission recessed at 5 p.m. and the meeting resumed at : 5; p.m. Mr. Stevens gave an overview of the Land Use Categories. Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the public hearing. Sanford Bloom, property owner on Foothill between Klusman and Hellman, opposed the; Mixed Use/Retail designation proposed for that property, Planning Commission Minutes - - April 30, 198 Pete Ritassi architect, advised that he was currently developing a consolidated master plan for this site. Mr. Ritassi presented the master plan to the Commission. Tian Beedle, representing Reiter Development, suggested that the uses within the Regional Related designation should be expanded to include ancillary commercial uses. Jeff Sceranka advised that the Ad Doc Committee had discussed the issue of allowing various commercial uses within the RC category. His recommendation was that the RC designation be the most broad based commercial designation and that the uses be expanded to include community commercial uses with a requirement for master planning and the identification of the anchor tenant. Cary Mitchell addressed the concern expressed by the Commissioners relative to the extent of commercial uses. He stated that after the Committee reviewed the economic background studies provided by the consultant team they determined that the traffic volumes on Foothill' Boulevard would provide more of a unique opportunity to capture commercial opportunities along the boulevard. Be pointed out that Rancho Cucamonga ranks among the highest earning per capita communities in the County of San Bernardino; however, ranks among the lowest in capturing retail sales dollars spent within the community. Bert Francis property owner in the Bear Gulch area e reseed a concern with p p �' � p the number of uses which are not allowed on his piece of property, particularly uses such as credit unions and ancillary medical offices. Beer Mackall , 8112 Foothill , asked that optometrical uses be allowed within the CC designation. There were no further public comments Commissioner Bmerick agreed that the uses within the Regional Related category are not broad enough." He agreed with limiting the uses within Specialty i Commercial so they could blend in with the 'Red Bill and Thomas :Winery areas. Commissioner Tolsto,y stated that staff should take a look at the Regional Related uses` and determine a way to state in the text that these' pieces o land are held only for centers that can be developed around large regional commercial uses Vice-Chairman Chitiea agreed that the base for Regional Related uses should be broadened. She supported the concept of master planning with the possibility of a requirement that at least one anchor store must be developed with phase one of every master plan. She additionally suggested that criteria be established relative to parcel size to assure that a large enough parcel o land will be developed;. Planning Commission Minutes - April 30, 1987 Mr. Stevens advised that the development regulations and design guidelines for Regional Related uses specifically create incentives and direction for future land uses to be of the major regional type. He also pointed out that the minimum parcel size would be five acres. r. Kroutil asked for comments relative to the Mixed Use concept. Commissioner Emerick supported the concept and felt that the flexibility that the designation affords the; property owner was appropriate. Vice-Chairman Chitiea <agreed and further stated that the flexibility might entourage the most exciting use ofthe laud. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that Mixed- Use would encourage property owners to join together and master plan, which was the intent of the Plan. Red Hill County Club Reali nment John Atwater, Associate Planner representing the City of Upland, expressed concern with possible traffic and noise impacts on Grove Avenue and the residential streets in the City of Upland. He felt that other alternatives should be provided for consideration. Thomas McGalloway, Planning Commissioner with the City of Upland, expressed concern and opposition' to Alternative -d of the Plan which diverted the Red Hill Country Club Drive westerly traffic onto Grove Avenue north of Foothill . He was concerned that this additional traffic would impact the ingress and egress to the shopping center on the northwest corner of Foothill and Crowe. He advised that; the Upland traffic engineer suggested a realignment point between the sycamore Inn property to align with San Bernardino Road. Russ Maguire City Engineer, advised that the northerly exit out of the Red Hill area at Alta Celesta is currently ;under~ contract to be signalized.. Further, the combination Vineyard/Carnelian and Country Club Drive intersection is being budgeted for signalation during the upcoming fiscal' year. He pointed out that alternative access was being provided to draw the traffic away from Red Hill . Mr. Maguire commented that a realignment near the Sycamore Inn' was previously considered; _ however, the grade differential to bring the street down to that point virtually destroys the area;. Edward Hopson, 1131 W. Cth Street, Ontario, representing the property owner of c 18 'acres surrounding the Sycamore Inn, stated opposition to the realignment of r Red Hill Country Club Drive with San Bernardino Road due to the adverse impact it would have on this property. John Holt advised that other alternatives were discussed by the Ad Hoc Committee, however, Alternative 2-B, was chosen due to safety concerns and because it least impacted the residential streets. Planning Commission Minutes April S , 1987 There were no further public comments.. It was the consensus of the Commission that the realignment of Red Hill Country Club Drive be continued to the neat meeting. Staff was directed to provide a recommendation relative to the traffic study prepared for the property owner at the northeast corner of Grove and Foothill . Extension of Estacia Avenue Mr. Kroutil gave an overview of the Plan proposal . Harold Lovgren, expressed concern with limiting access` on Estacia to San Bernardino Road. John Holt stated that the Advisory, Committee came up with an acceptable solution that would mean that access to San Bernardino would be acceptable if that access did not provide through traffic to Foothill Boulevard. Pete Pitassi' stated that if there is a connection on Klusman the logical location would be adjacent to Cstacia to form an intersection.. He was concerned that in order to get proper alignment, radius and right-of-ways to allow that alignment, the location of the commercial building behind Wendy' s would create hazardous traffic situation since there isn't enough depth from that commercial building to klus an. He felt San Bernardino Road was designed as a collector street and should be allowed to function in that capacity. He' asked that he be given flexibility on the connection street as part of his master plan concept. r. Stevens pointed out that the arrows designated on the plan are strictly opportunities for access, there are no mandatory statements of circulation. Warren Hillgren, owner of the mobile home park at 930 Foothill Boulevard, felt there were potential legal and economic problems with the Mined Use Residential designation. He stated that further traffic analysis and study should be conducted on both San Bernardino Road and Cstacia. Corgi Castle, representing Vineyard Bank, stated concern with the possible alignment of the Estacia Court extension. We additionally stated a concern with the lack of a median in foothill Boulevard at Klusman. Jeff Sceranka stated than the intent of the Committee was to minimize commercial traffic on San Bernardino Road. He felt that a residential project would create' less traffic impacts than a commercial project and would least affect the existing residences. There were no further public comments. Planning Commission Minutes - - April 30, 1987 Commissioner Emerick stated that the access opportunities indicated on the map are appropriate. He felt that access onto San Bernardino Road should be limited as much as possible. He concurred with no through access all the way through San Bernardino Road to Foothill and little or no commercial access from San Bernardino Road into a commercial project. Vice-Chairman Chitiea concurred and stated the Commission will >look closely at the proposals and the alternatives and will be sensitive to the concerns of all citizens. San Bernardino Road and Foothill Mr. Kroutil gave an overview of the Plan proposal . Vice-Chairman Chitiea opened the public hearing. Bert Francis supported the recommendation of the Advisory Committee. There were no further public comments. It was the consensus of the Commission to support the Plan proposal relative to San Bernardino Road and Foothill . San Diego Avenue RelllanEtrLt Mr. Kroutil gave an overview of the Plan proposal . Gary Mitchell stated that the Advisory Committee was al, so concerned with the property west of the flood control channel . He indicated the Committee's recommendation would be to Master Plan both parcels. Steve Lucas, 9489 Apricot, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the access to San Diego as it currently exists would be the acceptable solution. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Emerick stated that San Diego Road should be indicated as a dashed line to keep the possibilities, open. For master plan purposes he felt the street should be indicated, however, the text should state the entire corner should be master planned. Vice-Chairman Chitiea suggested that direction be given that the City would be flexible in this matter based on master plan. Mr. Kroutil pointed out that the question would be if the Water District comes in with a development plan independent of the remainder of the site would they be able to develop at this point, or would they be subject to an overall master plan. Planning Commission Minutes -6- April 30, 1987 Commissioner Tolsto,y stated the ideal solution would be to master plan the entire corner and abandon access on San Diego. r. Krdutil pointed out that you would not be able to develop that portion unless alternate access is provided elsewhere. r. Buller stated that if a proposal came in there could be a mechanism that if San Diego` were vacated on an interim basis it could remain there until> such time a the rest of the master plan is developed. If the Water 'District' s< property were purchased by a private venture, the City could allow an access punt into that project as 'long as it was not a through street. He indicatedi that the City would place the burden on the developer to show that their: project can fit into a master plan for the rest of the site. Commissioner Emerick reiterated that the access is being shown now as existing right of way, however, the City would be amenable to 'having it master planned. Conclusion r Krdutil gave an overview of the Commission' s actions during this meeting. Commissioner Chitiea added that she felt very strongly that the intersection of Haven and Foothill is extremely important and should` be included in the scope of this study. She advised that the Committee felt strongly about incorporating that intersection into the overall picture. She felt that Maven should relate to what is happening on Foothill and the last two corners should not be allowed to develop piecemeal . She asked :that this area be included. r. Buller stated that if this was a direction of the Commission, staff would suggest that action proceed` on this plan as it currently exists. He advised` that this area could be included as an addendum to the plan; however, the contract with the consultant would need to be amended and the City Council would need to support that amendment. Vice-Chairman Chitiea invited public comment. Gary Mitchell stated that there are two issues to be dealt with: the issue of designating that intersection as a strategic and special intersection, and, the issue of the land use between the Channel , on the west side of Virginia Cane all the way to the east side of the Devore Freeway, He suggested that the Commission consider separating the issues of the land use of that missing; link, but add a ; designation on the Plan signifying the intersection of Foothill and Haven as a special intersection where the City would want similar` kinds of treatment along the lines of the special boulevard. Planning Commission Minutes - April 30, 17 Commissioner Tols,toy pointed out that the General Plan designates Haven and Foothill a special boulevard. He agreed with Cyr. Buller that it would not be' necessary to stop action on the Plan at this point to include this section, but that it be done as an amendment to the Plana. Jeff Sceranka concurred with Mr uller's suggestion and further stated that it was critical that the Terra Vista Plan, Barton Development Plan, and 'Santa Fe Realty Plan all be coordinated with the Foothill Plan. There were no further public comments. Vice-Chairman hitiea concurred that the Commission not hold up this Process, but she suggested that the 'recommendations he made to the Council immediately so that the design elements can he incorporated* Commissioner Tolstoy Mated that the; Commission really should recognize the fact that there is a problem with this missing link of Foothill and recommend to the Council that the entire length of Foothill be included in the Plan area. Motion: Moved by T lstoyf, seconded by Fmer°ic , unanimously carried, to adjourn the pudic hearing for the Foothill' Boulevard Specific Plan to Monday, May 1 , 1987, p.m., Lions Pare Community` Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. Respectfully submitted, M Brad Buller ;. . Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes ' -8- April 30, 1 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP WE NES AY APRIL 29, 198 6: C P.M. Lions Park Community Center 9161 Base Lire Road Rancho Cucamonga Chairman Larry cNiel called the workshop meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at IC p.m. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Larry McNiel , Suzanne Chitie , Bruce Eaerick, Peter Tol stay ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Russ Maguire, City Engineer; arr,ye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; doe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer; Barbara Krall , Assistant Civil Engineer. UTILITY UNDER GROUNDING, POLICY -- Larry cNi e l , Planning Commission Chairman, explained the purpose of the workshop. Narrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked whether the railroad related utility lines were included in the uti l i ty line mileage total . Mr. Hanson stated they were not. Commissioner Chitiea asked over what Period of time the assessment was based. Commissioner 'Tol sto,y asked ghat the mechanism would he to form an assessment district. Mr. Hanson stated that he was not familiar with all the details regarding assessment districts* Russ Maguire, City Engineer stated that, it would have to be a facilities type district and, depending on the nature, would go to a 50 percent or 2/3 vote. Gary Mitchell , representing,; the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce, Chairman of the Economic Development Committee, gave a brief summary of the issues discussed at the Economic Development Committee meeting and the recommendations made by the Chamber. The Chamber is strongly supportive of the Cit ' s long range goal of undergrounding overhead utility lines for aesthetic purposes and economic reasons. Some residents had concerns whether they would be required to pay the costs of undergrounding existing overhead lines to the rear of their* homes, through alleys, or adjacent to equestrian feeder trails. Mr. Mitchell agreed to change the minimum length from 300 to 600 feet. He suggested exempting the small and medium projects from the; direct costs o undergrounding. The Chamber also felt the exemption of alleys and easements was a good addition to the policy. Mr. Mitchell stated that he was not sure establishing new benefit assessment districts would be applicable to the issue of utility undergrounding. He fel t a more equitable and realistic solution would be the establishment of an undergrounding fee based on a set fee per dwelling unit for residential development and square footage for commercial and industrial buildings. The current policy does not distribute the costs of undergrounding and there are some inequities. The Chamber felt some type of undergrounding fee on a per unit basis, would fairly assess every new project that is approved by the City. Regarding the issue of railroads, an alternative would be to place the rail lines in a Redevelopment Agency project, and utilize redevelopment financing techniques and assess developers at a' later date for development on adjacent properties. If the City had a restrictive account, the Commission and Council could prioritize the expenditure of those funds on a more high profile type of undergrounding. In closing, Mr. Mitchell stated that the Chamber is interested in working cooperatively with the City, both the Planning Commission and City Council . The Chamber strongly urges the Commission to consider the alternatives requested. The Chamber Board has taken the position that if the City chooses to pursue 'legislation, they will be in support ICC . Chairman McNiel questioned Mr. Mitchell as to what type of fee he was referring to. Mr. Mitchell stated that the Chamber was considering a fee to be assessed on every unit in a residential development, and on a square footage basis, in a commercial/industrial development. The Chamber was not aware of the amount per dwelling unit. part of the recommendation is that it should be known how many miles of lines were being considered and the estimated cost of undergrounding those lines. Commissioner Emerick asked if the Chambers proposal for having new developments shoulder the burden would not only be for undergrounding the utilities that would be required ;of the developer in conjunction on with the project, but also undergrounding the existing utilities throughout the City. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - - AP IL 29, 1987 Mr. Mitchell stated if a comprehensive program was used in which the City determines the lines to be u'ndergroundod, that it must be 'taken on an individual basis with new development, perhaps giving the builder and the Commission the right to decide which projects should be directly undertaken as a condition of approval , or which could perhaps; be postponed until a later date. It could work similarly to the current storm drain reimbursement program. This City has a good formula that states exactly what a fair allocation is and if a developer is forced to put in facilities ;that are beyond that related to the site, then there are provisions for offsetting credits. Commissioner Emerick asked, if there was to be a residential development of 50 acres or more in a portion of the City where there were no existing utility lines, and the developer is installing and undergrounding the utilities; according to that formula, would he be required to pay additional fees as well as undergrounding the new utilities servicing the project, r. Mitchell stated that Haven Avenue would be a good dividing line, Some felt that anything oast of Haven would most likely be in a planned community area, and those projects would be forced to bring in supply lines and underground anything inside* Perhaps the developer should; be treated by the policy differently than what would be considered an ' n- fill piece of property which would be required to contribute on a per unit basis. Commissioner Chitiea asked, if there was an in-fill project which didn't underground utilities but contributed to the foe, when would the undergrounding be done and what would the cost be to take out the improvements, pint in the utilities, and replace the 'improvements. It appears as though the cost is being doubled r. Mitchell stated that the Chamber discussion centered around the need for a threshold by which a project is required to underground all adjacent lines. mother discussion was the possibility of a new residential project that retained the use of existing overhead utilities, but the financial commitment paid by the ouilder/devloper was used in other areas of the community with a higher priority for immediate undergrounding. That is still an open issue. Commissioner Chitiea stated: that then there is the problem- of new development with aesthetics at ` a much lower level than other new projects, It begins to look as though some are required to provide certain improvements and others are not. It would almost appear as though newer projects in the City would have lower, aesthetic standards than what has been required currently giving the City a downward slide look. r Mitchell stated that the current policy does not require .the .. : undergrounding of oo kv lines and unfortunately there have been instances where the City has required the undergrounding of the 12 Kv line and telecommunications lines, but there are poles remaining to carry the 66 Kv lines. If there are to be remaining lines, it would be better to leave all the lines on the poles, assess a fee, and use that fee in another portion of the community. Commissioner Emerick asked what the technical reason was for the 66 Kv linos net being undergrunded. Mr. Mitchell suggested referring to the utility companies for that information Mr. Hanson asked if the Chamber was requesting that heir ;proposal exempt those properties altogether from the policy, and if there should .still in fact be an in-lieu fee. r. Mitchell stated that portion of the proposal would become the new threshold by ;.which Commission and Council would have discretion as to whether on site udergroundi ng would be required for that particular site and that the Chamber was not recommending that hose be exempt. I Chairman McNiel asked f in-lieu fees have a time l i i t and if not used o back to the developer, r. Maguire stated that there is a time limit. Chairman McNiel asked if any discussion would not be in the form of; an in-lieu 'ee but would be a type of development fee. r. Maguire stated that a development fee would require State legislation. The City Attorney has researched the situation and the City cannot establish a general development fee for purposes of undergrounding without State legislation. Chairman McNiel asked if there were any other questions -1 o issioner Emerick commented with respect to corner properties and stated that he felt the current criteria is a hardship. A developer not only has to improve both streets but also has to underground those utilities. He also stated he could see in a particular situation why` it may be a hardship;, especially In a residential area where a corner location possibly doesn't add value to the property. r. Mitchell commented that in a commercial project, having more frontage is an advantage, but in a residential project that is not necessarily true. Commissioner Emerick stated that with respect' to residential development, it could be argued that having two exposures is an inherent design constraint. Maybe the land owner should take the additional costs into account in respect to what his land is worth. Chairman McNiel asked if there was utility company representation. PLANNING O I I N MINUTES -4- AP IL 29, 1987 a � a - � � � # «r ♦!' m, * � �� �' M �. *^ � � � � � 1 •9M M � ' � f' �! r � } • # ! " N i / i ! " t a � '" s #:.. � ' • �� q � � • e , �, ,� N � A ® x i �, � f a � ! i e s a �. � � � Y� • � ,,. � .« a K ' i ' "«' • « • cl • ! • � r � r0 � � � � �� �, � �, • a � i .» i a � a pay taxes, which results in d . The Public Utilities Commission looked at the issue, and most felt it would be a good idea to pass the increase onto the rate; payers. Even with the testimony heard, the administrative line judge said he would recommend to the Commissioners that the tax be passed onto the contributor. He is recommending that it not be ' but C to 0 , because if it is a piece of property, there are depreciation benefits over a period time. The 30 number is taking into consideration that these depreciation benefits should be passed back to the City{ or County. They have present-valued that and figured the increase to be approximately 0%. Chairman an c iel asked when Edison would have definite numbers. } Ms. Wells stated that when the Commission rakes their decision, the final number will be determined. r. Hanson asked if C was a high probability. s. Wells answered yes, and stated that the rate payers are getting tremendous benefits from the Tax Act. Edison suggested to the Commission that due to the rate payers receiving such a substantial benefit, to pass the tax through, that mechanism. The 30 oul d be a one-time- cost Commissioner Emerick asked if there was any economy by underground ng the smaller lines and 66 Kv line at the same time to reduce the cost of undergrounding the; u Kv line. r. Gardeniere stated that the only economy would be using a similar contractor and having concurrent construction. The savings would not be substantial unless the project was 100 feet, for example. s. Karnes added that the reason there is not a greater savings is the lines go in separate trenches. Mr. -Hanson asked if the 300 per foot included the increase.. # s. Karnes stated it did not. Mr. Maguire asked if previous PUC regulations prohibiting the City's ability to require 66 Kv lines or larger to be undergrounded were still in effect s. Karnes stated there were none she was aware o . Chairman McNiel asked where the Edison Company became involved in the expense of doing the work under Rule 20A. Miss Karnes stated that each year she provides the City with the allocation for the' year for City projects to be set aside in a separate account within dison's banking system. This allocation is based on the number of overhead meters located within the City limits. Last year, the allocation was approximately $74,000. A lump sum of $30 million will be distributed among all the Cities for 1987. Chairman McNiel asked if that was specifically for City projects, or if it could be used in any specific way. Mr. Maguire stated that it's a joint agreement designating a project within an underground district. Miss Karnes added that the City is currently borrowed ahead approximately $5UI,UOO because of projects on Archibald and Base Line which required additional funds. Mr. Hanson stated that it would take approximately 7 years at the current allotment to "get out of the red". Miss Karnes said the Edison Company has currently been working with the League of California Cities in an attempt to change the formula of the allocation. The Edison Company is trying to change the formula so 45% of the allocation will be distributed according to overhead meters, and another 45% will be distributed according to total meters in the system, which includes meters already serviced by underground means. Ten percent of that money will be set aside for "special projects" which will be administered by a Committee representing Counties and Cities. Funds will then be provided for special projects such as the Law and Justice Center, City Hall or a regional park. The Committee will determine if the project is worthwhile enough for additional funding. If the Public Utilities Commission passes the new formula, the allocation will almost double. Mr. Mitchell stated that the Chamber looked at possible implementation strategies. It seemed that the newer growing communities were being somewhat penalized in comparison to older, already developed and established communities, if the allocation were to remain based on the number of existing facilities, It is newer growing communities that have a higher need for more funding sooner. He also felt one of the answers is to seek a new distribution formula at the PUC level . Some of the concerns relating to the use of the fees could possibly be covered by the enabling legislation at the State level for the City to enact its own development fee program. Commissioner erick asked if developers east of Haven Avenue should be charged a fee to underground utilities for in-fill projects, but also may be paying a small fee to underground other parts of the City where the lines are above ground. Mr. Mitchell questioned whether residents who live in the new planned community areas derive benefit from visiting a City park or a civic facility that might be located in an area west of Haven. If part of the undergrounding fees were used to underground lines in front of the Neighborhood Center on Arrow, and a resident from a planned community were to use recreational programs at that facility, would they benefit PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -7- APRIL 29, 1987 from that? The resident probably would. Not; to the same extent as undergrounds ng 'lines in front of the resident's house. He suggested a differential fee system be devised based on the amount of under round ng done by that project and in that community. The Chamber f el different approach should be,taken in regards to the area east of Haven, whether that approach meant no contribution on a fee basis or a differential fee, Hal Overton, General Telephone District Manager introduced Gene Hernandez, Outside Plan Engineering, who discussed the 300 vs 60U foot undergrounding and the 67 percent'increase. r. Hernandez stated that the Telephone Company would prefer the longer lengths to underground as does the Edison Company, because taking down one pole is not a benefit. The longer the undergroundi ng section, the better it fits the Telephone Company's requirements and reduces interruptions to customers Regarding the contributions in aid of construction, the Telephone Company's Tax Manager has taken a position for the company that there will be no collecting of taxes until the Public Utilities Commission takes a firm position on the ruling. There will also be no collecting of in-lieu fees. Chairman McNiel asked the TaxManager's position regarding the "bottom line", what it's going to fall at and if is a reasonable number*. Mr. Hernandez stated that no speculation has been made as to what percentage may come about. There were no;other utility representations present. Chairman McNiel stated that the meeting was generated due to the cosh to the developers and ultimately the end user, and because suddenly the number drastically increased. He further stated that the Commission would have to; come to a recommendation to allow the policy to go to the City Council either in its current form, an altered form, or a new form. He asked for comments from the Commission. The Commissioners chose to address each item separately. 4 Increase minimum length from 0 feet to 600 feet. Chairman McNiel asked if there was any discussion, and pointed out that the discussion was regarding the increase of minimum length from 300 to 600 feet Commissioner hitiea stated that she didn't see any reason not to have tne''increasew PLANNING MISSION MINUTES -8- APRIL 29, 1987 Commissioner Emerick suggested clarifying policy further to ensure i not be interpreted as are outright exemption, that in-lieu fees will have to be paid. Mr. Hanson suggested merely changing the present resolution to read 600 feet rather than 300 feet* He also pointed out that the resolution later states the developer shall pay are in-lieu fee. j It was unanimous on the issue of increasing the minimum length from 300 to 60U feet . Granting special consideration for corner parcels: Commissioner Emerik asked if there was an issue with respect to corner lots in the existing ordinance, whether it is sufficient with respect to undergrounding. It was decided to not change the; existing policy specifically granting special 'consideration for corner parcels, because the current policy already has a provision for the Commission to grant waivers under special conditions, 3. Disposition of railroad utilities: Chairman McNiel asked if passenger rail travel was going to continue through the City. Mr, Maguire Mated that there was one passenger train per day that passes through the City.. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that the Commission make it a policy to underground the railroad facilities, but have it done all at once with using some kind of mechanism to raise the money. This suggestion was agreed upon by Chairman McNiel and Commissioner hitiea, . Utility inventory: Chairman McNiel asked Ms. Karnes if the Edison Company had an inventory on utility 'lines. Miss Karnes stated that the Edison Company has an inventory map. Chairman McNiel also asked the Telephone Company representative if they have a similar map. r. Overton said they did. Chairman iel suggested the Commission validate the numbers through what is available from the utility companies. PLANNING COMMISSION INCITES -9- APRIL 29, 1987 Commissioner Chitiea suggested that the Commission get the information needed to implement programs Chairman McNiel suggested that the rail lines be included in that number. Commissioner Emerick stated he ,felt the primary reason for needing information now is to make the determination on implementation, whether it be assessment district or by fees, if there is legislation passed by the State that allows the Commission to do so. The maps that the utility companies will provide will be sufficient to make a preliminary determination of implementation. Commissioner Tol stoy stressed that he felt the Commission did not need "fine-tuned" information. Commissioner issioner 'Chiti` a stated that the Commission should have only enough information to implement the program. It was decided that the Commission look toward substantiating the figures presented to the Commission by Mr. Hanson. . Assessment district and underrounding fee: Chairman McNiel suggested that if the Commission determines there is a need for the assessment district and send; this recommendation to the City Council , that it be "tagged' with enabling legislation. Then a comprehensive utility inventory will be done. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the utility companies ` figures were the same as presented to the Commission by Mr. Hanson. Miss Karnes said the figures were reached by one of the formulas used. The City always receives the highest figure. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the figures presented to the Commission were adequate until legislation is passed to allow the Commission to have any further discussion. Criss Karnes added, for the Commission's information, that Edison currently has 185 miles of underground utilities within the City. The Commission decided to suggest to the City Council that they pursue both the assessment district and underground fen approach as methods of undergroundi ng utilities throughout the City. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES _IC- AP IL 29, 1987 r. Hanson stated that he would return to theCommission with memorandum summarizing the conclusions of the Commission regarding utility unaergrounding. Res Submitted, u re Actingeretrr CITE" OF RANCHO' CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting April 22, 1987 Chairman Larry 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 Pare Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman McNidl then led in the pledge of allegiance, ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS. PRESENT': Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emeric , Lamy McNi el , Peter Tol stay ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Greg Gage, Assistant Planner;; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson,; Deputy City Attorney; Debra Meier, Assistant Planner; Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the first public hearing for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan would be held on April 30, 1987. He advised that the meeting would be held at Lions Park Community Center, 911 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, and would begin at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Buller additionally announced that item " " on this evening' s agenda was provided for the Commission' s information only and that the item would not be discussed at this meeting. Chairman Larry McNiel presented a Resolution of Commendation to E. David Barker for his participation as a Planning Commissioner. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87- 2 - INVESTMENT BU'ILDINia GROUP -- The--develop ent of a 212,289 square foot industrial bui ding n 9.5 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14 , located approximately 650 feet north of 4th Street on the east side of Santa Anita Avenue - APN 29-331-10, 11. B. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-08 - WESTERN PROPERTIES - The developaaent of an office park consisting of four -story buildings totaling 250,000 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 Drive - APN 1011-421-06, 10, and 09. (Related to this project is Tree Removal Permit 87-20, requesting the removal of two groves of 'Eucalyptus trees (approximately 56 trees) within the site. Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the applicant for item " B" requested that the item be pulled and sent back to the Design Review Committee. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerlck, unanimously carried, to adopt item "A" of the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10543, - BARTON DEV L PMENT - A subdivision 6if_4_.29 acres of landli_nto7 parcels in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) , ; located on the north side of Jersey Boulevard between Utica Avenue and Vincent Avenue - APN 209-142-11, 12 Barrye' Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There r n p g were o comments, therefore the public hearing was closed, Motion* Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerik, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 10543. Motion carried by the following voter AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTO NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -2- April 22, 198 i D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7-1 - MULLER - The request fora Master Conditional Use Permit to alloy Financia , Insurance and Real Estate services for Building E, F, and C; and a 9,365 square foot recreational facility (Star Fitness Center) for Building E within an 18.4 acre approved Master Plan in the General Industrial District Subarea j, located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and` 9th Street a AN 09-01-15, 17, and 05. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Staff suggested that Condition 3 of the Resolution be modified to state that the modification o the previously approved Master Plan and Design Review must reflect additional parking. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Linda Unger, 77 El Arco, Rancho Cucamonga, applicant for Star' s Fitness Center, concurred with the Conditions of Approval . Commissioner Tolstoy asked what percentage of services would be provided to non-members of the club. M . Unger stated that the figure would be less than 10 percent. Steve Muller, 2 Corporate Park;, Irvine, developer of the project, addressed the parking concern and advised that this project would be designed as a low tech development. He felt that adequate parking had been. prodded. Commfssioner Tolstoy; stated while . he could see that overall the project provided adequate parking, his concern was the; proximity to Building E. Mr. Muller stat ed that the. .parki ng for the new user f o Building d`i n p_ g E the. former Inspiron site) would ;be located on the west side of the building, which would be the only main entry to the; property. He indicated; that this would be a secured parking area. Cheryl; Tarkington, 516 N. Orange, Riverside, stated that the peak hours for Star' s Fitness Center would be after 5:00 p.m. and on weekends, which would be off hours for the majority of the remaining businesses. She did not feel there would" be a' parking problem. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that staff' s added condition to rewire a edification to the previously approved Mas,ter Plan to reflect additional parking would insure that adequate parking would be provided. He further stated that the parking and security fencing could be conditioned to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. If the Committee determined it necessary, they could refer the item to the full Planning Commission._ Planning Commission Minutes - - April 22, 17 Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoyto issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution 'approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 87-13, with an amendment to Condition 3 which would require that the modification reflect additional parking. The parking and security fencing is to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: E ERIC , TULSTUY, C ITiEA, MCNIEL NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7-1.0 _ SARMAKIAN - The request for a Master Conditional Use Permit to a low Administrative Offices;, Professional/Design Services, Financial Insurance and eal Estate Service's within an existing multi-tenant Industrial Park in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1 , located at the ; southwest corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Route - APN' O7-P14 . Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Staff suggested that Planning Division condition 1 of the Resolution be modified to include "as defined in the Industrial Specific Plan" at the end of the first sentence. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Andrew Barmakian, applicant, gave an overview of the request. Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho` Cucamonga,, concurred that the timing involved in obtaining a ' Conditional Use Permit is a problem. He felt that the philosophy to open up the Conditional Use Permit process to a building conditioned to allow other users to come in and which would not require submittal on an individual` basis would bring more businesses to the City. He felt that staff' s review of adequate landscaping and parking would provide the necessary controls for the City. There were no further comments , therefore the public hearing was closed;. Commissioner E crick stated this is a goad area of town for this particular project. He felt, that staff had addressed the parking concerns quite well . His only concern was that some of the industrial uses might be incompatible with the other three'- uses proposed in the Master CUP; however, he felt that this concern could betaken care of by the applicant when he leases the units. i Planning Commission Minutes - - April 22, 1987 Commissioner Chitiea was concerned with giving a carte blanche CUP to a large project; however, felt the type of uses proposed were reasonable and appropriate. She felt the comments relative to attracting business were important and should be taker into consideration. Based on the parking figures provided, she supported' the project. Commissioner Tolstoy supported the comments; however, was concerned with Faster CUP because often individual circumstances may need close investigation and design measures to mitigate problems that might be unique to any one user. He asked if there could be a condition on a Master CUP that before a tenant could move into a building, the City was made aware of the user. Mr, duller explained: staf;f' s review process for permitted uses. He pointed out that the proposed uses are the type of uses that the impacts are negligible and therefore staff felt comfortable in recommending approval of this Master Conditional Use Permit. Chairman McNiel stated that the uses proposed are an upgrade from those typically in an industrial park. He felt that since the applicant intends to move his offices into this complex he would be particular as to who he leases to, He stated that his concern would be if the uses proposed were less than what is permitted. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had no problem with this particular project; however, in general he had a problem with the concept that the Commission is going to grant Master Conditional Use Permits to other type situations. ' Chairman McNiel suggested that staff be directed to establish guidelines for reviewing future Master Conditional Use Permits, Commissioner Chitiea staged that this project should be closely monitored. She pointed out that Commission should be careful to protect the Industrial Specific Plan so that the balance of zoning and planning for office and professional is not altered. Commissioner Emerick asked if it would be; possible to require noise mitigation if there proved to be a problem between users. . Boller advised that if staff determined at the time tenant improvements were submitted that noise would be a problem, they could require additional sound insulation. Commissioner Tolstoy reiterated his opposition to blanket UPas. I`n this case, he felt that the conditions were such that he could support the Resolution.` He agreed this was a special; project, and; that space for incubator users was important. Planning Commission Minutes - April 22, 1987 Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Condit'±ional Use Permit 87-1O, with an amendment to planning Division condition I to add "as defined in the Industrial Specific Plan" to the end of the first sentence. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, CHITIEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried F. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-08 - CUCAMONGA CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP A proposal to establish three classrooms and a mu ti-_purpose room for an existing church within an Industrial Park, (Subarea' ), at the northwest corner of 7th Street and Archibald - APN 07-171- 6. Greg Gage, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. He advised that Condition 1 of the Resolution should be deleted. Chairman McNil opened the public hearing, Steve Fitch, 838 Lucite, Rancho- Cucamonga, addressed the Commission on behalf of the applicant and urged approval . There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion; Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emeric , to .adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 87-O8, Motion carded by the following vote: AWES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, EMEIC , CHITEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-06 - RANCHO UCAMON A REALTY PROPERTIES II, LTD - A request to serve alcoholic beverages within an established 3,700 square foot restaurant within the Neighborhood Commercial District NC located at the northeast comer of lgth and Archibald 9740 19th Street) - APN 20 =171-g7. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing. i' Planning Commission Minutes - - April 22, 1987 James Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the applicant' s request. He observed that there has never been a problem with parking in this center and supported a reduction in required parking spaces. He stated that this restaurant is one in the 'City which is doing a good business and urged the Commission to grant the expansion request. Mr. Hamblin, adjacent business owner;, supported the request and concurred that parking is not a problem in the center. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea recalled problems the City encountered with the Hoar' Head on 19th and Carnelian. She suggested that the conditions reflect restrictions on ;hours of operations. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that since the applicant for this project was not in attendance at the meeting, the Commission might consider continuing the public hearing to allow the applicant to present his case. Chairman McNiel concurred and pointed out that this would allow staff" time to reviews the paring issue. With the concurrence of the Commissioners, he reopened the public hearing for purposes of continuation. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolsto , to continue the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use permit 7-06 to the May13th agenda, Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TGL TOY,: MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK ABSENT': COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Commissioner Emerick clarified his "No" vote by stating that he felt comfortable with the parking situation to make a decision to approve the project at this time : U p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed :SO p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened H. ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 6.04 -RY ER> - The eve o ent of a true rents , ease, sae and maintenance facility on 4.23 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea; 14) located on the west side of Santa Anita Avenue north of 41:1 Street - APN 2 9- - O6. Planning Commission Minutes -7- April 22, 1987 Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report® Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Mitch Nakamuro, _1. 17 Spruce, Bloomington, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project and concurred with the Resolution and conditions of approvals There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea stated serious concerns with the screening of the project due to its location hear 4th Street and the freeway. She stated she would be concerned with this type of use at this location unless it was adequately screened. Commissioner Tolstoy concurred and further stated that it would be helpful if staff could` provide a line of sight drawing of the view from the freeway. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that staff concurred with the Commission' s concerns and advised'' that a condition of approval' for the project was that screening he provided which would screen views from 4th " Street and the freeway. He pointed out that the .screening was required to be submitted to the Design Review Committee for approval prior to the issuance of building permits, and was also conditioned on approval by the City Engineer due to drainage problems in the area. He indicated that if the Design ;Review Committee deemed necessary, it could refer the item to the full Planning Commission for review and approval . He advised that if the Commission was uncomfortable with this direction, staff would recommend-a continuation of the public hearing to allow staff an opportunity to complete a line of sight study. Chairman MNiel stated he felt comfortable ;enough with the conditions to approve the project, given that the Design Review> Committee could refer the project to the full Commission if they are dissatisfied with the screening solution. Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Cmeric , to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and. Conditional Use Permit H -D4. Motion carried by the following vote; AYES; COMMISSIONERS. CHITIEA, EMERIC I, MCNIEL, T4LSTDY NOES; COMMISSIONERS. NONE i ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE -carried i Planning Commission Minutes -8,- April 22, 1987 MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITSHERIFF & ASSOCIATES - Proposal for remodeMn-g- the—Store- f'room-f-fa—ca—de—,—minor---E-u-i-T ding--ad'it7i-ons and reconstruct 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 Base Line Road - APN 202-381-24 thru 26, 28 thru 33, 35 and 36. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea thought that the roof was to be consistently green throughout the project and not a combination of orange and green. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the applicant feels strongly that the tower elements should be treated with a different color material . He suggested that the Commission discuss this issue. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the recent painting of Carl ' s Jr. and asked if they received approval . Mr. Buller indicated that staff had met with representatives from Carl Jr. who indicated their intent and willingness to work with the City to make their project consistent with this project proposal . He advised that if revised plans were not submitted to the City by Carl ' s Jr. , staff would proceed with code enforcement action. Chairman Mc Niel opened the public hearing. Garth Sheriff, project architect, stated a willingness to comply with the Commission' s direction relative to roof color. He indicated that the applicant would like to proceed with the project as quickly as possible in order to complete the remodeling before the Christmas season. He addressed the issue of utility undergrounding and requested that the Commission waive the requirement. He indicated that if the requirement was not waived, the project financially would not be able to proceed under this Conditional Use Permit modification request, but might proceed under the original approval . Sally Forester-Jones, representing Capri Properties, stated that the undergrounding requirement would impose $325,772 in additional costs, or 58% of the total project cost. She reiterated Mr. Sheriff' s comments that the project could not proceed with that requirement. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick advocated the use of one roof color and suggested that orange might be the more appropriate choice given the red the used on adjacent projects. He felt the applicant had a valid point relative to under grounding and suggested that the Commission explore means which would allow the project to proceed. Planning Cornmission Minutes -9- April 22, 1987 Commissioner Tol stay stated he had no objection to the roof colors submitted by the applicant. He commented that the architectural treatment of the j buildings on the east side of the project next to the high school should be extended the length of the buildings. He concurred that the Commission should work with the applicant on the undergrounding issue. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the idea behind the use of a green metal roof was that it would create a statement of its own rather than are attempt to emulate the red the roofs of adjacent projects. She felt orange used with the green would create a garrish look, and suggested a different shade of green could be used as a contrast. She stated that the tower details and the color should be brought to the Design Review Committee for review and approval . Relative to utility undergrounding, she suggested a compromise that the applicant underground utilities on Rase Line and that an exception could be made on Carnelian. She indicated that she would not like a precedent set; however, pointed out that this modification was only for a B increase in total building area. She `felt that undergrounding was an important aesthetic issue for the City, however, would not like to see the project lost since the improvements are significant for this particular property. Chairman Mciel stated he did not object to the green roof, however, suggested that the orange be toned down somewhat. He agreed that undergrounding should be negotiated given that this project has special circumstances. He asked for a response from the applicant relative to Commissioner Chitiea" s suggestion to underground the utilities on Rase Line. He then reopened the public hearing. Mr. Sheriff stated that undergrounding on Base Line alone would be a $175,000 cost . to the project. He indicated that an option to the developer might be develop the site under the original Conditional Use Permit which was still in effect s. Forester-Jones indicated a willingness to work with staff and the Commission on the architectural issues-, however, concurred that the cost of undergrounding would be prohibitive to the project. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Fmerick felt that requiring the undergrounding on one side of the project would be appropriate Commissioner Tolstoy concurred with undergrounding along the Base Line frontage, but indicated he would not like to 'see the project lost due to the undergrounding costs. Commissioner Chitiea stated she was an advocate of the City' s undergrounding policy, especially along Special Boulevards. Based on information that the applicant could proceed under the original Conditional Use Permit, however, she would opt- for the better design and grudgingly eliminate the undergrounding requirement. Planning Commission Minutes _1 - April 22, 1987 i Chairman McNiel supported> utiI i ty undergrounding along Base Line. He stated that the City ;has fought hard for undergrounding and did not think the requirement should relaxed. Mr. Buller pointed out that the original Conditional Use Permit for the project allows a certain- square foot addition. He indicated that if the difference between the square ;footage originally approved and that which is being proposed is less than the 5,0;00 square feet the current undergrounding policy would exempt this project. He added that Condition la could reflect this condition. Ralph Hansoms Deputy City Attorney, suggested an addition to Building and Safety Division condition 1 by adding section "C" stating "to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Building Official that agreements or other considerations have been developed for fire call -separation at the property line as required by the Building Code" . Mr. Sheriff indicated that the developer would agree to this condition; however, stated that the applicant has agreed to record all parcels as one. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, to approve theproject with additional conditions that the colors and architectural details be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval , as well as the continuation of the facade along the east building elevation, the inclusion of Building and Safety condition 1 c. as ;proposed by the City Attorney, the statement added to Engineering condition la as proposed by the City planner to elimination the utility undergrounding requirement if the project does not exceed 5,000 square feet from the existing CUP. Motion failed 2-2, with CommissionersChi ti ea and McNi l voting No. Motion: Moved by Chitie , seconded by McNiel , to approve the project with undergrounding required along Base Line, the colors, architectural details, and east building elevation facade to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee; and the inclusion of Building and Safety condition I c. as proposed by the City Attorney. Motion failed -2 with Commissioners Emerick and Tolstoy voting No. r. Buller suggested that the utilities along Base Line be required but recommended the following statement be added: "cif the additional square footage does not exceed 5,000 square feet from that which has been previously approved by the existing Conditional Use Permit. . ." He indicated that if the records prove that the applicant is increasing the approved building square footage more than 5,000 square feet the utilities along Base Line must be placed underground:. Motion;:: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving the modification to Conditional Use Permit84-34 with conditions requiring that the colors and architectural details be submitted to the Design Reviews Committee, for review and approval ; as well as the continuation of the facade along the east building elevation; the inclusion of Building and Safety Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 1987 condition I c. as proposed by the City Attorney; the statement added to Engineering condition la as proposed by the City Planner stating that if the increase in building size is more than 5,000 square feet, underroundig of utilities along Base Line is required. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS. EM RIC , TOLSTOY, CHITIEA NOES: COMMISSIONERS; MNIEL ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7-11 - ELKS LODGE NO. S`70 - A proposal to locate an El s Lodge of 6,OS7` square feet within a multi-tenant industrial center in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 6 , located at 8686 Utica Avenue - APN 209-142-18. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Ralph Manson, Deputy City Attorney, suggested that Condition 1 of the Resolution be deleted which established that the approval would be void upon change of ownership or if the use ceases. He further suggested a modification to condition 6 to reflect that plans are to be submitted and approved b Foothill Fire District. Chairman Mcil opened the public hearing. John Mannerino, 5610 Sapphire, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the request. Commissioner Chitiea asked for a clarification of the applicant' s request to hold 24 parties throughout the year. Mr. Mannerino responded that the Lodge would do business under a private club license which does not permit the sale of alcoholic beverages to the general public; however regulations would allow the Lodge to purchase 24 catering permits per site. Commissioner Chitiea: asked if Mr. Mannerino could project the number of people who would use the facility under these circumstances. Mr. Mannerino indicated that it could be as fern as ten and as many as 200. Commissioner Tolsoy questioned the number of ,people who would use the facility at lunch time. i Planning Commission Minutes -1 - April 22, 1987 Mr. Mannerino advised that lunches were not currently proposed; ;however, if lunches were proposed at a later date the establishment would only be open to club members. He indicated that luncheons would be held on special occasions and not on a day-to-day basis. Jim Barton,; 80 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, was concerned that the parking be totally contained within this site. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that there would be a code enforcement problem with trying to monitor the parking situation. He indicated one solution would be to place' a condition that any rental agreements processed by the Elks Lodge would include a statement as to where attendants could or could not park. He further suggested that the responsibility for the enforcement of parking be placed on the Elks Lodge. He advised that if surrounding tenants experience a parking problem, they could contact the City at which time revocation might be considered. Commissioner Emerick suggested security guards or members of the lodge be required to monitor the parking situations when large parties are held at the establishment. Mr. Mannerino stated the Elks Lodge would be willing to put a condition in the lease that the Elks Lodge would guarantee against infringement of parking on off-parcel sites* He further Mated that County ordinances require security guards for largo parties, therefore that concern would be taken care of by those means'. There were no further` comments,: therefore the public Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit ; 87-1.1 with amendments to include the requirement' of a notice to and renter of the establishment that all parking must occur on this parcel . In addition, a representative of the Elks would be responsible` for monitoring,the enforcement of this condition with violation of this condition being grounds for consideration of revocation of the CUP; deletion of condition I as proposed by the City Attorney; and modification to condition 6 to require plans to be submitted to and approved by Foothill Fire District, Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TUL TOY, CNITIEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -13- April 22, 1987 K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 87-14 NEW HOPE CHURCH - A request establish a 7,000 square foot church within an existing 190 square foot multi-'tenant industrial facility in the General Industrial Land Use District (Subaru, ) , located at 95 1-A Business Center Or - APN 9-0 1- 9._ Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Staff suggested that Condition 1 be deleted and that Condition 6 be modified to state that plans should be submitted to and approved by the Foothill Fire District and Building and Safety Division prior to building permits. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Bryon Spradlin, 9408 Hillside, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the Resolution and Conditions of Approval . There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea was concerned that all safety elements be installed prior to occupancy. She felt that Condition 7 should be modified. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, suggested that Condition 7 be modified to state that the building could not be occupied except for offices until the Building and Fire Code requirements are met. Commissioner Toltoy stated that the City has experienced many problems in the past with trying to enforce compliance of the Building and Fire Code requirements if the structure is allowed to be occupied prior to meeting these conditions. He suggested that in all applications of this type, staff include the language that the building could not be occupied until completion of the safety requirements. Commissioner Chitiea concurred and further stated she would like to see' a stricter interpretation of the Foothill Fire District' s requirements. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 87-14, with modifications to include the deletion of Condition 1 modification to Condition 6 to require plans to be submitted to and approved by the Foothill Fire District* and modification to Condition 7 to state that the building may not be occupied except for office activities until completion of all Foothill ' Fire District and Building and Safety requirements. Motion carried by the following vote': AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLSTOY, EMERIC , MCNIEL HOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -14- April 22, 1987 'I i L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1.3305 - LEWIS HOMES - The total development of a residential subdivision of08 acres, within the Terra Vista Planned Community (Low-Medium Residential 4-8 dwelling units per acre into 48 lots) , located on the southwest corner of Terra Vista Parkway and Mountain View Drive - APN P 7 151-1 . Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the applicant for this item requested it continuance to the May 27, 1987 agenda. j Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chltiea, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13305 to the May 27, 1987 agenda NEW BUSINESS M. TERRA VISTA NORTHEAST QUADRANT` AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN LEWIS HOMES Consi eratio`n of an area d eve opment playa for the northeast qua d rant df the Terra Vista Planned Community for that portion of Tura Vista located south of Base Line Road, north of the central major greenway spine, east of Milliken Avenue, and west of :Rochester Avenue. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. John Melchor, representing' Lewis Homes, gave an overview of the request. Commissioner Emerick stated he would like ;to see additional landscaping amenities such as plaza elements, drinking fountains and benches. Commissioner Chitiea felt that all - trails in the City !should be ,reviewed by the Trails Committee. She felt that it is important that the trail beginnings and endings were appropriate as well as the trail design. She suggested that the condition be amended to require the trails to be reviewed by the Trails Committee for their comments prior to review by the Design Review Committee. Motion': Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving Terra Vista. Northeast Quadrant Area Development Plan, with an amendment to Planning Division 1 to require the trails alignment for the greenway system and the open space node area to be referred to the Trails Committee for their recommendation to the Design Review Committee. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes a1 April 22, 1987 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA TOL TQY, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS* NONE -carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS N. INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS - SUBAREA 8 - Review of existing Subarea B land use n eveldpment stars ards requested by the City Council . Brad Buller, City Planner, presented the staff report. It was the 'consensus of the Commission that the existing Industrial Specific Plan provisions for Subarea B are appropriate. Additionally, the Commission concurred with staff" s recommendation relative to ,line ' of sight studies for developments adjacent to the I-IS Freeway. O', COMMUNITY PARKWAY TRAIL ON BERYL The report was received and filed as information only. P. BILLBOARD AMORTIZATION Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff to proceed with establishment of a list of existing billboards in the City along with the probability of those signs being removed by development. PLANNING DIVISION WORK PROGRAM - Oral Report The report was received and filed. COMMISSION BUSINESS There was no Commission business. Planning Commission Minutes -16- April ` , 198 PUBLIC COMMENTS `mere were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT Motion. Moved by Tdlst ,y, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 11; 0 p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submit d, Brad Buller Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -17- April 22, 17 -CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting April B, 1987 Chairman Larry McNil 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 McNil then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS. PRESENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emeri;ck, Larry McNil , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner flan Coleman, Senior Planner; Bruce Gook, Associate Planner; Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Greg Cage, Assistant Planner, Barrye Hanson, Senior CivilEngineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary; Rubin Yu, Associate Planner CONSENT CALENDAR A. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12873 - PARAGON HOMES - A total residential develd ent o? 30 single family etached homes on' G0.S acres of land in the Low-Medium Density Residential District 48 dwelling units/acre) , located on the east side of Haven Avenue, between Lemon Avenue and.. Banyan Street - APN 2 1-271-2G, 30, 44, 45, 4E "and 47. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW B -29 - BARNES - The eve o ent df a -stary 10,566 square ?oat u, ti tenant building in the General Industrial District (Subarea ;3) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located on the northwest corner of gth Street and Helms Avenue _ APN 208- 02-1 . . RESOLUTION FOR VARIANCE 7-0 - DECKK DEVELOPMENT - A request to reduce the side and front yard setback areas, and to exceed the height limitation for a proposed -11,000 square foot office building at 9113 Foothill, Boulevard in the Office Professional District located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Hellman Avenue, and east of Vineyard Avenue APN 208-2 1-09, Commissioner Tolstoy 'requested that Item C of the 'Consent Calendar be pulled for discussion, Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adopt Items A and of the Consent Calendar. C. RESOLUTION FOR VARIANCE 67- 2 - DEC DEVELOPMENT Commissioner Tolstoy was concerned with` the tuck under parking, design and asked that it be reviewed by the Design Review Committee to insure the design mitigated the Commission' s, concern, Motion: Moved by Chi-tiea, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to adopt Item C' of the Consent Calendar. The tuck under parking is to be reviewed by the Design Review Committee, PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Mc i el advised that the following items were being recommended for continuance, therefore would be advanced in the agenda, E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 10393 _ EITHLUSk COMPANY' - A sub ivislon of 79.2 acres of and into 33 parses in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 16) located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 4th Street - APN 2 0 062-13, 11, 02, 26, 33, 32, Related File. DR - . (Continued from. March 25, 1907 meeting) P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 06-37 - KEITH/LUSK COMPANY The evelopment of a Master Pan for a 7g.17 acre industrial park consisting of 33 lots in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 16 , located at the northwest quadrant of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - AN 21 -06 -02, 11, 13, 26, 32 AND 33. Related File: PM 10393. ' (Continued from March 2 , 197 meeting) Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Bob Cunningham, representing the applicant, requested a continuance to the Planning Commission agenda of May 13, 1987, There were no further: comments. Planning Commission Minutes -2- April D, 1987 Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried to continue Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 10393 and Environmental Assessment and Development Review - 7 to the Planning Commission agenda o May 13 1987 F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 6-30 - BROWN LEARY The d ve opment of an 88 bed acute psychiatric hospita , approximatel, 53000 square feet of floor area, on 6.12 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea ` 7) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Arrow Route and Red Oak Street a- APN 08-351- , (Continued from. February 25, 1887) Chairman McNiel announced the Planning Commission was in receipt of a letter from this applicant requesting that the item be withdrawn from the agenda. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 8 -08 AMENDED - SPETNAOEL - request to waive the maximum height requirement of 56 feet for an extendable radio antenna to allow an existing antenna to be extended to 7 feet on a .47 acre parcel in the Very Low Residential District (less than dwelling units/acre) located at 5327 Carol Avenue - APN 1061- 1-19 (Continued from March 25, 187) Oreg ,Oage, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing. Charles Spetnagel , 537 Carol , Rancho Cucamonga, gave an overview of his request. 8e felt that the City' s code was in violation of P B-1 and urged the Commission' s support of his request in its original form, or that they direct staff to present an alternative which would be acceptable to him and the City. Commissioner Emermick asked clarification of PRB-1. r. Spetnagel stated that these letters stood for Public Radio Branch and was put out by the Federal Communications' System. Mr, Spetnagel advised that this was part of the Commission' s packet Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, advised that this was a federal directive which could be binding on the City's ordinance. Be advised that. what Mr. Spetnagel recited was essentially the definitive statement on the pre-emption of local ordinances. He advised that Rancho" Cucaonga's ordinance contains the balance of providing ghat appears to be a reasonable height for amateur communications and balances against it the recognized rights of other citizens in the surrounding area. Further, the ordinance appears to meet the basics of P B-1 in that it allows reasonable communication. Planning Commission Minutes -3- April 8, 1987 Commissioner Tolstoy asked; of the frequencies Mr. Spetnagel wished to operate on, which one would require a tower over SD feet. Mr. Spetnagel stated that 40, 20, and 80 meter bands would require a tower over 50 feet. He stated that the Commission had discussed this issue at their January 2th meeting and suggested that the Commissioners review the Minutes of that meeting which were included in the report. John Weymeyer, 8149 Lucinda, Rancho, Cucamonga, opposed the 'variance request. Mr. Weymeyer presented a petition containing 36 names in opposition to the antenna height Sonny Sen ario, 8181 Lucinda, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the antenna height. He advised that he contacted the FCC and discovered that they have no rules governing Haight of antennas and that this limitation was heft up to local ,jurisdictions. He was concerned that this issue has been heard by the Planning Commission and City Council a number of times, which he felt was waste of his tax: dollars and his time Chairman Mciel advised that the Planning ;Commission was following the process which was designed to allow all parties an opportunity to present their arguments. Penny Senario, 8181 Lucinda, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the antenna height based on aesthetic concerns. r. Sptnagl stated he was paying for this process, not the taxpayers. H advised that his tower height had been reduced to 30 feet since the January 2th meeting. Further, he had submitted documentation and engineered drawings to City departments. He stated that he had attempted twice to gain permits for the tower and was denied both times. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.. Mr. Buller advised that the tower in existence is a free standing non- retractable tower which is in violation of the `City' s current'standards. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, advised that the issue the Commission must deal with is the Planning issue of making the findings to grant the variance request Commissioner Chitiea stated she saw no new information presented tonight regarding special circumstances that would warrant granting the variance. Commissioner Fmerick agreed and further stated that the applicant has made a lack of showing why the four findings could be met. He could not support the variance request. Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 8, 1987 Commissioner Tol stoy stated the City° s ordinance is reasonable in that a 50 foot height for most bands is a reasonable height. He recommended denial of the request. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Eme is ,; to adopt the Resolution denying Environmental Assessment and variance BG-C . Motion carried by the following vote* AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA EMERIC , MCNIEL, T LSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS. NONE ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS; NONE carried Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the applicant would have a ten day timef ame in which to appeal this decision of the Planning Commission. If an appeal was not filed, staff would begin taking the steps necessary to proceed with code enforcement of the antenna.. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 10208 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA A 'division of 1 -SE acres into 2 parce s wit in t e 'Low- e iur -0 dwelling units per acre Development District located; on the south side of Feron Boulevard. between Ramona Avenue and Turner Avenue - APN 208-085-02, 03, and 14. B4rry'e Hanson, Senior: Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing. There were no comments therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emeric , to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and. Parcel Map 10208. Motion carried by the followingvote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, EMERIC , CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried' H. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12830 - CITATION - A request to delete a condition of approva requiring a modffied cu - e-sac: to be constructed at the north end of Garnet Street for a previously approved tract consisting of 103 single family lots on 21.41 acres of land in the Low-Medium Density Residential District 4-8 dwelling units per acre) , located on the west side of Beryl Street, north of Base Line Road - APN 02-21-40.' Planning Commission Minutes -5- April H, 198 Barrye Hanson, Senior' Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Merry ;Linton, representing the applicant, advised that the modification was being requested on behalf of the existing;residents. Geraldine Putnam, 90 Lavine, supported the deletion of the modified cul-de- sac and objected to the disruption of the parkway. She indicated that either alternate 2 or 3 proposed by City staff;would be acceptable to the existing residents on Lavine Street:. Alex Sanchez, 9046 Lavine, supported deletion of the modified cul-de-sac. Be additionally stated a concern with a one-foot opening left in the block wall at the end of the cul-de-sac, and with the construction of two-story homes. Mrs. Hillard, 7057 Garnet, was concerned with the installation of- a sidewalk, and supported the deletion of the modified cul-de-sac. She indicated that the neighborhood prsentliy experiences problems with teenagers from the high school congregating at the end of the cul-de-sac* There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the Planning Commission 'requirement of a cul- de-sac, was a good one. In this case, however, he supported Alternate 2 since it did not intrude on the lots of the adjacent residents and does allow for street sweeping' Commissioner Chid ea agreed and felt Alternate 2 would be a good compromise between City policy and the desires of the neighborhood. she asked if staff would comment on the addition of a street light at the end of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Hanson indicated that he was unaware of the location of existing lights on the street and advised that staff could look into the addition of a street light. Commissioner Chitiea asked if staff was aware of the problem with the opening in the block wall . Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the block wall was required as a condition of approval of the tract and that staff would look into the situation. Chairman Mriel supported Alternative 2 and felt it would be a good compromise. Motion: Moved by Tostoy, seconded by Emerick, to deny the modification to Tentative Tract 12830. Staff was directed to proceed with Alternate 2 as presented. Motion carried by the following vote* Planning Commission, Minutes - - April 8, 1987 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TULSTOY, EMERICK, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ASSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-37 MASCARENAS - The request to modify an ­a­p`proveZ conceptual Master Plan rem one restaurant pad to the deve,lopment of a 2,100 square foot fast food drive-through restaurant and a 1.,750 square foot retail building on 0.84 acres of land within a D acre approved shopping center in the General Commercial District, located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Town Center Drive - APN 1077-401-22. Nancy Fong,: Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Mciel opened the public hearing.. Dan Richards, 8331 Utica, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project, Commissioner Emerick was concerned with the amount of cars stacking behind the order window of the fast food restaurant Mr . Richards indicated that staff° s Alternative E-1 should mitigate any problems with stacking of cars at the order window. Commissioner Emorick noted that the order and pick up windows were fairly close together and asked if the applicant anticipated traffic congestion doe to their proximity. Mr. Richards did not anticipate any congestion due :to the location of the two windows. He advised that if these issues were of concern to the Commission, they could be addressed during Design Review. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed, Commissioner Chitiea stated that the architectural changes that have been made have come a long; way and are representative of the Design Review Committee' s comments and were acceptable from her point of view. She indicated the major concern was the site plan and the stacking of cars. Her concern would be that the stacking not impact the entry way which would be served by the traffic signal . Planning Commission Minutes - - April D, 1987 Commissioner Emerick stated he liked the architecture of the :building and did not have an objection to the land use. His concern was the stacking or loading of traffic. He felt it may be an inherent impossibility because of the design constraints of the site to address adequately the stacking and loading issues. Commissioner Tolstoy stated when reviewing this site, not only the Brunswick site should be considered but also the adjacent theater site as well . He felt the site had a circulation, problem which he was unsure could be mitigated. He was concerned that people using the traffic configuration would be confused by the irregular shape of the lot, especially when the theater and bowling alley traffic is heavy. He questioned the feasibility of using an "entry only" and "exit only" type of configuration, thus creating one entrance and one exit. Paul Rougeau, City Traffic Engineer, commented that one-way aisles were considered during the review of this project; however, this concept was not presented as an alternative. He indicated that a study regarding the amount of adequate room for stacking had not been, done by City engineering staff, but possibly has been done by the fast food industry. . Buller recapped the Commission' s comments that it finds the design of the site as far as architecture and landscaping adequate and acceptable for this location. However, the traffic and stacking issues were of major concern t the Commission. He suggested consideration of a continuance to allow staff to research and analyze regulations for fast 'food restaurants in other cities, a well as standards for=stacking. ' Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. r•. Richards stated he would consent to a continuance to work with staff o the traffic and stacking issue Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 8 - 7 to the May 18, 1987 agenda. J. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 12952 - GLENFED - A request to delete a condition of approval- requiring the a ition of one floor" plan with elevations for a previously approved tract consisting of 172 single family lots on 34 acres of land in the Low-Medium Density Residential District 4-8 dwelling units per acre) , located at the end of 19th Street, south of Highland Avenue - APN202-211-36. cott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes -8- April 8, 17 Mot ion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving the deletion of Condition 9 of Resolution 86-38. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, EMERICK, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13443 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY K_res i dent i aT -_. tract subdivision' of in -i-h—e--low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) , within the Victoria Planned Community into 144 lots, located on the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane - APN 227-011-01, 02, 03, and 227- 081-01. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steve" lord, representing the William Lyon Company, stated concurrence with the Resolution and conditions of approval . Commissioner Tolstoy asked if a time frame had been established for completion of Th-e Lakes. Mr. Ford advised that he would be meeting with City staff on May 5th at which time the areas of setting design criteria, engineering criteria and time frame for preparing an initial submittal to the Design Review Committee would be discussed. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13443. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK, TOLSTOY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -9- April 8, 1987 L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13444 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - A residential tract subdivision of 46.91 acres in the Low Resi `ontial District -4 dwelling units per re) within the Victoria Planned Community Into 176 lots, located at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad - APN 227-011-01, 02, 07 and 227- 0 1-01, OD, 09, 10. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the 'staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steven Ford, representing the William Lyon, addressed the issue of the school park sites and advised that a number of meetings had been held between the William Lyon Company, City staff, School District representatives and members of the community. He advised that a consensus had been reached on the preliminary design for the sites and that exhibits would be presented to the Pares Commission for their review at their next meeting. He further stated that the time frame for completion of the schools was in very preliminary stages; however, the park sites would be built as part of the infrastructure improvements. He concurred with the Resolution and conditions of approval . Douglas Lion, 12477 iron Bark,, Rancho Cucamonga, commented that the school park sites should' be large enough to accommodate all of the residents who will be using the sites when Victoria is fully developed. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion. Moved by Tolsoy, seconded by Emerick, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13444 Motion carried by the following vote. AYES® COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, EMERIC , CHITI'EA, MDNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried 1 0.15 p.m. - Planning Commission d o ass on Recessed 10,00 p.m. Planning Commission i Convened with all members present Planning Commission Minutes -10 April 0, 1987 M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 130 - LEWIS HOMES - A total evelopment residential subdivision of 24.19 acres within the Terra Vista Planned Community (Medium-High Residential , 14- 4 dwelling units per acre) into one lot for condominium purposes for 38 dwelling units, located on the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Church Street - APN 10 -41 1ST Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Cook presented a revised Resolution incorporating conditions of the Design Review Committee. Chairman Mc Niel opened the public hearing. John Melchr, representing the applicant, objected to the requirement to construct Milliken Avenue from Base Line to Foothill Boulevard. He felt that this requirement: was overreaching by the City and stated that only 35%of the traffic would be generated by the residents of Terra Vista. He stated that the attorney for Lewis Homes indicated that the requirement was excessive to the point of being an illegal exaction. He further stated that the Map Act, Section 66411, does not give the City the authority to require construction ahead of the reasonable need of the facility. He concurred with the remaining conditions of approval There were no further comments,;therefore the public hearing was closed. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated he basically agreed with Mr. Mlcher's recitation of the law. He suggested staff clarify the reasonableness of the conditions Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, staged that the City Concil 's direction was that large portions of streets constructed in Tierra Vista at one time. He pointed out that Milliken Avenue has been one of the streets specifically identified by the Council as a street that should be constructed as soon a possible. He advised"" that the William Lyon Company to the north is building long lengths of streets as part of their conditions of approval . Russell Maguire, City Engineer, stated that if each individual project was taken alone the measure of reasonableness is difficult to measure; however, this is one of many projects that accumulatively affect the impact. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to respond to further questions by the Commission. He asked what kind of alternatives to the construction of Milliken the applicant would propose. Mr. Mel Cher advised that for the time being access to the project would be provided by Elm and Church Streets He stated this would basically be one point of access, however, would not be inconsistent considering` there will only be 384 units. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that the Development Code clearly states that two means of access must 'be provided, i Planning Commission Minutes -11_ April B, 1987 i i, i Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Emerick noted that Milliken is entirely within the Terra Vista tract. Not only for the good of the project, but for the entire community he felt Milliken should be constructed to relieve the traffic; congestion from Haven Avenue. He stated that the Commission needed more facts on which to base how reasonable the condition was. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed and stated the Commission should see the overall picture and: needs to see what is developed and ghat has been approved of the entire circulation problem He was concerned with traffic on Haven. Commissioner Chitiea stated that primary and secondary access is very important and agreed that looking at the total picture would be a lot more meaningful: Chairman McNiel supported a continuance of this matter to allow further information to be presented. M . Melcher recognized the Commissioners' concerns from a planning perspective; however, he could not consent to a continuation of; the 'public hearing. He asked that the Commission act to either approve or deny the project. He indicated that should the Commission deny the project, it should be stated that denial was based on the applicant' s objection to Engineering Condition one Them were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioners Emerick .Mated he °would not support deletion of the requirement to construct Milliken, without further information. Commissioner Tolstoy concurred that not enough information had been provided to address the issue of Milliken; therefore, rather than make a wrong decision he supported staff° s conditioner Motion:: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13270, with the inclusion of Design Review conditions as presented by staff in the revised Resolution. Motion carried by the following vote® AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERIC , TOESTCIY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -1 - April 8. 1987 I N. TENTATIVE TRACT 134 REVISED PANNDN DEVELOPMENT - The development of sing family detached homes on 11..6 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) , located at the northeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and 19th Street - APN D -191-1 , 23. (In addition, applicant has requested a Tree Removal Permit to remove Eucalyptus trees.) Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. He advised that Design Review condition 18 of the Resolution should be modified to read Lots 12, 13, 16, 63 and 67. Further, condition 20 should be modified to read a minimum 13 foot corner sideyard setback as measured from the curb is required for Lot 64 and a minimum 15 foot corner sideyard setback as measured from the curb on Lot 51. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Petar Laden, representing the applicant stated concern with access to be granted to the northern parcels. He requested that access through this tract only be granted :after construction is completed on the northern parcels. H was concerned with heavy ;equipment trucks damaging the decorative pavement provided by Tract 13342 and noted that the repair of such pavement would be the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association of Tract 13342. He cormnented that the northern parcels during construction could gain access from Finch Avenue, Rarrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that Finch' treet is within the future freeway right-of-way. He stated that if the property to the north does not develop before the freeway is constructed.., this would be the only access to that property at that time. If the property was developed soon, it could take construction access from Finch Avenue; however, if the freeway is under construction access would not be possible. Mr. Laden stated he would 'accept a condition that the northern parcels would be required to use Finch Avenue for construction access prior to construction of the freeway. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, advised that this would be a legitimate condition to place on the northern parcels when they develop. He stated that a condition on this tract would merely be an informational item. Chairman McMiel asked if there would be a way to flag the northern parcels so that this condition could be placed on development of those parcels. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated he could work with the developer on a condition which would be to his satisfaction if the developer would be willing to leave the condition as written to the satisfaction of the City Planner, City Engineer, and City Attorney. He indicated that the proper method might be a conditional dedication. ' Planning Commission Minutes -13 April 3, 1987 Commissioner Emerick was concerned with the use of cultured stone on the flood walls along Hermosa. He was of the opinion that natural river rock should be used and that high quality landscaping be installed at that location. He suggested that Condition 7 of the Tract Map :'be modified to require use of natural rock. He also suggested that natural river rock be used on the theme wall , particularly at the intersection of Hermosa and lgth Street. r. Laden expressed concern with the 15 gallon size trees required for rear yard landscaping. He advised that the development complies with Title 24 requirements, and felt that methods other than planting of trees would mitigate solar heat gain r. Buller suggested that Planning Condition 19 be modified to include language stating that other alternates could be used subject to review and approval by the City planner. r. Laden opposed the condition requiring planting of 15 gallon size trees as landscaping buffer Tong the north property line. He additionally requested that. Standard Condition E-16 be modified to require only those retaining walla which are exposed to public viers be provided with decorative treatment. ; There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea commented on the applicant' s request relative to access to the north and stated that the request; was reasonable. She suggested that, staff work with the applicant to address this issue. Relative to the landscaping :on the north property line, she stated that the view to the north is a valid point. She suggested the 'tree ;planting in a windrow affect leaving view corridors would be more appropriate. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the view might be blocked by the elevation o the freeway ,at that point. r. Huller suggested that condition 5 be modified to require one tree per lot. Motion: Moved; by Chitiea, seconded by Emeric , to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13342, with amendments to Design Review Condition 5 to modify the requirement to one 15 gallon tree per lot; Condition 18 modified to read lots 12, 13, 16, 63 and 67; Condition 19 modified to allow other solar alternatives subject to review and approval of the City ;Planner; Condition 20 modified to require minimum 13 foot corner sideyard setbacks as measured from the curb on Lot 54 and 15 Feet on Lot 51 as measured from the curb; Engineering Condition 7 modified to require construction of the flood wall to be natural rock, and, Standard Condition E-16 modified to require all retaining walls exposed to public view to be provided with decorative treatment. Motion carried b the following vote: y g Planning Commission Minutes -14- April d, 197 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICk, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT® COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried 0. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84- AMENDED LAN BENTSEN MASTER PLAN -; MORSE C NSULTING BROUP - An amendment to t e i�pr_o_v_ed Master Plan text specifying a provision for a major open space area of 17000 square feet within the western portion of Phase III on approximately 40 acres of land located north of Highland Avenue, south side of Lemon Avenue, east of Hagen Avenue. Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked how fixed>the 1 7000 square footage was; Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the square -footage should exceed 7000 square feet. He suggested that the condition require a minimum of 7000 to clarify the intent. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion Moved by Emeri k, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving the amendment to Development Review 84-22. Motion carried by the fallowing vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERIC , TOLSTOY, CH TIER, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried NEW BUSINESS Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-0 ® DICKER- ARINOTON - The---- si gn nevi ova of elevations and detailed si to p an for two proposed satellite buildings totaling 13,800 square feet within a 15.3 acre approved integrated shopping center, in a Neighborhood Commercial District of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast corner of Base Line Road and Haven Avenue - APN ' 0 -80 - , 27. Nancy Fong, `Associate:Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment Planning Commission Minutes -15- April B, 1987 Ji Polderi`ng, representing the applicant, concurred with the Resolution and Conditions of approval . She requested clarification of Building and Safety condition 2. Brad Duller-, City Planner, advised that this condition was imposed to require the applicant to provide plans on how the drainage for the two pads concludes at one point. There were no further public comments. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 8 -D , Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: NI IE_A, TDLS TOY, ERICK, MCNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT:: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT" AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - - WESTERN PROPERTIES - The deve opment` of an office park consisting; of four -story buildings totaling 250,000 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- 1- , 1 , and Dg (Related to this project is Tree Removal Permit 8 - 0, requesting the removal of three; groves of Eucalyptus trees (approximately SS trees) within the site. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. John Mel Cher, representing the ;applicant, gave a slide presentation for the Commission's consideration. He stated that the architectural style provides the transition and compatibility with the surrounding area. There were no further comments. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the Design Review Committee found the site plan innovative and functional . The concern with the architecture was that this is a very urban looking complex within a residential area; however, mass and scale were of more concern than the architecture. I Planning Commission Minutes 1E April 8, 198 i Commissioner Tolstoy stated that when the original proposal came before the Design Review Committee, it was one building with concepts for others. He recalled that the original proposal was similar to a garden office park and looked like an apartment house. He stated that the original Committee comments were that the development should be a more formal architecture. Commission Emerick agreed that a heritage type architecture Which mould blend with the Virginia Dare Center would be more appropriate at this location. Commissioner Chitiea pointed out that there are heritage architectural styles which are different from that which exists with the Virginia Dare Center and stated she would< refer to see another style for this site. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed and further stated_ he would prefer to see a style akin to that on the Virginia Dare Center rather than akin to the commercial district south of Foothill Boulevard. He did' not think that the residential tract across Church Street to the north should havemuch architectural hearing on this project.` Commissioner Chitiea stated that if the applicant is willing to work with the Design Review Committee she felt the project could be be `brought to a paint at which everyone would be satisfied. John Melcher, representing; the applicant, asked that the Commission' s action be to either approve or deny the project. Chairman McNiel questioned the reason for this request. Mr. Melcher stated that the developer has been working on this project for many months and felt` than there were voices on the City Council who would listen to an appeal . Motion Mowed by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to direct staff to present a Resolution of Denial for the Commission' s consideration o the May 8, 1987 agenda... DIRECTOR'S REPORTS S. CHAFFEY SCHOOL DISTRICT NEW HIGH SCHOOL SITE - Pursuant to State law ucaflion o e 900 , the C affe Joint union High School District requests the Planning Commission to comment on a proposed high school site located on the northwest corner of future Victoria Park Lane and Rochester Avenue. Rubin Yu, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -17 April D, 1987 Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that a three party agreement between the School District, William Lyon Company and the City would be required for road and other public improvements. Commissioner Tol stay hoped that the architects for the School District would consider the surrounding neighborhood in their design. He commented that the road redesign by the William Lyon Company in response to the School District's needs worked out very well, Commissioner Chitiea asked that the orientation of the elementary school and traffic concerns be forwarded to the School District. Chairman McNiel agreed that when the site plan; is presented to the State, they should be made aware of the proximity of the elementary school . Commissioner Ch tiea pointed out that the concerns are with traffic and circulation as ' well as intimidation of the high school students on the elementary students , Steve Butters, representing the School District, stated the School District wants to work with the City on the design of schools. He indicated that the high school would be oriented to the, north and east and, would be at least 1/4 mile away from the elementary school It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff` to forward the recommendations of the staff report to the School District. T. RANCHO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AMENDMENT NO. 1 - Adoption of the Resolution approving the aeWd Re eve opment Plan as it relates to its conformity with the General Plan and review of the Draft Supplement 'to the Environmental Impact Report for the Rancho Redevelopment Project Area Amendment No. 1. Linda Daniels, Senior Redevelopment Agency Analyst, presented the staff report. Chairman McNrel ;invited public comment. There were no comments. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adopt the Resolution approving the amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. i Planning Commission Minutes -t8 April 8, 198 H. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN STUDY - A presentation of the drat Specific Plan for the Foothill Boulevard Corridor with a brief description of the plan formulation process and its general policy direction. The purpose of this presentation is to introduce the Planning Commission to the status of the project and to establish further review, format and public 'hearing schedule. Otto kroutil , Senior Planner, gave an overview of the Specific Plan process. Van Stevens, representing the project consultant, FORMA, gave an overview of the Plan Rick Gomez, representing FIRMA, gave an overview of the land use concepts. . Kroutil stated that the purpose this evening was an introduction to the Foothill Plan. He advised that advertised public hearing dates would be established, at which time public testimony would be taken and an in depth review of the Plan would be accomplished by the Commission. V. PLANNING DIVISION WORK PROGRAM - Oral Report Brad Buller;, City Planner, presented the report. The report was received and Bled by the Commission COMMISSION BUSINESS W. SELECTION OF PLANNING COMMISSIONER TO SERVE ON REVIEW PANEL FOR TRAILS STUDY - Oral Report Commissioner Chitiea was selected to serve on the review panel for the 'Trail Study, with Commissioner Tolstoy selected as alternate. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. Planning Commission Minutes - g_ " April B, 1987 ADJOURNMENT Motion, Moved; by Tolstoy, seconded by Chiti a unanimously carried, to adjourn. : U a.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bu er` Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes - U April 8, 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regul ar Meeti n March 25,< 1987 Chairman David Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at Liens Pare Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: F. David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Brine eric `, Larry McNiel , Peter Tol stoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Clan Coleman, Senior Planner;; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, Russell Maguire, city Engineer; Debra Meier, Assistant Planner; Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer; Chris Nest an, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that a ;Utility Ondergrounding Planning Commission rkhop would be held on April 29, 187 at Lions Park Community Center beginning at 6:00 p.m. He also announced that staff would be contacting the Commissioners to establish a hearing date for the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. PRESENTATION OF COMMENDATION RESOLUTION TO E. DAVID BARKER It was the consensus of the Commission that this item be mowed to the end of the agenda. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN It was the consensus of the Commission that this item be moved to the end of the agenda APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNi el , to approve the Minutes of June 25, 1986, with an amendment by Chairman Barker to page 7, Motion carried 3-2, with Commissioners Emeri ck: and -Tol stoy abstaining. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to approve the Minutes of January 28, 187 with amendments by Commissioner Chitiea to page g, and amendments by Chairman Barker to pages 14, 15, and 26. Motion: Mowed by Chitiea, seconded by Mc Niel , unanimously carried,, to approve the Minutes of February 1 , 1987 as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 86-02 e reques o amen a errs Vista Planned o uni y by establishing a Business Park Overlay Zone for areas designated, as Office Park, Commercial and Mixed Use within the Planned Community boundary. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TRACT 13057 ( ODIFICATION) - THE FIELDSTONE -_'MoUi Tica tron o con i ,ens o approva perroug rron oncr ng adjacent to deer Creek'for Tract 13057, an approved residential subdivision of 22.55 acres within the Victoria Planned Community (Low- Medium Residential , 4-6 dwelling units per acre`) into 147 lots, located at the southeast corner of Highland Avenue and Deer Creek =- APN 202-211-1 , 38. (Continued from February 25, 19 7 C. V O � ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 6-2 T VIEW AI e eve o en o a , square oo nranu a uring ware oue u ng addition to an existing 86,000 square foot building in the General Industrial/Rail Served District; (Subarea 5) located at the southeast corner of 7th Street and Center - APN 209-242-0 . I D. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 12902 - NORDIC - Design review of building e 'ewa ons an -pTo-f 51 ans f6F 29 P 6g1 a ily lots on 22.73 acres of land in the Very Low Density Residential District less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Hermosa Avenue, south of Almond Street - AP 1-071-05, 06, 25 26, ; 5 a 36. Planning Commission Minutes - - March 25, 1987 Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel;, unanimously carried, to adopt the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Barker announced that the following items were being recommended for continuance, therefore would be heard out of agenda order. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 86-0€1 (AMENDED) - SPETNAGEL - reques waive aim e r r' erg e r an extendable radio antenna to al l owwr an existing antenna to ' e extended to 72 feet on a .47 acre parcel in the Very Low Residential District (less than dwelling units per acre) located at 5327 Carol Avenue - APN 10b1-111-1g. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, suggested that this item be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of April 8, 1987. He stated that he had spoken to Mr. Spetnagel 's attorney earlier in the week and, had advised him that the Commission would be continuing the item in order to allow the City Attorneys the opportunity to review case law. Chairman Barker ;opened the public hearing'. Mr. Spetnagel consented to the continuance to allow him the opportunity to have legal 'counsel present. Motion: Moved by Emerik, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Environmental Assessment and Variance 86-08 to the Planning Commission meeting of April B, 1987. - Motion carried 4-1, with Commissioner Chitiea voting no. M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 1 393 EITH COMPANY - su v si on o . acres o an n o paroe s n n ns r ark District (Subarea 16), located at the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 4th Street - APN 10 062-13, 11 02, 26, 33, 32. (Related File: D BC- 7) 0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8 37 - KEITH COMP - e eve o en o S Xa—s-te—r--PTa—n---fo—r--a ---T97J7acre Un ua r a park consisting of 33 lots in the Industrial Park District - (Subarea 16), located at the northwest quadrant of 4th Street and Archibald Avenue - APN 10-06 -0 , 11, 13, 26, 32 and 33. (,Related File. PM 10393) Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 25, 1987 otion: Moved by Chit ea, seconded by M Niel , unanimously carried, to continue the public gearing for Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 10393 and continue New Business item Environmental. Assessment and Development Review B - 7 to April B 1987. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-02A - CITY CP H456R t6 aFren e CiRUIRM Mffiin o e enera an. Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion; Moved, by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to recoinmend issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 87-02A to the City Council . Motion carried by the following vote. AYES: COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, TCLSTOY, BARKER, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ®carried F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS14ENT AND GENERALPLAN AMENDMENT 6-0 - CITY CE e�ue o amen a an se Rifit o Efie Gen era an ow- edium Density Residential d4-8 dwelling units/acre to Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units/acre) and/or Very ;Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units/acre) for 68 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Wilson if extended) and Milliken (if extended) AP : 201-191-11, 17. (Continued from February 25, 1987) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 6-05 - CITY reques o amen a DiRlopment Distr-fid ap r oo on roll and "L " (Low-Medium ensity Residential - - dwelling units/acre)) to 'T' (Low Density Residential - -4 dwelling units/acre) and/or "VL" (Very Low Density Residential _ less ; than 2 dwelling units/acre) for 68 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Wilson of extended) and.. Milliken if extended) - AP 2 1-191- 1, 17. Cynthia Kinser, _Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. i Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 25, 1987 Michael Vairin, 8480; btic , Rancho Cucamonga, advised that he; was representing the applicant for Tentative Tract 13542, which was proposed to be developed on this site and was, being heard on this evening's agendas Mr. Yai ri n gave an overview of the product type and site plan for Tentative Tract 13542 and supported staff" s recommendation to amend this site to Low Density Residential. There were no farther comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick stated that he felt comfortable with the project designed by the Deer Creek. Company and felt the concerns of the Commission had been addressed. He supported the Low Density designation. Commissioners Tolstoy and McN el supported the Low Density designation and stated they were happy with the proposed Deer Creek project. Commissioner Chitiea ;supported the Very Low designation. She advised that all tracts north of Banyan were to be minimum half-acre equestrian lots; therefore, she felt more comfortable with the Very Low designation. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by M c� Niel , to recommend to the City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the Resolution approving the Low Density Residential designation (2-4 dwelling units/acre) for Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment _ 8 -00. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS EMERICK, MCNIEL, BARKER, TOLSTOY ROES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by McNiel , to recommend to the City Council the issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the Resolution approving the "L" (Low Density - 2-4 dwelling units/acre) designation for Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendment 86- S. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS EMERICK, MC IEL, BARKER, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA ABSENT.* COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes - - March 25, 198 1 G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13542 - DEER CREEK - A custom o su v on acres o and in the Low Medium Density Residential District l -8 dwelling units per acre), I located east of Chaffey College between Wilson Avenue and Banyan Street APN 201-191-17 and a portion of 1.-1 1. . Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Michael Val ri n, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project. e stated that the applicant was not particularly pleased with the final street configuration, however, understood the it 's concern with: high speeds coming dower the street grades. Therefore, the applicant consented to the present configuration. He requested that Planning Division condition 3 be modified to reflect that corner side yard fencing (decorative masonry block) shall be required only on Canistel Street. He also requested that the Planning Condition S be modified to reflect that buffering be required along the natural biological area between the residences along the west property line and Chaffey College. He further requested Engineering Standard Condition L-2 be modified to require 40 total feet of right-of-way dedication on Wilson. arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, suggested that 44 total feet be stricken from the condition and "asshown" substituted. Commissioner Cmerick asked if the landscaping along the west property line j wouldbe on the applicant's property or that of Chaffey College. r. Vairin indicated that the landscaping would be on the adjacent college property. He advised that the landscaping was being designed to tie into the Coll ege`s irrigation system. Further, that the applicant would he doing the design work and; installation of the landscaping and irrigation. Mr. Vairl advised that he had a letter from Chaffey College in, which they requested protection of their natural biological area.., which is approximately 700 feet. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the condition requiring the landscaping buffer between the residences and the College should remain, :with an understanding that the College could submit a letter to the City stating that they would rather not; have the 'landscaping. He pointed out that the City was not only protecting the interest of the College, but the interest of the future residents as well . Commissioner Chitiea suggested that the landscaping of the lower areas be provided by the developer in the back yams. r. Vairin commented that ;planting trees and ,yards does not always, insure that they will stay there since homeowners have different ideas of how they would like to design their backyards.and He agreed with Commissioner Tol stay+ that the applicant be allowed to work with the College on the issue. Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 25, 1987 Commissioner Emerick asked staff to comment on the applicant's request to only require corner side yard fencing along Canistel . Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that on all recent tracts of this size it has been the policy ;of the Commission to require corner side yard fencing on all corner lots. r. Vairin stated that on the interior the applicant has; found that the people who boy those lots normally are buying them for the ability to have better access to the rear yard for landscaping and pools. The applicant found in the past when there are fences or walls, people would either take them down or put holes in them to gain that access. He pointed out that the repair is often done badly since a different block or mortar might be used. Jim Barton, 5552 Canistel, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed the Commission as a resident and as a member of Chaffey College Board of Trustees. As a Trustee, Mr. Barton thanked the Deer Creek Company for meeting with the College to address concerns and issues, He concurred with Commissioner Tolstoy's recommendation to allow the applicant the; opportunity to work with the College on the landscape buffer. As a resident, he supported the developer's request to eliminate the cornier side yard fencing. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chi ti ea felt that Planning Condition 3 regarding side yard fencing should remain as proposed by staff. She stated that modification or removal of the condition would be inconsistent with past Planning Commission policy. She supported giving the applicant the flexibility to work with the College on the landscape ,buffer, however, she indicated that the ;buffer should be installed, whether the 'resultant solution is on the College's property or on the private property. Commissioner Tolstoy stated it would be to the advantage of both Chaffey College and future residents to have a landscape buffer the entire distance between the two properties. He strongly felt there should be a planted landscape buffer as well as a gall . Commissioner McNiel addressed the corner side yard fencing and stated if a theme were being created for Canistel , be could see no `reason why that theme should not continue along a parallel street on the opposite side of the tract. We could not support modification of the condition as requested by the applicant. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded Chit e , to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 1 with a modification to Engineering Standard Condition L-2 to reflect right-of-way dedication as shown for Wilson Avenue. Motion carried by the following vote Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 25, 1987 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: . dI E L.. V {# p(Ey T4 6:. 1p,y, {wp.gy+. NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13316 - FRIEDMAN HOMES - 551 rest en a eve oilmen of 123 s ng ar#r s 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 Earrari Avenue - APN 241- 71-14 37, and 45. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Mr. Murphy advised that Resolution condition 8a should be modified to read the first pole south of the north tract boundary. Further, that Standard Condition L-2 should be modified to reflect 28 feet on Earrari Street.` Chairman Barker advised that the Planning Commission was in receipt of letters which had not been included in the staff ;report from Dorothy Reese, Dr. Melvin kornblatt, Mr. & Mrs. Roger Hudlow, Mr. & Mrs. Gary Elinard, and Mr. & Mrs. Allen Jones which expressed various concerns including homes backing onto Almond, keeping of horses, landscaping requirements, and street improvements on Almond. He then opened the public hearing. Martin n Dowd, representing ';the applicant, gave an overview of the project. He .stated that the individuals expressing concerns were not actually in opposition to the project but were asking for modifications or changes over which the developer had no control , such as code enforcement and the keeping of horses. He stated that the provision for equestrian trails and landscaping standards were requirements by the City. He referred to Planning; Condition 2 of the Resolution relative to relocating lot 59 twelve feet to the north and requested that this condition only be required if determined feasible by the Building Official due to the location of the lot to an earthquake fault zone. He additionally addressed condition 10 relative to the preservation of the existing Oak tree on Lot 44 and requested that the construction barrier be required prior to issuance of grading or building permits and prior to commencement of work in order to avoid delays. He requested that condition 12 be modified to reflect landscaping of the debris basin outside rather than inside s e the slope of the debris basin. He requested; that Engineering cdi t7 on _ o 4 requiring the improvement of Almond Street be deleted. He was of the opinion that the adjacent developer should be required to install this street improvement. He referred to Engineering Condition S relative to street grades and advised that he would like an understanding that there is one street within the tract at a slope of approximately 13.7 percent. Rela ive to Engineering Condition fi concerning, the vacation of Chestnut Street he' stated that this request for vacation had been submitted to the Department of Water and Power and the developer had received their approval to vacate Chestnut on the Department's behalf. He noted that Chestnut Street is off the project's Planning Commission Minutes -8- March 25, 1987 property. Since this vacation would have no impact on this tract, he requested that the condition be modified to reflect prior to issuance of any occupancy permits rather than recordation of the map. Relative to Engineering Condition 8 concerning utility undergrounding, he requested a modification to require undergrounding from the first pole north of Carrari Street rather than the south side. He further suggested the City consider a capital improvement project to help defray the cost of undergrounding utilities on Archibald. If this assistance was not granted, he request that all in-lieu, fees be deleted for undergrounding on Almond. He requested that Standard Condition C-4 be deleted since the Design Review for the project indicated that no further architectural amenities needed to be added to the elevations. He asked when the City would take over maintenance of the debris basin. Russell Maguire, City Engineer, advised that the basin would be inspected after completion and then the work would go through a 30-day establishment period. At that point, the City would take over maintenance; however, the developer would have a one year maintenance bond against material , workmanship and qual ity. If a problem arises in any of these areas, the bond would be called. Mr. Dowd referred to Standard Condition G-2 relative to emergency access and stated he felt the existing Almond Avenue and its alignment would serve to meet this condition. He requested that the condition requiring sidewalks either be deleted or that the developer be required to install sidewalks only on one side. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, agreed that the sidewalks should only be on one side of the interior. Mr. Dowd suggested that the City contribute to the construction of the debris basin. Chairman Barker asked Engineering staff to respond to Mr. Dowd's request to appeal the construction of Almond Street, and the comment that one street within the tract is at a 13.7 percent slope. Mr. Hanson responded that a 'tract this size should provide some pavement over to Hermosa to finish off Almond. He additionally felt it would be important to provide this street for the residences on the north side. Be felt reimbursement would be appropriate for the cost of any permanent improvements this developer constructs. Relative to the street slope, he responded that the grading had not been looked at in a great deal of detail and at this time preferred that the condition vernaln as written since the City standard is 12 percent. Chairman Barker asked staff' s response to substituting occupancy permits for recordation. Mr. Hanson replied that this would be acceptable to staff. Planning Commission Minutes -9- March 25, 1987 Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that it would be possible to landscape the inside of the slopes of the debris basin to a certain level so that there would be some buffer around the retention' basin. Russell Maguire commented that the ;debris basin is an upstream basin, which meant that all storms would go through that basin. he explained that staff expects debris placement and a debris removal cycle annually. He advised that e would be comfortable with the condition reading landscaping to the high water mark and that particularly the upper slope should contain certain levels of landscaping on the inside Chairman Barker asked for staff's comment relative to utility undergrounding arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, commented that the current Planning Commission policy states that a developer should underground utilities to the first pole offsite or reconstruct a new pole at the project boundary. The existing pole in this case is a little more than S feet. He recommended that under rounding stop at 20feet south, versus the S feet. Relative to Carrari Street, he commented that the Planning Commission eso ution requiring underrounding specifically states that a project should extend the underg'rounding across an adjacent .street. Relative to reimbursement by the City for undergrounding on Archibald, he advised that the policy is that reimbursement only comes from other development, which in this case that property has already been developed. He stated that the Planning Commission does not have the authority to commit City funds to this type of issue. The option to not contribute tin-lieu fees for Almond Street in the event that the City does not reimburse for Archibald, he Mated has not been the City's policy. Chairman Barker advised that the public` hearing was still open and invited public comment. Brad McCall , 9795 Carrari', representing residents of Carrari Street, stated they did not object to development of the tract by Friedman Homes. However, he expressed concern' with the proposed hones backing' Carrari Street. He requested code enforcement for CC&R's enabling the City to notify residents not complying with CC&R's of violations and if violations are not corrected within a certain amount of time, the residents would either be 'billed or 'a lien placed on the property. He additionally requested that the residents of Carrari take part in the design of the landscaping and slump stone wall proposed for the north side of Carrari . He asked that occupancy not be granted until these items were completed to the satisfaction of the existing residents. Chairman Barker asked for a recommendation from staff regarding enforcement of CCU 's. Planning Commission Minutes -10- March' S, 1987 Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the City s normal code enforcement procedures would insure property maintenance. He pointed out that under the current code enforcement procedures, if a violation is not corrected it becomes a misdemeanor and is handled through the court system. He suggested a possible solution would be to increase the trail area thus increasing the landscaping area. He believed there is sufficient area within the 0-foot easement to provide a landscaping which would buffer visibility to the rear yards. William Reese, 4888 Archibald,: opposed the keeping of horses in the proposed tract. Chairman darker advised that this tract is within the Equestrian Overlay District which is governed by an ordinance of the City Council . He explained the appeal process to Mr. `Reese. d Pagliochini, 5049 Jadeite,, stated that he was notified of this public hearing; however, he was not notified of the neighborhood meeting held by the developer. His concern was blockage of his view to the east by the proposed two story homes and variety of trees being placed on Archibald Avenue, He also objected to the keeping of horses in the tract. r. Matsumo, 4994 Klusman, objected to the rear yards of homes facing the front yards of the existing homes on Carrari . He felt that a precedent might be set by approval of this design. Bob White, 4947 Mize, stated he was not informed; of the developer's neighborhood meeting until after the meeting was held. Mr. Murphy explained that the City is not required by Mate law to give the 10 day notification which is required for, public hearings for a neighborhood meeting. He advis ed used that the neighborhood meeting is a courtesy meeting held by the developer, at the City's suggestion, at which the developer attempts to address concerns early in the process. Mr. Murphy advised that the notices for the March 17th meeting were mailed to the residents on March 12, 1987. Alan Jones, 1001E Almond, stated that he and his neighbors were first notified of the tract development approximately one year ago and had attended several meetings with the developer in that one year time frame. He and his neighbors supported development of the tract. ,lack Pickering, Hidden Farm Road resident, stated he was not contacted regarding the neighborhood meeting. r. Dowd responded to the public comments and asked that the tract; not be held up while the City debated the community issue of allowing homes in this tract.' He 'stated that the two story homes would only block a slight degree of view, since the proposed heights were actually peak heights. He advised that he contacted every single property owner that is directly affected by this tract. Planning Commission Minutes -11- March 25, 1987 There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Fmer ck commented on the code enforcement of &R's and stated that Mr. McCall 's point is well taken. However, he felt that violations could be handled by private code enforcement where criminal sanctions are possible. Chairman Barker stated that he would like clarification of the existing language regarding &R's Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, advised that the ity's current Condition language would allow the City to take advantage of current legislation regarding code enforcement of &R's if that legislation is passed. Chairman Barker asked for comment regarding the request for the Carrari Street residents to take part in the design of the wall and landscaping. Commissioner Emerick agreed that appropriate- landscaping in addition to the wall would serve an adequate buffer. He suggested that the City Planner be directed to review and approve the plan, after which he would notify the arrari Street residents of his decision. If the residents do not concur with the City Planner's approval , they could ;appeal this decision to the Planning Commission. o isiover Mciel asked if the area could be increased to 25 feet as opposed to 20 feet. r. Dowd stated that it would be possible to increase the setback to 25 feet and added this might further mitigate the concerns of the Carrari residents. He agreed to this increase as long as it does not affect the net gross lot area. r. Buller stated he would suggest a, modification to the landscaping condition to state that view corridors will be provided. He poi need out that the applicant .Mated that the first 4 houses would be model homes, which will have rear ,hard landscaping. Chairman Barker asked for discussion concerning the blockage of- view-, to the east Commissioner Emerick commented that he felt there are tradeoffs in that a one story house would require more grading. He pointed out that the trees would soften the vier of houses for those residents who do look up towards the mountains. '' Commissioner Chitlea appreciated the residents' concerns. However, she stated that anyone who buys on a hillside with adjacent vacant land must realize that eventually that land will be developed and the view may be lost. She felt the City and Friedman Homes has made an admirable attempt to address this issue. i Planning Commission Minutes - March' , 1987 Chairman arker asked for discussion regarding the concern of backs of homes .facing fronts of the existing homes on Carrari . Commissioner McNi el stated he was -inclined to agree with the residents and stated that what the Commission was dealing ;with is concessions versus good planning. He stated that under every circumstance that it makes no sense and felt it wool d be a mistake. Commissioner Emerick pointed out that there would be two different architectural styles facing each other by locating the fronts of these homes toward Carrari . He questioned how integrated a street would be under this approach as opposed to doing a good job with landscaping as a buffer. Commissioner Chi ti ea stated she agreed with Commissioner McNiel and did not like to see the rear yards fading existing streets. She preferred a design with street compatibility;and felt design could be a mitigating factor." Commissioner Tolstoy stated that one reason the tract is laid out as ro osed p p is because of severe slope and _grading constraints. ' r. Dowd advised that to reverse the design to face the homes on Carrari would require a great deal of grading Commissioner cNi el stated his intent was not to redesign the tract at this point. He commended the applicant and staff for taking the initiative to talk to a great many people who don't get taped to under normal tract development, much less have their input considered. His point was that as a matter of good versus bad planning, this might have been caught at an earlier stage when something different could have been done. Commissioner Tolstoy; felt it was important to point out :that the biggest issue associated with this tract has always been grading. He advised that the solution now proposed was the best alternative. He concurred that better planning might, be that the houses on Carrari' face each other. However, if that would have occurred, there would have been a completely different grading plan with considerably more grading. He stated that the City had stressed to the developer from the beginning that grading should be kept at a minimum. The requests raised by the applicant re,lative to`the conditions of approval were agreed to as follows. It was the consensus of the Commission to retain Standard Condition relative to architectural amenities to side and rear elevations. Additionally, Engineering Condition a relative to utility undergrounding was retained in its entirety. Engineering Condition 4 relative to the improvement of Almond was retained Motion: Moved by McNiel , ;seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the <Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13316 with the following amendments: An additional -foot landscape easement required along the south side of Lots 18; Planning Division Condition 3 amended to reflect review by the City Planner of the landscape Planning Commission Minutes -1 - March 25, 1987 i plan for the block wall and landscaping along the south property line of Lots 1-8, with view corridors to the north to be provided; relocation of, Lot 59 required if feasible as determined by the Building Official ; Engineering Condition 8a modified to reflect the first pole south of the north tract boundary, as proposed by 'staff; Standard Condition L-2 amended to require 28 feet on Earrari , as proposed by staff; Planning Condition 12 modified to require landscape and irrigation of the debris basin along the outside and inside slopes above the high water ark; and Planning Division Condition modified to require Carrari Street improvements prig to issuance of occupancy permits. The City Planner was directed to notify the residents of Carrari Street of his decision regarding the landscaping and wall treatment along Lots 1- , The residents will have a ten day period in which to appeal this decision. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NIEL, TOL TOY, BARKER, CHITIEA, EMERICK CIE. COMMISSIONERS: NONE BET: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried 0:20 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 1 :40 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present J. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PE IT 84- 1 TA LOMA CHRI TIAN regoe o _c_o__nverFt an existing , square oo sl ng e amp ,y yes ence to an office for the Alta Loma Christian Church on B acres of land in the Low Residential District (less than 2 dwwdlling units per acre) located on the vast side of Sapphire, across from Orange - APN 10 - - . (Continued from January 28, 1987 Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Glen Cadow, representing the church, stated he believed all requirements had been met. He advised that the irrigation would be dons manually by use of a water hose, Brad Buller, Litt' Planner, advised that staff would recommend that this method of irrigation be monitored for a while before it would be considered an acceptable solution. If the method proved to be unacceptable, staff would recommend that the Conditional Use Permit for the church be brought before the Commission for modification or revocation. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes -14- March 25, 1987i Commissioner Chi ti ea questioned how much staff time could be committed to a monitor the project, r. Buller advised that routine inspections would be made by code enforcement. Commissioner McNiel state the extension should be issued. However, if the area is not maintained upon the first inspection, it would come back to the Commission 'and the Conditional Use Permit will be pulled until the matter is corrected. `r. Buller stated that staff would take that action and then follow the steps for revocation process, Chairman Barker stated that he would strongly recommend if the method proposed by the applicant fails, :the Commission pull the Conditional Use Permit an require that a professionally designed system be installed* Motion: Moved by ' cNi el , seconded by Tol stay, to 'adopt the Resolution approving the Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 844-21, Staff was directed to prepare a letter to the applicant advising them that if the method of irrigation and reseeding is not successful, the Conditional use permit for the church will be scheduled for revocation. Motion carried by the following vote. AYES, COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, TOLSTC , BARKER, CH TIEA, EMERICK NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: C OMM ISSIONERS: NONE -carried Chairman Barker advised that he did not receive his copy of this staff report in time to review it; therefore, advised that he would step down from the podium on this issue. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1 279 - WILLIAM LYCN COMPANY - A reP en rac su v s on o acres n o o s o crew e planning areas for the future development of the Vineyards North Village within the Victoria Planned Community, generally located north of Southern Pacific Railroad, south of Highland, west of Day Creek & east of Milliken -:APN 227-0 - 1, 02, CS, 04, 05, 06, & 07, 227 ► 81 01, 040 08, ag, 10, 11, & 227-0 1- 6 Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Co issioner Chitiea asked at which point can the City require that prior to any further approvals, Victorian Lakes must be developed. Planning Commission Minutes -15- March 25, 1987 ----� i Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that one way would be through an amendment to the Planned Community text that establishes a phasing schedule for development.; Commissioner Fmerick; shared the concern and advised that during a recent Design Review meeting the developer had stated there are some engineering concerns relative to the improvement of Day Creek Channel . Commissioner Chitiea stated she would like more specific information and would also like to the the working drawings and design already in place providing some guarantee that in fact when the improvements to Day Creek are completed, the Lakes will be developed r. Buller advised that the City recently received a letter from the developer indicating that in thirty; days the City would be seeing plans for the Lake. e suggested the Commission direct staff to prepare a status report on the Lakes for an upcoming agenda. He advised that at that point, the Commission could determine if staff should proceed with an amendment to the planned community text. Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steven Ford, representing the William Von Company, stated concurrence with the Resolution and conditions of approval . He clarified that on Engineering Condition 16 the developer considered all costs to include the cost of condemnation as well as the cost of the street hardscaping and landscaping and that it doesn't particularly relate to the ' portion of Victoria Park Lade adjacent to the proposed high school site. He advised that the developer had been working on concepts for an area development plan for the Lakes portion of Victoria from Base Line south to Miller, which would include the actual bodies of water. He additionally Mated the developer had been doing extensive planning and marketing surveys to determine how best to proceed on that property as early as possible. He stated there are some physical constraints to the site. He indicated there may be potential options to the actual engineering design of the site that may offer the opportunity to proceed without the total completion of the ultimate Day Creek improvements. He agreed' to work with staff to provide a status report to the Commission on the Lakes development. There were no further convents, therefore the public hearing was closed. Comissioner Chitiea stated that the redesign of the parkway was more attractive and appropriate. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 13279. Motion carried by the following vote Planning Commission Minutes - - March 25, 1987 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK, CHITIEA, MICNIEL, TOLSTOY DOES: CO ISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried ABSTAIN. CO ISSIONERS: BARKER 11: 0 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 11:40 p.m, - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present Chairman Barker advised that the following items were related and would be beard concurrently by the Commission. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 87-0 - D CKK DEVELOPMENT - reques o Fe duce num er o par ing spaces re451re , the side yard setback area, and the front yard setback and to exceed the height limitation for a proposed 11,000 square foot office building at 9113 Foothill Boulevard in an Office Professional District located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard crest of Hellman Avenue and east of Vineyard Avenue. Tree Removal Permit B 1 requesting the removal of B mature Chestnut trees, 4 Liquidambars & 4 Modesto Ash trees - APN OB- 1-0 . (Related File: DR 86-46). , N. tNVI,RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR 86- 6 - DEC K propose o cons ruc an , sq. o ice ui iAg Ili Too� i Il Boulevard in the Office Professional District located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, west of Hellman and east of Vineyard - APN 0 - 41-0 . Associated with this proposal- is Tree Removal Permit 87- 1 requesting the removal of two ) `mature Chestnut trees, 4`Liquidambr trees, and 4 Modesto Ash trees. Chris Wes an, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Dan Richards, represent the applicant, gave an overview of the project and urged the Commission's approval . He advised that parking for the projecthad been based on the net rather than Dross floor area. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner McNiel stated that this is the kind of development that the City is looking for on Foothill Boulevard. He stated his real concern with the project was the parking. Planning Commission Minutes - - March 25, 1987 Commissioner Tolstoy stated that one of the most important problems associated with this outparcel is trying to get it to fit in with the surrounding area . He felt that the architecture fits in with the apartment complexes on both sides of the project and had no problem with the side yard setback, front yard setback or the building height. However, the major concern was parking.. Chairman Barker stated that he had no problems with the setbacks or building height and agreed that parking was the major issue. He felt that the property would police itself and that uses that would require a lot of parking would not lease in the building. Overall , he liked the product and felt it was a good use of an odd shaped piece of property. Commissioner Chitiea' stated that the 45 foot landscaping required by the Foothill Interim Policies is mostly directed toward the consolidation of smaller lots to encourage master planning, which is not possible with this parcel . She felt if the developer was sensitive to the design of the Foothill Plan as proposed by Forma [design Consultants, that the landscaping requirement might be mitigated. She stated in terms of mass, scale and architectural design this project; fits in well with its location and proximity to the apartments. She did not thine that scaling back the building to meet the parking requirements would solve any major parking problems and felt that Chairman Barker was correct that the building would police itself.; Commissioner Emerick saw the parking being a problem because it creates a hidden trap for vehicles entering the parking lot and not being able to find a parking space. He felt the lobby area needed to be calculated for parkin purposes because the developer may utilize the space at a later time or utilize it for a' waiting area. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated one option would be tuck under parking which would provide four additional parking spaces, . Richards stated he would prefer to develop the project as proposed; however, if it Leant denial of the project, he would agree to work with staff on this issue. Motion: Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 86-46 with a modification that tuck under parking is to be provided. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: E ERICk, CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, TCt TOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried Staff was directed to prepare a Resolution approving Variance 8 -02 for the Planning Commission's consideration on April 8, 1987. 1 i Planning Commission Minutes - March 25, 1987 1 HEIR BUSINESS P. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-40 - CHC ARCHITECT INC. The development of a 4,000 aqua oo an aci is Iona Rank) on 0.68 acres 4f land within an approved 15.3 acre shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District of the Term Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast corner;of Rase Line Road and Haven Avenue ® APN 0 -801- S, 26. Clancy Fong Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the Design Review Committee did net review the consistency of the tower with the rest of the center. She suggested that a condition be gadded to require consistency of the tower design with the rest f the center. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Henry Savario, representing Security Pacific Rank, addressed conditions 3 and of the Resolution, He stated that the building is much smaller scale than the rest of the center and felt because of the Coale a smaller type rafter would be more appropriate. He requested use of an 48 rafter. He additionally stated that if the curvilinear gable was lowered it would result in exposing the parapets and mechanical equipment, and requested that the condition be deleted. He agreed with designing the tower to be consistent with the rest of the center; however, felt the design should be sensitive to the scale of the proposed project. Steve Yaeger, representing the applicant, advised that he would like the flexibility to work with staff on the issue of the gables. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the 6X1O rafter was considered by the Design Review Committee to be in scale with the building. He asked if the reduction to U8 as requested by the applicant would be acceptable. Commissioner Chitiea felt the rafters should not be scaled down and should match the rest of the center, r. Buller suggested that the rafters and the lowering of the gables go back to Design Review on the Consent Calendar. Planning Commission Minutes -1March 25, 198 Motion: Moved by Chi ti ea, seconded by McNiel ,_ to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 86-40, with modifications to include requiring the wood rafters and curvilinear gables to be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review, and addition of a condition that the tower element is to be consistent with the existing center. Motion carried ed b the following owi n vote: _ g _ AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA CNIEL, BARKER, EMERICK, TOLS OY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: N -carried ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW -42 - LEFF - The eve o en o n us multi-tenant bui o ing 150,754 square feet on 9.15 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) located on the north side of Arrow Highway between White Oak and Maple Streets - APN 20 -351.60, 51, 57-70. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, Chairman Darker invited public comment. David Leff, applicant, concurred with the Resolution and conditions of approval There were no further public comments. Motion: Moved by Chi`tiea, seconded by Mc Niel , to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 85-42. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, EMERICK, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-45 - A review The revi o a ve s er an o acres 'an eve b en o lots and of the Master Plan. Lot 2 consisting of a 41,500 square foot industrial building on 2.36 acres and Lot 3 consisting of a 51,250 square foot industrial building on 2.77 acres of land all within the Industrial Park District (Subaru 12), located on the east side of Pittsburgh Avenue south of Sth Street - APN 2 9-26 -3, 4# Planning Commission Minutes -20- March 25, 1957 Auft Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public comment. John Richards, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the Resolution and conditions of approval. He requested an understanding that because they were agreeing to extend the rear property line beyond what they had anticipated, and requested the opportunity to slightly adjust the building sizes. Commissioner McNiel stated that he felt the applicant should be able to add to the length of the buildings which would be subject to review of the City Planner. Ban McDavid, representing the applicant, <gave an overview of the architecture and landscaping. There were no further public comments. Motion; Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by McNiel , to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review 86-45. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY NIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, EMERICK NOES,: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried S. PRELIMINARY REVIEW 86-76 - GREEN VIEW ESTATES - A consistency determination 6etweenthe Fo_o_thT1rT_(;orr1;(for IMFM '175 es and a proposed development of 142 townhome units on 11.86 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 du/ac) located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Baker Avenue - APN 207-201-30 & 41,43. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chi tiea commented that one good aspect of the project proposal is that it has access off of Baker instead of Foothill , which she felt was important for this site. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by M,cNiel , unanimously carried, to determine Preliminary Review 86-76 consistent with the Foothill Interim Policies. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS Planning Commission Minutes _21- March 25, 1987 T. INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS - SUBAREA 8 Alan Warren, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. It was the consensus of the Commission that this item be brought back to the Planning Commission on April 22, 1987. U. PRESENTATION OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA VIDEO - Oral Report Due to the lateness of the hour, the Commission deferred presentation of the Rancho Cucamonga video to a later agenda. ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to elect Larry McNiel Chairman of the Planning Commission. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to elect Suzanne Chitiea Vice Chairman of the Planning Commission. PRESENTATION OF COMMENDATION RESOLUTION TO DAVID BARKER This item was deferred to the Planning Commission meeting of April 22, 1987. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 1:2U a.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. Planning Commission Minutes -22- March 25, 19871, Respectfully submi Brad Buller' Deputy Secretary I i i Planning Commission Minute - - March 25, 198 MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP THURSDAY FEBRUARY 26,; 1987 C,CC P.M. Neighborhood Center 991 Arrow Rancho Cucamonga Vice Chairman Larry McNiel called the workshop,meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at- C:UU p.m. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Larry McNiel, Suzanne Chitiea Bruce Emerick, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: David Barker STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, Chris Westman, Assistant Planner. A. ' TERRA VISTA MULTIPLE FAMILY ARCHITECTURE A review Of a l existing, approved or proposed apartment, condominium or townhome projects relative to their architectural design similarities Brad Buller, City Planner, explained the purpose of the workshop. Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Stan Bel and Ernie Corrill representing Lewis Homes and. Carl Lagoni, representing Aram Bassen.an & Associates, presented an overview of the differe nces in archi tectural c ural styles and features of the various multi-family projects within Terra. Vista.. Mr. Bell and 'r. Oorrill explained that Luis Homes ;targets each project to a specific rental market and therefore the building architecture is to a great extent a function of rents. The goal of Lewis Homes is to provide for a range of housing affordability. Commissioner Emerick stated that the grid site plan layout affects the streetscape and creates a repetitive appearance. Mr. Ball explained the site plan layout concepts. Mr. Buller asked Lewis Homes to explain the thought process on how they develop the site plan layout. r. Bell stated that buildings .are plotted for privacy in that patios and balconies do not face ;patios and balconies on adjacent buildings. Also, entrances are not plotted opposite another entrance. The natural grade of 3 - within Terra Vista is suited to B-plex style buildings which allow grade to be taken up between buildings. A longer building is more constrained by its size and shape and would require expensive stepping of the building pad and larger retaining walls and/or slopes. Mr. 'Buller asked Lewis Homes whether certain architectural styles lent themselves to a particular building configuration" Did the architecture dictate an 8-plex building? Mr. Bell replied that it did not. r. Buller asked Lewis Homes if the goal is to create units that have window exposures on at least two sides. were there other solutions? Mr. Borrill stated that there was not. Otto Kroutil , Senior planner, disagreed and stated there were alternative solutions. Commissioner Chitiea stated that certain elevations for the three newest projects were too simple and were reminiscent of the ;style of architecture prevalent in the 19501s. John Melcer, representing Levis Homes, stated that a dwelling is a background for a peson's life and shouldbe restrained. Mr. Lagoni , explained that the architecture for Tentative Tract 13270 was intentionally kept simple to keep the cost down. He also explained the use of post-modernistic elements in the patios and balconies. Mr. Kroutil stated that given the constraints of an 8-plex product type, Lewis Homes had done all that could be done architecturally. However, he stated that the feeling of repetitiveness is created by the almost exclusive use of an B-plex product type that dictates a certain building form and mass. Therefore the choice of product type is critical to providing; variety. Mr. kroutil explained that techniques can be used to vary the appearance of the upper and lower floors. The floor plans do not have to be identical stacked units. For example, he indicated that units can be cantilevered out over first floor or lower floor floor plans: can be slightly larger allowing the building to step back, 1 story units can be used on the ends of buildings.. Carriage units over garages : can also be introduced for variety. Mr. kroutil stated that it is a lack: of product variety, not a lack of quality, that is the issue. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - - FEBRUARY 26, 1987 r. Bell indicated that the 8-plex type of product will be replaced soon with other types of product in areas of different density. Discussion followed concerning the issue of product type. The consensus of the Commission was that the product type was the key and that other product types should be explored. The Commission agreed that the quality of architecture for multi-family was acceptable overall within Terra Vista. The three newest projects should go back to Design Review Committee for review and consideration of their architecture based upon their individual merits. B. AWARDS FOR DESIGN EXCELLENCE Review of numinatibns for annual ;Awards for Design Excellence and selection of recipients.' Ban Coleman, Senior Planner, explained the purpose of the awards and gave a slide presentation of the nominees. Discussion followed concerning the categories of ;awards that may be given. Brad Buller, suggested that letters of commendation could be given in certain categories, such as parks. I Discussion followed concerning the nominations. The consensus of the Commission was that awards should be given in the following categories: Single family residential , multifamily residential , commercial , neighborhood commercial , office, industrial master plan document, master planned development, landscaping, rehabilitation, and community facilities. The Commission directed staff to prepare a final list of nominations. Meeting was adjourned a . 8 p.m. to, the March 25, 1987 regular g Planning Commission meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUT -3- FEBRUARY 26, I9�87 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regul ar Meeti ng February 25, 198 Vice-Chas r°-- Larry McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of _Rancho Cucamonga ,ing Commission to order at :DD p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Pars, ,,ommunity Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT. Suzanne Chitiea Bruce Eme ick, Larry McNi el ,; Peter Tol toy ABSENT: E. David Barker STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Bruce Cook,: Associate Planner; Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Debra Meier, Assistant Planner; Sett Murphy, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary; Chris Westman, Assistant Planner" APPROVAL DE MINUTES The minutes of June- B, 1986 were removed from the agenda due to a lack of quorum of Commissioners attending that meeting, CONSENT CALENDAR A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 10414 - REYNOLDS - The review of building e eva 'ons or sing a ami y e ac a homes within an existing residential subdivision of 17 Lots on 10 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District less than 2 dwelling units/acre) located south o Carrari Street and west of Haven Avenue - AP 1-101-1 .` "I D. TRACE 12577 - (DESIGN REVIEW) - NORDI - Design Review of building e eva ions en p pans T5F a Ofe0fau-s-Ty approved tract map comprised of 16 lots on 4.2 acres in the Low Density Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of lgth Street, west of Hellman Avenue APN 2 2-D41- , 52. E. TRACT 13318 (DESIGN REVIEW) - MAYFLOWER HOMES - Design review of building e eva Eons an p o pans for a prevfous .Y approved tract consisting of 16 single family lots on 5 acres of land in the Low Density Residential District ''2-4 dwelling units/acre, located at the southeast corner of Nermo ,nue and Man anita Drive - APN 201-181-28. Motion: y Tolstoy, seconded by Emeric , unanimously carried, to adopt the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC BEARING D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85- 5 MESSENGER7CROWN COACH e es ao i s mere o a or oiae us assesoi dsi ness wit i n an existing 168,ODD square foot i n�dustri al bui 1 ding, and the 83,000 square foot expansion of the existing building on 11.8 acres of land in the General Industrial/Rail Served District (Subarea 2), located at the southeast corner of Arrow Highway and Vineyard Avenue - AN 209- 0 2-1 . (Continued from December 10, 1986). DEVE- REVIEW 86-1 MODIFICATION MESSENGER The request. to mo ... revs ous y approve as er an y re u 1 ng ;the site area of Phase III from 4.4 acres to 2.9 acres in the General' Industrial/Rail Served District (Subarea 2), located at the northeast corner of gth Street and Vineyard Avenue - APN 2 9-D12-16." (Continued from December 10, 1986. ) Vice-Chairman MONiel announced that the Planning Commission was in receipt of a letter from the applicant withdrawing this item from the agenda. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 6-0 - CITY OF eques o amen a an se amen o e enera an rum ow edi um Density Residential 4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Low Density; Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and/or Very Low Density Residential (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) for 58 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Wilson (if extended) and Milliken (if extended) - APN 20 -191-11, 17. (Continued from January 14, 19 7) I Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 25, 1987 ENVIRuiiMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT ;DISTRICT AMENDMENT 06 CITY OF 'RANCRO - reques o amen eve opraen roc ap r oa on; rol ) and "L " (Low Medium Density Residential 2- dwelling units per acre) for 68 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Wilson (if 'extended) and Milliken (if extended) - APN 201-191- 1 , 17. Vice-Chairman McNiel announced that the Planning Commission was in receipt of a letter from the applicant requesting a continuance to March 25, 1987. He then opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Motion: d by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to continue tne public hearing for Environmental Assessment and General Plan 66- 03D and Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendment 86-05 to the Planning Commission agenda of March 25, 197. Vice-Chairman McNi el announced that the following items would be advanced in this agenda. M. ENVIRDN ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 6-30 - BROWN LEARY` - The development of 6 80e acu d ps c a r1 c ospi a approxf ma d y ,000 square foot of floor area, on 6.12 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Arrow Route and Red Oak Street APN 208-351-42; Vice-Chai 1 n McNi el announced that the applicant for this item was requesting a continuance. He then opened the public hearing.. Richard Fuerstein, representing the applicant, requested a continuance to April, H, 1987. There were no further public comments. Motion: Moved. by Chi ti ea, seconded by Toi stoy, unanimously ; carried, to continue consideration of Environmental Assessment and. Conditional Use Permit 6-30-to the April d, 198 Planning Commission agenda. ice Chairman McNiel announced that the; following item would be advanced in the agenda: Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 6-02 reues o amen a errs is a Planned o un y 5y igta shing a Business Park Overlay Zone for areas designated as Office Park, Commercial and Mixed Use, within the Planned Community boundary - APN 107 -421-D6, 1077-091- 7a (Continued from January '14, 19 7 Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 25, 1987 I Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that this item was continued from a previous greeting, therefore, was being advanced in the agenda.. He additionally stated that the Planning Commission's action on this amendment would be a recommendation to the City Council . Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jahn Meg presenting the applicant, commented on the staff report. He advised ie applicant wanted to develop the business park type of use with the twit i"ange of uses listed in each of the zones indicated as potential locations for this use. He, therefore, disagreed that the overlay zone is redundant and asked that it be allowed to apply to: all the ' zones. He disagreed with staff's conclusion that retail studio land uses do not give sufficient definition of this section and is therefore of no value. He pointed out that the staff report also states that appliance repair, plumbing shops and supplies, television and radio repair and upholstery shops are incompatible uses in an office `park and agreed that this statement as written is true; however, the applicant stated 'these uses are entirely appropriate within a business park environment. He commented on staff' s suggestion that floor, wall and window covering sales and installation, paint and home decorating; stores could involve large showrooms and warehousing and advised that these would be retail uses and he expected the tenants to be small merchants whose primary trade is developed from the residential sections of the co ur He believed that the receiving of Household goods, the retail sale of goods and the : delivery and installation of such goods in customer's nog es and place of business is a legitimate and appropriate activity within Terra Visa and not in any way industrial in character. He disagreed that dance studio would be inappropriate in this environment and stated they are small businesses which require relatively large floor areas and low rents and, therefore, have a need of the business park environment e felt that dance studios may be priced out of commercial recreational facilities and stated it is unlikely that any dance studio could adversely affect other businesses uses or activities. He indicated that noise factors could be mitigated through construction. He further disagreed that the potential for adverse environmental impacts exists and suggested that it would be appropriate to prepare a Negative Declaration on the basis of the proposal as submitted. Mr. Melcher additionally gave a slide presentation. Terry Sario, 10025 Yew Street., Rancho Cucamonga, .stated that residential uses should be above Foothill and any type of commercial uses below Foothill . There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes - - February 25, 1987 Commissioner Chi ti ea stated that she did not think that expanding would be beneficial to the City or the community. she found nothing in the applicant's proposal to support that the request was essential to Terra. Vista and stated that the uses proposed belong in an industrial area. She stated that for the City to take everything on a case-by-case basis is not the appropriate way to control land uses and was unconfortabl e with the request for all uses in all :zones. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the planning that went into the Planned o uni tl e' *° Loess was quite extensive and the uses that were allowed to go , in the ommunities were looked at very closely. He was concerned with placing Bess Park Overly in a Planned Community. He stated that it reduces tr;e quality of the land use pattern that was established. He pointed out that when a developer has a building to rent he never knows what tenants will go into what building; therefore,; one never knows how to design the building to accomplish sound attenuation to accommodate a light manufacturing or dance studio type of use. He further stated that businesses come and go and uses change and it would be difficult to anticipate all kinds of uses in all kinds of design requirements. He stated that the Planned Community Text currently has provisions for many of the uses the applicant is asking for in the Business Overlay request. He did not think that the additional ones the applicant wished to add would enhance the Terra Vista project commercial areas or office park areas. He further stated that the City has many acres of business park available to developers, and did not'support the request because it is in conflict with the General Plan. Vice-Chairman McNiel stated that he concurred. He ;pointed out that the applicant stated that eventually the Business Park Overlay would become all office, which is what currently exists in the Plan.` He could not support the request. Motion: Moved by Emerick seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to direct staff to prepare a Resolution of Denial to be placed on the March 25, 1987 Planning Commission agenda. F. VARIANCE 87 01 - LANE A request to reduce the minimum front yard setback from 37... fiR t6 31 et for Lot 6 and from 7 feet to 27 feet, for Lot 5, on a 1.65 acre tract in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Turner Avenue, south of Base Line Road at Ironwood Street - APN 1077-041- 8.' Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing, Terry Lane, applicant, concurred with the findings of the Resolution and conditions of approval . Planning Commission Minutes -5- February , 197 There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving Variance 67-0I. Motion carried by the following vote: RYES: COMMISSIONERS TOLSTDY, EMERICK ITIEA, MCNIE NOES., COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER -carried G. ENVIRONMENTAL ENVIRONMLNTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13475 - WDS DEVELOPMENT - A cos orrr o su i vi sign o parce on , acres o an i n e Cow Density Residential District ( -4 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Ramona Avenue, north of Church Street.. Associated with this application is "free Removal Permit 6-64 requesting the removal of the existing (4) Eucalyptus windrows - APN 1077-301-38. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman McNiel ;opened the public hearing. Richard Castello, representing the applicant, concurred with the findings of the Resolution and conditions of approval . He indicated a willingness to wo rl with staff , the preservation of trees on the site. The fallowing individuals addressed the Commission opposing the tree removal permit. Terry ;Sario, I05 Yew Street, Rancho Cucamonga Rick Nicholson, 7662 Dartmouth, Rancho Cucamonga Richard Rivas, 7654 Dartmouth, Rancho Cucamonga Additionally, a petition containing '36 naves in opposition to the tree removal permit was presented;to the Commission. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. o issioner Emerick -stated that the consensus of the existing neighbors seems to indicate that the trees should be saved. He pointed out that the developer has also offered to save the trees along the north; and east boundaries of the tract.' He: suggested that the tract be approved with the condition that all the Eucalpus trees that are possible to be sabred along the exterior north and east property lines subject to design p y es gn review approval. He suggested that the applicant might want to consider applying for a variance on those lots where there is not enough room to provide a good back ,Yard while saving the trees.. He felt that the trees in the interior should be looked at on a tree- by-tree basis during Design Review, I Planning Commission Minutes -6- February 25, 1987 I i Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the windbreaks on the north and east property lines should be preserved. He asked the current policy regarding an arborist inspection of trees. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that either staff or the Commission has the discretion to require an arborist report with a tree removal permit, He indicated that staff did not feel ' review of the trees by an arborist was necessary in this particular instance. o issi stoy suggested that the trees be topped if they are extremely high. -ed that the interior trees should be removed and replaced with an appropriate variety. r. Murphy" advised that staff would require the trees to be trimmed, removed of dead branches and a general clean up of debris around the base as conditions of approval for any tree removal permit. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that staff discourages the practice of tree topping based on the 'expert testimony of an arborist during review of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. Commissioner Chi ti ea stated that aesthetically, she was very much in favor of saving the trees. However, based on the number of recent reports from arborist and people who are looking into borer beetle infestation, she was uncomfortable with leaving the trees on the interior of the property. She indicated her preference would be to remove and replant all of the trees, out since 'ieighbors and developer indicated their desire to retain then, she would ncede to those wishes, Vice-Chairman M Niel stated that the density proposed by this project falls within the ranges established by the General Plan and Development ent Code. His preference 'would also be to remove and replace all the existing trees for the liability and safety of the people who would live there.. r, Buller suggested that the tree removal permit could be denied and a condition be placed on the tract that at the time of design review the tree removal permit e considered. He indicated that the Commission would then know how the units would fit on the lots in relationship to the trees. , Commissioner Emerick suggested that the developer be required to install a deep watering system. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that an arborist examine the trees and report, to the Commission on the feasibility of preservation. Mr, Buller suggestd modification of the conditions to state that should grading be pursued prior to an actual design review, a modified grading plan showing preservation of all the trees along the north and east property lines shall be submitted and approved. Planning Commission Minutes -7 February 25, 1987 otion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chi iea, to adopt issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 'I347 , with `modifications to include the requirement for a revised" grading plan showing preservation of all trees along the north and east property lines, and provisions for the possibility of a deep watering system for the trees should they be preserved. The Free Removal Permit was denied'. An arborist report was required to be submitted for Design Review consideration, at which time the passibility for changes may occur. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: IMMISSIONERS TC STUY> CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER' -carried H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-4 - CRATE - A two year review for compliance w e approve conditions o ; approval of an established 1,660 square foot church within a 6,600 square foot multi-tenant industrial building in the General Industrial Area (Subarea 4) located on the south side of 6h Street east of Archibald Avenue - APN` 10 7 48. Chris fides an, Assistant planner, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jim Crate, pastor of the church, advised that the items had not been completed due to financing problems. He indicated that the church was now in a financial position to complete the conditions of approval . Joseph Barfedo, 935 Golden Rain, Upland, stated that although the church was out of compliance with the conditions of approval , they had been cooperating with the City to now bring those items into compliance. Forrest Hindley, 568 Deerhaven Court, Rancho Cucamonga, gave an overview o the problems faded by newly formed' churches. He advised that it was very difficult for these new churches to meet the demands of the Fire District due o the expense involved. He suggested formation of a task force comprised of area pastors and members of City staff and the Commission to discuss these problems and issues. He suggested a higher tolerance and some encouragement of churches would be the goal of this task- force. He felt that churches should not be considered as businesses, but as non-profit organizations designed to help the community. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission Minutes _8-, February 25, 1987 I, Commissioner Chitiea stated that the City was primarily concerned with the safety of the people; who attend the group meetings. She indicated that it was not because these churches are located within the business districts that they are being conditioned to meet the requirements of the Fire Code and safety regulations, it is simply one means to insure the safety of those people gathering. She recognized that it was sometimes difficult to come up with the funds to complete these items; however, she felt that the safety concerns must be addressed. With respect to this particular use, she sawn no problems with it and saw no reason not to let the applicant submit their application as long as they c, ' I complete the conditions of approval Commissi Astoy stated his concern was the safety issue and compliance with Firs rr regulations. He felt that the extension should be granted when those regulations had been mete Dan Coleman, Senior planner, Mated that if the applicant were to apply for the expansion, which would be a modification to the Conditional Use Permit, staff would not bring it to the Commission with a recommendation of approval until; such time as ;the Building and Safety and Fire District items had been completed. Vice-Chairman McNiel asked if a time limit could be placed on the Conditional Use Permit Commissioner Chitiea recalled a previous Conditional Use Permit that had a time limit placed on it; however, the time limit was never met. She was very concerned with this approach. She pointed out that the group could meet in double ser :,--es if necessary and stated that she could not recommend that this type of safety violation be allowed to exist. Commissioner Cmerick agreed and stated that the applicant should come back with an application reflecting that the chinch had doubled the size of the facility. He stated that a time limit for compliance with the Fire Code regulations should be included in the conditions of approval Dan Coleman, Senior Planner cautioned the Commission against approving the extension request with a time limit for compliance. He stated that the City wouldin essence be condoning the operation of the church in violation of the building and fire regulations. He suggested that the condition should remain as written to not allow group meetings of more than Q ,persons until the building is brought into compliance.* Vice-Chairman McNiel stated he was in absolute agreement that the City' should not turn its back on the codes; however, by the same token, he felt compassion for these people and their situation. He stated he would be inclined to grant them 30 days for staff to contact the Fire District to make an inspection of the facility. Planning Commission Minutes -9- February 25, 1987 r, Buller advised that the Fire Marshall could close the church down. He recommended that the Commission take the action of continuing the item for 30 days to allow the applicant to submit a revision to the Conditional Use Permit. During this time the Fire District could make an inspection for compliance of Fire Code regulations i d b iseconded Mot on. Move Emer cTolstoy, unanimously carri d continue Conditional Use 'Permit 84-22 to the Planning Commission meeting of March 25, 1987. The applicant is to resubmit an application and the Fare District to inspect for compliance. 8:50 p.m. - Planning` Commission Recessed : 10 p.m. Planning,Commission Reconvened I. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-03 - CHRI TIAN FAMILY FELLOWSHIP - A two year review or compliance with ap a ve con long bf approval of an established 1,650 square foot church within a 6,000 square foot multi- tenant industrial building in the General Industrial Area (Subarea 4) located on the south side of 6th Street east of Archibald Avenue - AP 10-0 1-47, 48. Chris Wes an, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Forrest Hindley, 568 Deerhaven Court, pastor of the church, stated that he was also concerned with the safety of people, however, the items out of compliance were those of specific codes. He advised that Orangewood Baptist Church has no more than 30 people meeting and using this facility, and he was not aware that they would require a separate Conditional Use permit. He stated that the temporary signs in question had been stolen. He advised that the church will be moving from this facility in dune to a site in the Cucamonga Business Park, which was formerly Brethren in Christ Church and currently being utilized by tar's Fitness Center He did not concur with the recommendation to submit an application for modification within 30 days since by the time the application was processed through the normal channels the church would be Vacating the site within a few days® There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed, Commissioner Eeri ck stated he understood the applicant's dilemma in that he did not want to put money into a building the church would be vacating. However, he questioned if the Commission should be 'concerned with the issue of the church moving since the Fire District must operate under their codes which state no group meetings may ' occur until these issues are addressed. He Planning Commission Minutes -1 - February 25, '1987 I suggested a further condition that the church vacate the facility by June 1, 1987. r. Duller questioned the applicant if ;the facility he is moving to is now vacant r. Hindley advised that Star's Fitness Center is currently utilizing the facility and awaiting completion of tenant improvements on the Archibald location. The leasing agent had advised the church that the 'building would be vacated D,, a- 1st., Mr, Bulle that he could not recall a Conditional Use Permit submitted by Star's "�, "toes" tness Center for a facility on Archibald and cautioned that it could be later than dune before they could move to the Archibald site if this had not been done. He suggested that no action be taken by the Planning Commission at this time other than to defer to staff to discuss with the Eire District the status of whether they will request staff to pursue revocation of the CUP for non-compliance. It was the consensus of the Commission to request the applicant to submit an application for modification to the Conditional Use Permit within 30 days. Within 30 days, staff is to meet with the Eire District as to the status of compliance and to obtain the Eire District's concurrence to delay enforcement proceedings until June J. ENVIRUI syi NTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -0 - PILGRIM HOUSE, rogues o c onduct re a sae o urn ure in con,l nc ion wT 1 C wholesale storage and distribution st bubo wit hin� g , thin an existing industrial facility in;the General g Industrial District (Subarea 14) locaed at 12215 4th Street APN 9-331-1 . Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion. Moved by Emerick, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit H -D , Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. _; COMMISSIONERS EMERICK, CHI IEA MCNI L, TOLS O NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 1987 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-1 MODIFICATION - JEHOV'A 'S WITNESS - A reques o mo , a can ion OT approval requiring e un ergroun fng of existing overhead utilities along Church Street for a proposed church on the north side of Church Street, east of Archibald Avenue - APN 177- 1- 0 Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Vice-Chai .. iel opened the public hearing® Cal Curr ' resenti g the applicant, Mated that the applicant was willing to comply with the modified conditions of approval and urged approval of the request. g pp There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chtiea 'agreed with staff's recommendation and Mated this was a reasonable request in light of the situation and the changing laws. She felt that the in lieu fee was appropriate. Vice-Chairman McNi l was concerned with the b increase to be charged by the PUC and stated he would like staff to pursue the matter. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, suggested that the Commission advance the letter received from the PUC to the City Council with a recommendation that the City o on record with the PUC either requesting clarification or stating opposition ;:o the fee structure. He further suggested that staff invite the local utility representative to attend the Council meeting when the item would be discussed. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution modifying the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of existing overhead utilities along Church Street. Additionally, staff was directed to forward the letter received from the PUC to the City Council .. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, TOLSTOY, E E IC , MCNIEL LADES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER , -carried Planning Commission Minutes -1 - February S, 1987 i , 1111111111111AI AIIISSMIIT AND TRACT 11011 IMOD FICATIDN III FIELDSTONE COMPANY" Ica lon o ionsppro+ra perm wroug iron encing adjacent to Deer Creek Channel for Tract 13057, an approved residential subdivision of 22.55 acres within the Victoria Planned Community (Low-Medium Residential , 4-8 dwelling units per acre) into 147 lots, located at the southeast corner of Highland Avenue and Deer Creek;- APN 202- 1-13, 38. Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report, Dan Coles: ,.nior Planner, advised that the applicant for this item was not present evening and suggested that the Commission might consider continuing discussion to the next agenda Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Doug Lion, Rancho Cucamonga resident representing the ACTIVE group, concurred with staff' s recommendation to 'deny the request. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Emerick;supported staff's recommendation to deny the request. Vice-Chairman McNiel suggested that a Resolution of Denial be placed on the March 25, 1987 agenda and that_ staff be directed to contact the applicant and advise hint that should he wish to address the Commission, he could do so at that meeting Motion: Moved by Chi ti ea, seconded by Tol stay, to direct staff to prepare a Resolution- of Denial for the March 25, 1987 Consent Calendar and to contact the applicant and advise him of these proceedings. Motion carried unanimously. N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ;87-01 - INLAND EMPIRE e es a is men o a u ink con rac ors o ice an yard to T— an e sting building, with a lease 'space of 1,540 square feet on 2.99 acres of land in the General Industrial District (:Subarea 4) located at 9375 Archibald Avenue, Ste. 501 - APN 210-071-48. Cindy Norris, Assistant Planner', presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed Motion. Moved by Emerick, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 87-01. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -13- February 25, 1987 AYES: COMMISSIONERS EERICK, TOLSTOY, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES:; COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER -carried O. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT' 86- _ THE PLANNING GROUP - The request to amend . .Re` on i iona a PermitY adding business support services to a co, sales and services development project on 1. 18 acres of land in t; eral Industrial/Rail Served District (Subarea ), located at the northeast corner of Hth Street and Vineyard Avenue PN 01-01 -15. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded. by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving the amendment to Conditional Use Permit 86- 4. Motion carried by the fallowing vote: AYES; COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES:: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER -carried P. STREET NAME CHANGE FOR TURNER AVENUE - Proposed to be Hermosa Avenue, a rforth7south running ree rom Rancho Cucamonga City Limits just north of 4th Street to its terminus at Rase Lino Road, a distance of approximately three miles. Chris Wes an, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Vice-Chairman MtNiel opened the public hearing. Arnold Anderson, Rancho Cucamonga resident, opposed the name change to Hermosa. He advised that during this past year he had developed a 1 ,000 square foot shopping center which had been named Turner Plaza because of its location on Turner Avenue and Arrow Route; He felt the -change of street address from Turner to Hermosa would probably make the name of the center worthless. He supported the change to extend Turner Avenue north to the City Limits rather than extend Hermosa to the south. Planning Commission Minutes -14- February 25, 198 Tom Everett, 769 Turner, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that historically Hermosa belonged to the community of Alta Loma and Turner to the community of Cucamonga. He advised that there are more houses and businesses which front on Turner than on Hermosa. Due to the expense involved in the; street name change and expense to businesses and homeowners alike, he supported leaving the street name as it currently exists. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Co issio­ merick found the name Hermosa to be more aesthetically pleasing than Tu °°fie felt it made good sense in terms' of unification to make the street c He supported the:name change to Hermosa Avenue in the City Limits of Kan ho Cucamonga, recognizing it would be a brew in continuity with the City of Ontario. Commissioner Tol stay supported naming the sheet one name and concurred with the choice of Hermosa due to its historical significance. Commissioner Chitiea, agreed that Hermosa was the more aesthetically pleasing of the two names, and supported the change to Hermosa based on its historical significance Vice-Chairman McNiel stated the fact that there are two 24th Streets, two 25th Streets, and two 26th Streets in the City was significantly more confusing than this particular street name change. ' He didn't find the name Hermosa any more aesthetically pleasing than Turner and stated that it made more sense to him to con l ue Turner up; into the foothills. He suggested that another more significant street within the City could then be named Hermosa. He supported the change to Turner based on the fact that there are a nigher number of addresses for both businesses and residences on Turner. Commissioner Tolstoy made the motion to recommend the name change to Hermosa. Vice-Chairman McNiel suggested that the Commission recommend to the City Council that the name change become effective one year from the: adoption of the name change. He pointed out that this would allow businesses and residence enough time to make necessary changes to business cards, letterhead, etc. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, to recommend to the City Council that Turner Avenue be changed to Hermosa Avenue from the southern Rancho Cucamonga; City Limits north to its terminus at Base Line Road. The name change was' recommended to become effective one year from its adoption by the City Council . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS TO,LSTOY, EMERICK, CHITIEA NOES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER -carried Planning Commission Minutes -15- February` , 1987 DIRECTOR'S REPORT R. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR TRAILS STUDY Karen McGuire-Emery, Assistant Park Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea commented on the Parks Commission recommendation regarding , inns trails and asked if it included those trails which might e planns the future. She stated she would have a problem with that concept because trails may not connect new, but there may be ways of making them connect in the future. She stated she would not like to see those trails eliminated because at this point in time those connections are not there. s. McGuire-Emery stated her understanding was that the trails would be those that are not coterminus with a' regional multi-purpose trail in the future. Commissioner Chitiea stated that her concern was that sometimes the only connections are less than community size trails and to put into the request for proposal the elimination of those trails is not the direction she would like to see taken. She advised that she would like to see an expansion of the trails system throughout the City wherever possible as secondary circulation, whether it be equestrian or minor trails for 'pedestrians. She reoested some anguage within the Request For Proposal to indicate the desire to expand and make 'tra4 ` ,onnections wherever possible and in whatever war possible. Further, s is ti res the connections at a regional or community trail level may not be possible, but she felt that other methods of making these connections should be explored. She considered secondary circulation to be important for the rural atmosphere and for the type of lifestyle the City is trying to promote throughout the community. She additionally requested that all herds be included in the contract to make sore there is no room for additional charges in the future. t was the consensus of the Commission that with the comments received this evening, the report be forwarded to the City Council . S. TERRA V l A MEDIANS Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. John Melcher, representing Lewis Homes, urged that the direction be for staff to work with the City Engineer and the Traffic Engineer to minimize the lengths needed for the mid-block median breaks so that landscaping can be maximized. Planning Commission Minutes -16- February 25, 1987 It was the concurrence of the Commission to accept staff's recommendation to permit a mid-block median break within Church Street between Elm and Milliken. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. d 00N a. Motion: Moved by Tol stoy, seconded by Chi ti e , unanimously carried, to adjourn. 11:00 p. _ planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -17- February 25, 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting February 11, 1987 Chairman David Barker 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 Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: E. David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: one STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Barnes, Parks Supervisor; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Greg Gage, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner; Debra Meier, Assistant Planner; Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the March 11, 1987 Planning Commission would be cancelled due to lack of quorum. The Commissioners will be attending the Planning Commissioners Institute from March 11 through 16. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Emerick, unanimously carried, to approve the Minutes of January 14, 1987, with language amendments by Commissioner Chitiea to pages 13 and 14, and to page 7 by Chairman Barker. CONSENT CALENDAR A. TENTATIVE TRACT 13057 (DESIGN REVIEW) - THE FIELOSTOWCOMPANY - Review of s e an an -- In itecture f6F THR ' '1305'7';' ''an approved it pld bu1 Td- _g arch residential subdivision of 11.11 acres within the Victoria Planned Community (Low-Medium Residential 4-8 dwelling units per acre) into 147 lots, located at the southeast corner of Highland Avenue and Deer Creek - APN 202-211-13, 38. Motion; Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to adopt the consent calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY END ENT -0 re ues amen a erra anise ommurlr y y s al) fishing a Business Park Overlay Zone for areas designated as Office Pare, Commercial and Mixed Use, within the Planned Community boundary - APN 1077-4 1-0 , 1077-091-17. (Continued from January 14, 19 7) Chairman Harker announced that the Planning Commission was in receipt of a letter from the applicant requesting this item be continued to the Feoruary 5, 1987 meeting. He then opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Notion: Moved by Tol stoy, seconded by Chi ti ea, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 86-02 to the February 25, 1987 Planning Commission agenda. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Do - NEW HOPE roposa o oda e c uric u ace y o s re ee wi n an eist sting multi-tenant industrial center in the General Industrial District (Subarea 1) located at dS O Vineyard Avenue - APN 07- 2 -49 Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. _ Chairman Darker opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed,, Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, recommended that "during hours of religious assembly and group meetings` be added to the end of Condition relative to nurseries and Sunday School Commissioner Tolstoy recalled past enforcement problems with uses such as this net meeting Fire Department requirements. He stated he would.` not like to see that situation repeated Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that Condition 6 stated that public assembly or large group meetings cannot occur until compliance; with Fire Department regulations. He pointed out that the condition further requires plans to be submitted to Foothill Fire District and the building to be inspected prior to issuance' of occupancy permits. Planning Commission Minutes February 11, 197 Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Toltoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit Hb- , with an amendment to Condition 8 adding "during hours of religious assembly and group meetings". Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS MCNIEL, TOLSTOY, BARKER, CHI IEA, E ERICK NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND AMENDMENT TO TITLE 14 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Emerick questioned Item K and the use of 75 as the percentage of the units that have been leased or rented. He felt that if 5 of the units were vacant, perspective tenants would still need direction to the leasing office. He suggested that ,the figure be increased to 90 Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the top reader board should announce the name of the planned community. Commissioner Chi ti ea suggested that guidelines be developed outlining the appropriate sign design and the type of illumination allowed. She advised that directional signs should net be misconstrued as advertising because of the way they are designed and illuminated. Commissioner Tol stay was concerned with the design of commercial/industrial project signs and stated they should be coordinated with the uniform sign program for the center and should be of permanent construction. He felt that Exhibit "811 of the Resolution was appropriate for planned communities signs; however,, felt that the de sign n wa s not industrial project. g appropriate for a commercial or r Coleman advised that when commercial or industrial signs are submitted, staff reviews the design for architectural compatibility with the project. He pointed out in many cases the shape and form of the sign reflects the form or design feature of the building. Chairman Barker suggested that staff be directed to address the commercial and industrial signs as another.issue. He then opened the public hearing. John Melcher, representing Lewis Homes, concurred with the findings of the staff report. He addressed the issue of vacancy percentage and advised that he would concur with Commissioner Emerick"s proposal to increase the percentage to 9 Planning Commission Minutes -5 February II, 1987 Commissioner McNi el asked if a sign design proposal had been submitted. r. Mel Cher replied that a design had been submitted and reviewed by staff. He indicated that the sign would have a header board at the top whicn refers to Tura vista and will nave the names of residential projects only. He stated that he had discussed with staff the possibility of occasionally where appropriate to identify non-commercial community features such as parks and schools. Chairman Harker asked if the proposed language that would prohibit that type of sign use.. . Coleman stated that language had not been included to address this issue, however, could be added if the Commissiondesied. Commissioner Tol stay asked if Mr. Mel Cher would object to adding "Planned Community" to the header board announcing Terra Vista. r. Melcher agreed to that addition. There were no further comments, therefore the public hewing was closed. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chi ti ea, to recommend adoption of Environmental Assessment and Amendment to Title 14 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code ` concerning directional signs to the City Council , with edification to item K to increase the percentage to 90 , and inclusion of an announcement of the planned community to the top header: board identifying i t as a planned community. The Commission directed staff to refer the sign design to the Design Review Committee. Motion carried by the following vote. AYES: COMMISSIONERS MCNIEL, CHITiEA, BARKER, EM RICK, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Commissioner McNiel questioned if there was an opportunity on the BIA signs to place items such as historic sites in the community. r. Buller stated that staff could place this topic on the Planning Division work program. He stated that discussions could be undertaken with the RIA to determine if criteria: could be developed. He cautioned against anything which might be misconstrued as a commercial venture advertisement as in cases such as the Christmas House and Thomas Winery. Commissioner Emerick thought it a worthwile topic for discussion and suggested that it be placed on the work program list. At the time of the work program review, the priority level could be established, Planning Commission Minutes a4 February 11, 1987 NEW BUSINESS E. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT B -C1 - KUN & COMPANY - Appeal' of taff's decision e�rova en ev reel oca e in rant of the Woolworth's Garden Center the south 'side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Helms Avenue - AP B 208-261-55. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the;staff report. Commissioner Chi tiea asked what` the City had done to initiate removal of this nonconforming sign. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, advised that under State law the only way the City can remove a billboard' is through the condemnation process. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Jim Gentry,' representing Kunz and Company, advised that the gees in question are blocking a lawfully erected outdoor advertising di spl ay. He stated that it came to his attention that the City of Rancho Cucamonga required the trees to be planted as part of the approval process for development of this site. He felt the trees have now grown to such a height as to limit the use of the display. He believed removal of the trees to be the most equitable solution for all involved. At Kunz and Company expense, he would be willing to plant smaller replacement bashes or trees at the discretion of the City.; Secondly, he was willing to remove the sign with fair compensation by the City either monetarily or by allowing relocation to a suitable site on 1-1. . Mr. Gentry read an excerpt from the State of California Business and Professions Code relative to just compensation. Doug Lion, Rancho Cucamonga resident, opposed the tree removal request. He stated that if the City required the trees to be planted as part of a project approval process it seemed rather ridiculous to now require them to be removed. He did not ;consider the fact that the trees had grown to be a valid reason for removal . There were no further public comments. Chairman Barker asked for counsel 's direction on this issue. Ralph Hansen, Deputy City Attorney, stated that Mr. Gentry presented his appeal on the assumption of an inverse condemnation action by the City to effect the taking of private property. He advised that he `saw no facts to justify that there has been such action by the City. Planning Commission Minutes -5 February 11, 1987 Chairman Barker stated that the City has, as a condition of approval , required the planting of trees and landscaping. The appellant believes that this action makes the City responsible for the impact to his sign. He asked for counsel 's opinion. i r. Hanson stated that it might be said that there has been an impact pact and the City has been responsible; however, whether that impact raises se to the level of an actual taking of the usefullness of that property would be a matter for the j court to decide. He stated that by the appal l ant's own admission, it only limits the value of the sign. By this statement by the appellant, he indicated the appellant has failed` to meet the grounds for the taking of property. He further advised that even if the Commission was to approve the tree removal permit, there would still be no authority to cut down the trees since this applicant did not own the trees and the City does not have the property owner's permission. He stated that the City can't sanction this as-a permit to tr ss ass on to other property to damage that property. He advised denial of the Tree Removal Permit based on that fact. Commissioner Emeri ck asked to be supplied with a copy of the text from which r. Gentry read. r. Ranson advised that this was the section he was referring to, which dealt with non-compensated removals. He advised that this section really has nothing to do with inverse condemnation in terms of taking of property, out actually addresses the limitation of the traditional way cities formerly dealt with billboards which was to amortize them over a 20 ,year period. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the tree, planting for the area in question is consistent with that which is presently being required on Foothill Boulevard. Commissioner Emerick stated that the applicant's thinking that any time a person with a partially blocked sign would have a cause of action against the City was ludicrous. He did not support the applicant's appear. Commissioner Chitiea pointed out that the sign is still visible. She did not support the appeal Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel , to deny the appeal Tree Removal Permit 8741. Motion carried by the following vote; AYES: COMMISSIONERS CNITIEA, MCNIEL, E ERICK, BARKER, TCLSTOY" NOES: CC NIISSIQ ERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -C February 11, 1987 F. PRELIMINARY REVIEW 80-7 - NUWEST - A consistency determination between the oo i orrl or n erim d icles and a proposed 90,700 square foot integrated shopping center on 8. 7 acres of land in the General Commercial District located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman APN `.CB- bI- S and 26. Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, Presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Frederick Chan, NuWest Corporation, urged approval of the consistency determination. Commissioner M Niel asked if there were a major tenant for center at this time. r. Chan advised that there will be 4 or S major tenants for this center and that tenant co ittment for approximately 40 of the spade had been secured at this time. Kenji Nomura, Nadel Partnership, gave an overview of the project. Chairman Barker explained the consistency determination process and its relationship to the Foothill Corridor Study. There were no further public comments. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would rather have a project similar to this proposal than a strip commercial project. His concern was the discussion o this proposal prior to completion of the Foothill Plan. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that staff anticipated that public hearings on the Foothill Plan would begin in approximately 45 days. Commissioner Chi ti ea stated that as member of the Foothill Ltd Hoc Committee she felt this project would be consistent with the direction the Committee will be recommending to the Commission and Council She pointed out that the project would be consistent in that it is a master planned project which is sensitive to architectural style. As to the specific site plan, she commented that those items would need to be addressed during ; the review process. Overall , she felt the project conceptually was consistent with the Interim Policies. Commissioner McNi el agreed that the project would be consistent with the Interim Policies. He further stated that the project has to go through the normal review process, and didn't think those issues should; be discussed at this time: Planning Commission Minutes -7 February 11, 1987 Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Mc;Niel unanimously carried, to determine Preliminary Review 86-77, Nuwest, to be consistent with the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies. I C. HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT Ho- 1C TAYLCR - Appeal of staff's decision enyf ng Occupation Permit ­at__8I59__Malachite Avenue (Continued from January 28, 1987)i, Greg Cage, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker advised that this item has been before the Commission on two occasions and had not been heard in order to make sure the applicant had an opportunity to appear. The applicant has been contacted and is aware of this evening's hearing and was given every opportunity to be present. Commissioner Chitiea stated that staff' s findings are sufficient to deny the appeal , specifically based on noise, vibration, fumes and the outward changes to the appearance of the property, Motion; Moved by McNiel ,; seconded by Chitiea, unanimously tarried, to deny the appeal of Home Occupation Permit 8 - C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT H. CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSION/POTENTIAL OF RESIDENTIAL PROJECT IN ETIWANOA - DI 'acre 5iRill ar la6doca orl—thesouth s _um_ `i , wes� of San Sevaine Creek - AP -11-0 .: Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Emeri ck questioned if there was an additional alternative which was not in the packet. Mr. ruiadvised h h o t l _ that when the project was reviewed by g the Design Review Committee, the Committee had concerns with trails and lot widths. H explained that the applicant prepared an alternative which eliminated the east.-west trail ' connection and eliminated quite ; a few lots in order to increase the lot widths to 60 feet, Commissioner Chitiea asked if the trails connect to existing trails. Mr. Kroutil advised that these are not egdestian lots; therefore, there are no trails proposed. He indicated that the project north of Summit ties into the Community Trail Commissioner Toltoy questioned the length of the cul-de-sacs. Planning Commission Minutes -H February 11, 1987 r. Kroutil advised that the cul-de-sacs are 600 feet, which is the maximum length allowed. Commissioner Eerick questioned the interpretation of the common open spade and private open space definitions within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. . kouti 1 advised that common open space is to be visually accessible, but is not interpreted to mean that the open space must be used actively. He advised that the alternate depicts open fencing at the rear of the lots. Commissioner Emerick stated that by definition, he did not consider the plan to comply with the Etiwanda Specific Plan because 12.88 acres is within the rack yard areas and cannot be used as private open space. r. Buller pointed out that the open space is accessible off the public right- of-way Commissioner Emorick-stated it seems that the back yards and passeos are being assessed as private open space. r. Kroutil advised that the intention was to create a condition which exists in Etiwanda in that the development is not fenced off. He advised that the 30 open apace requirement was not only for uses of the land, ;but for the enjoyment and open space. He indicated that visually accessible may or may not include fencing.` Commissioner McNiel stated that the objective under the Optional Standards was to upgrade the; concept of development. He felt that this is a typical development with some amenities l`oosly attached because of the Etiwanda Specific plan* He stated he knew this developer could come up with some wider street frontage to create that kind of concept the City hied to create years ago during the review of the Etiwanda .Specific Plain. he stated this is a basic project with amenities added on as an after thought. Joe 8i lori , project developer, and Jess Harris gave a slide presentation and overview of the proposed project. Commissioner Chi ti ea referred to the pan with the center park design and asked if it would provide for equestrian uses. r. Cilorio advised that there is a trail north of the center park site; However, a trail was not required down the center of the site. He felt it would be difficult in the center park concept to work In an equestrian trail .. Planning Commission Minutes -g February 11, 198 Commissioner Mc Niel stated that under the Basic Standards the average lots sizes are 15,00 square feet. Under this plan, the average size is 9,800 to 10,000 square feet, which nets an addition 80 units and a 60increase in density. He stated that for some time the Commission has discussed innovative design; and greater variation in str etscape. This plan depicted neither of those items and he was not nappy with the proposal . ` tated that one reason the project was referred to the full I Barkers Chairman � p , Commission by the Design Review Committee was to discuss the appropriateness of granting 0 open space credit for the parkways, front yards and passed system. Commissioner McNiel stated that he could not see where the developer had achieved that concept. Commissioner Emeri ck stated that 0 open spate shbul d mean something to the people who live in the project. He was concerned with the project open space and how it would be maintained and saw no way around requiring aHomeowners' Association. He suggested it might give more options if a gradient was used to determine open space. Commissioner Chitiea stated that moving the houses ;back on the lot to provide extra space in the front ', r was an interesting concept, however, she was concerned with the maintenance at the rear of the property. Commissioner Tol stoy stated he could see that a lot of thought went into the project with its sensitivity to maintain'' the Eti Wanda character+ He thought private open space should be enjoyed by"the people who live in the project. He shared the concern that if someone is not made responsible, the open space won't be maintained. He was additionally concerned that the passeos don't seem to go any where and didn't think they work in this project. iorio addressed the issue of maintenance and stated that the question is whether a Homeowners' Association or a landscape maintenance district would be the most appropriate method. Commissioner Emerick addressed the issue of whether open space credit should be given for the surplus beyond the front yard setback and did not agree that it should be given or at least not fully. He ,pointed out that the front yard setbacks are being increased at the expense of narrowing the lot widths and placing the houses closer together; He stated that passeos should be part of the circulation system; however, these particular passeso simply go from one edge of the tract boundary to the other edge of the tract boundary and don't lend much to the open space due to their configuration. He further stated that the City wants to retain the windrows and the existing trees on the site and wants open space along Summit to help the appearance of the entire community. He did not feel the plan provided enough of a trade off. Planning Commission Minutes -10 February 11, 1987 Commissioner Chitiea pointed out that if the site were developed at 2 unit per acre, this would be horse property as it is in within the Equesti an Overlay Area. This development would require installation of bridle paths behind the lots, which in effect would be the same thing as a passeo system. She pointed out that in parts of Alta Loma the windrows are either adjacent to or incorporated into the bridle area in the 'rear of the lots. 1n the 2 dwelling unit per range, she felt this would be another alternative to getting the system in and still maintaining windrows and the secondary circulation. Chairman Barker disagreed that common open space was to be interpreted as visually accessible and Mated it was not what he had in mind during the Eti Wanda Specific Plan discussions. Because he was having trouble agreeing with that interpretation,' he was also having difficulty agreeing than open space credit should be given. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that development under the optional standards would' accentuate and preserve the -Etiwanda appearance. Further•, that visually could mean not so much from the user's standpoint but the passerby visually seeing the open space. Mr. krouti l stated the Commissioners, should keep in mind that the definitions were set up to work with any type of a product, net necessarily with only a single family detached subdivision. The attempt was made to make the definition as general as possible within the constraints of some interpretation. Commissioner Tol stoy stand that the setbacks of the existing houses along tiwanda Avenue give the feeling of open space rather than the closed feeling of a tract development. Chairman Barker stated that the argument is that it is not commonly useful property whether it part of a Homeowners' Association or not. He felt that common open space should not be interpreted as common visual open space, but people should have common physical access to the open space. He was concerned that if it is not interpreted this way, it would meean from this point on anyone would be allowed to donate anything and the City would have to say if you can see it ,you can get credit for it. Commissioner Emeickstated that the literal interpreation seems to support that in order to give credit for open space it has to be physically accessible to everybody in ;the community; however, Mr. Kroutil stated that the intent of the Committee was to make it so: that it was visual open space. Unfortunately, the Committee didn't define it far, enough. Mr. Buller stated that staff" brought three major issues for discussion and were not asking for a decision. He pointed out that after this evening's discussion Mr. DiIorio will make a decision as to whether to pursue a formal application. He advised that staff would work with the applicant should he want to pursue a formal submittal and bring the item before the Planning Commission in a formal public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -1 ' February;11, 1987 Jim Frost, Rancho Cucamonga resident, stated that his concept was to encourage some innovation and location of footprints, cluster of housing, oringing homes together, and siding on lots to provide the illusion of openness something that was visually accessible to all . Commissioner Chi tiea stated that the developer should be sensitive to equestrian use connecting up to other trails through the community. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he attended the Etiwanda Specific Plan meetings and felt that the Etiwanda residents wanted the illusion of open space. Commissioner Emerick stated he would like to see open space along Summit, as many of the existing trees saved as possible along the boundaries of the parcel , and possibly an open space scheme of 5-10%. However, the plan doesn't allow the concentration of density to bring the lots down slightly under 15,000 square feet if 5-10% open space is created on the parcel unless something else is done with the plan. Commissioner Barker asked how much flexibility is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Mr. Buller stated that staff interpreted the Plan to stated that once you cross over the line of over two dwelling units per acre, 30% open space is required. He advised twat staff could entertain the possibility of a gradient or sliding scale, at the Commission's direction. He did not see that the Etiwanda Plan prohibits that interpretation, but cautioned that once the interpretation is made it sets a precedent in the review of other projects. Mr. Kroutil stated that the use of a gradiation of density presumes that if the 30% is met, 4 units per acre would be allowed. He pointed out that it may not always work out because of a lot of other considerations. Mr. Buller advised that staff would not recommend a straight sliding scale, but one that is flexible with the Commission review on a project-by-project basis. Commissioner Tolstoy was concerned that the interpretation allow the flexibility since he would not like to see development at the top of the range with a mediocre project. Commissioner Emerick stated that where the 30% open space works the best is in the hillside area where 30% of the site that is the steepest would be left and the concentration of the units on the remainder of the site. He felt that a plan developed on flat land area such as this one seems to have a lot of contrived open space. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to see 30% open space but all usable. Planning Commission Minutes -12 February 11, 1987 Chairman Barker stated that even though the Commissioners have come at this from different directions, they all agree as to the final outcome in that they all want that feeling of open space, feeling of setback, and all want to he able to step on it. r. Dilorio stated to get that pure open space you either wind up with a patched type product or you wind up with the central park concept and lots that are approximately 450U square feet. Matnameticall,y, he advised that the only other alternative is the one they had come up with. Chairman Barker stated he felt there was some indication for a degree of flexibility within conservative parameters Co issioner Emerick stated that the central spine or park concept does not give the visually accessible open space to the entire community. he 'stated that ghat the Commission is saying :is for this particular site the O open apace might not justify the granting of the bonus because it doesn't work. There was no further discussion. I. EUCALYPTUS BORER BEETLE PROBLEM Jeff Barnes, Parks Supervisor, presented the staff report and slide presentation, Commissioner Tols o,y stated that for many years the City has discussed the preservation of windrows. He was concerned that many of the trees that were planted 50 years ago are in a weakened condition. Be was also concerned with the replacement policy which provided replacement with another variety of Eucalyptus 'since it is not known at this time if those varieties will also be attacked by the beetle. He felt that the City should notify the citizens of the Borer Beetle problem so that if an amendment needs to be made to the Tree Preservation Ordinance in the future, they will have been alerted. He also suggested that the City provide publicity that deep watering of the Eucalyptus trees seems to deter Borer Beetle infestation. It was the consensus of the Commission that staff look into ways to publicize the Borer Beetle problem and also begin looking for alternate replacement trees. COMMISSION BUSINESS J. ESTABLISHMENT OF WORKSHOP DATE - Staff recommends that workshop dates be set for the o dwin r ears, esign Excellence Program, and Terra 'Vista Architecture. Planning Commission mute Februar :::I1., 1987 The Planning Commission selected he ted the date Of February 6, 1 87" for� the above PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no Public ants. ADJOUNRMENT Motion: 'laved b� Tolsta adjourn. ,�� -seconded y Emericko unanimously 12:45 a.m. - Planningto Commission n espedt�`ut�J submitted, Adjourned. carried,itted, /ra r - ePu `D ; Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -14 February 11, 1987 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3 Regular Meeting January 28, 1987 i i Chairman David Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Co fission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line ; Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California._ Chairman Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance, ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: E. David Barker, Susanne Chit ea, Bruce Emerick, Larry McNiel , Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: Nome STAFF PRESENT: Brad Bul l er, City Planner; Dana Coleman, Senior Planner; Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, Greg Gage, Assistant Planer; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner; Janice Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary; Chris Wes an, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the Planning Commissioners Institute would be held March Ilth 'through the 13th. He asked the Commissioners to inform staff as soon as possible if they would be able to attend the conference.' CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW -3 - TAG DEVELOPMENT - eve oilmen an , square oo corporate—,an a finis ra Tive office building with light storage facilities on 0.61 acres of land in the Industrial Park District (Subarea E) located on the north side o Trademark Sheet, 927 feet west of Haven Avenue - APN 210-381-6. B. CT 10035 (DESIGN REVIEW) - RANCHO ASSOCIATES - Design Review of uf hg e ova ions an p pans f o sing am ly lots on 15.7 acres in the Low Density Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located southeast of Red Hill Country Club, south of Cal l e Corazon - A H 07- 31-C1 through 23 'and '07-6 1-01. through 12. C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 19 - YAZ CAIH The review of revs se o pan, wo new eva it ons an oor ohs Plan A2 and 8 to replace the approved Plan A and Plan 8 for 20 lots of the total 26 lots, n the Low Medium Residential District 48 dwelling units per acre) located on the south side of Arrow Highway at Edwin Street - APN 207-222- 8. C. TRAILS FENCING STANDARDS Commissioner Tolstoy requested Item C be removed for discussion. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chi ti ea, unanimously carried, to adopt items 'A through C of the Consent Calendar. D. TRAILS FENCING STANDARDS Commissioner Tolstoy asked for more information about the proposed fencing material . He rioted that PVC has been used in Heritage Park:. He questioned j the durability of PVC and the fact that PVC is not rigid. Commissioner Chitiea advised that one of the reasons PVC was chosen was because of its flexibility which makes it safer for horses :and riders, She stated that the manufacturer has given a 20 year guarantee for the fencing material ; however, the material had net been tested for the -full 20 years a t had not been out that long. Commissioner Tolstoy asked the cost advantage of PVC. Commissioner Chtiea stated that she believed PVC to be less expensive than concrete; however, did not have the figures. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that answered has questions, however, he was still concerned with the durability. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the City Engineer advised that he might have a contact by which the City could test the product; however, the testing period would be approximately 6 months. He suggested that staff could have the material tested and report back to the Planning Commission and Trails Committee. Commissioner Chitiea stated that it would be appropriate to test the material . In the meantime, she suggested that PVC be required throughout the City rather than continue with concrete, which has serious problems. Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 28, 1987 Motion Moved by Tolstay, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adopt item D of the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS E. PARCEL MAP 5786 - MODIFICATION - CROWELL BROTHERS ® The request to lation of a six C � �on a rove re u�r7 n ns a t foot high masonry wall and additional landscaping along the south boundary lino for an approved office park subdivision located at the southeast corner of Base >Line Road and Carnelian Street - APN 207-031-28. (Continued from December 10 19 ) Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Dave Cooper, 521 N. Mountain, Upland, representing the applicant, objected to the the condition to construct a block wall along the northern boundary and planting of trees and vines along the eastern boundary of the Exchange site. He believed these conditions to be excessive in that the entire site was originally ;approved to include a separate building. He felt there was no association between the site being ,created on Carnelian and the; pedestrian access; problem at the southeasterly portion of the Exchange site. He pointed out that the recordation of this parcel map ;is only necessary to sell the separate site on Carnelian. He felt the applicant was being required to take care of access problems which do net originate on this site, are not being created by this site, and have no relationship to the potential use on Carnelian, and felt this should not be the responsibility of this applicant to mitigate. He advised that extensive landscaping was to be installed along the eastern y boundary of the site by the City as part of the park site, which he felt would help mitigate the pedestrian :access pro blem.em. He stated that the Exchange site was better landscaped than any other commercial project in the City. He advised that additional requirements which would be cost prohibitive to this project would possibly result in site not being developed, which would be self-defeating in the City`s quest to establish a better tax base and provide additional employment opportunities, Chairman Barker stated that the original parcel map was approved subject to certain conditions and asked if it was correct that the map is ;functioning under those conditions at this time. Mr. Buller replied that this was correct, Chairman Barker asked was not the issue at one time that all of the conditions of the original parcel map had not been met. r. Buller replied that this was also correct and that one of the conditions had been the subject walls on the south and east sides. Planning Commission Minutes - - January 28, 1987 I -,I Chairman Barker pointed that the action modification was a request on now before the Co i �on for � approval , y the applicant to elf in to the condition f r lea clarifiedthat i f the modification request on nil conditions would ti i exist, of as net approved, the Commissioner 1Tol stay stated that he was on the ExchangeBuilding was originally reviewed the Commission at the time amount of time was spent in mitigating and recalled that a considerable the South. problems with the existing; houses would At that time the Commission was satisfied that what to provide those homeowners with the at would a done appears that these original conditions were net carried privacy treaded; however, � now Chairman Barker asked red out. requests the applicant he was withdrawing his modification parcel Magi van that he didn't agree to the conditions o approval effect. He advised that the original conditionspp would placed on wool remain in lr, Cooper stated that the applicant a e g quest for aon gnat ly cage before the Ce i ssi on requirement had b waiver of the wall requirement with been nt fu be tf 11 ed since the site had been abut built accordinge felt that the approved plans and more s a wall te one southeasterly property lonel along all of theproperty to the installed at that location because of the except for the e advised that a wall had hot been felt that the requirement had bash stet and the a the ber�nin at drat location, the foot block wall along the southerly boa e wa�ved� applicant was requesting that hoary o the; Exchange site be Mitchell' i tech, llg Cal urea Court, landscaping has not heart al a nod Rancho Cucamonga, e advised that two more trees had blown g stated that the y the developers of the Exchange sits. over during the recent wind star" replaced. He and ping had been damaged duringors and that the landscaping that his family had been threatened b access through their property ..and f other Storms and not begin acmes through of the ark. felt the situation would e worserwith t taking e urged the Commission to require the b he Originallyoet conditioned. block wall as Linda Hirsh g Caluma Count, problem i s with the Parking lot of the Rancho namon a park in is lotwith at night, She ;did g � stated that part of the ge and indicated that cars often provide the necessaryof feel that additional landscaping would conditions for ;bloc wall safety for her popery and supported the original Mr. Cooper stated that the block wall was an and was not a problem emotional issue of the Hir°sc wished to build on or create y the Exchange or the h s pedestrian access' across the Hi sch He stated that. this sit parcel dthet applicant lot was required to have a certain property. ��rt ease trequirements and that that the southeasterlylie stated that the peeing mbar of parting spaces pariner City g lot get very little use Planning` Commission Minutes M t 0 w . �, Y . N •t1 i� i 1 ��� � � r e ,. .; t r A 1� + �M y �, � . 4': 'i i ! tl!it. a -; F: • f ��. * 1F., i t' a *- 3 # • # � ♦ "� a � • d 1 " M. . • M si e a `" � t w.. � m . ! . i i ! ,� t r i • .. .� � t+ R. i M� � r � M .fin � 4 � N ! f • - Mfi � .'i a ,Y �, � e /1 � f . a � 1 � 1 t M M; � N "' fi 1 Commissioner Emerick suggested suggested the original condition be retained which stated that a problem exists with respect to pedestrian access to the south and for this reason the City wants to secure that location with a fence going along the entire length of the property. He suggested this condition be placed on the approval of the newest parcel map. Commissioner c Vi el pointed out this condition would not cover "landscaping along the eastern boundary. 'r. Buller stated that if the Commission' s intent is to add landscaping in addition to the wrought iron pilaster fencing along the east property line, the resolution should be modified to require extensive landscaping and fencing. He advised that Staff did not feel extensive- landscaping was necessary there due to the landscaping being provided by the park site. Commissioner McNiel asked if the consideration was for a wrought iron and pilaster wall along the southerly portion as well , or if that wall would be a continuation of the existing block retaining ►al l Commissioner Emerick clarified that his intent was to require the applicant to construct a wrought iron fence with pilasters along the entire east property line going from the southeast corner: of the property all the way north to the existing wrought iron fencing being created by the adjoining property. Along the south property line, his intent was to require the applicant to construct a masonry gall the length of the irsch's; property and then have the applicant fill in with landscaping in these spaces where landscaping is not adequate at the present time. r. Buller advised that condition 2 requires a masonry wall between the Hi rsch's property ending at their western property line and goes to this subject rcel ' s eastern property line. He further advised there is existing fencing from the western portion of where the new block wall would be constructed all the way to Carnelian. Commissioner McMi el stated his concern with the fence traveling west towards Carnelian. His concern was that the proposed ;block wall connect with another existing fence to make one continuous fence. Commissioner Tolstoy' stated that the block wall will connect to the existing chain link fence'. Commissioner merick, stated that the landscaping along the eastern side appeared spotty, and suggested the possibility of requiring a landscaping plan along the east property line subject to approval by the City Planner. r. Buller suggested; the use of bougainvillea as in condition 3a might be of help to discourage that access Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 28, 1987 oti on: Moved by Emeri dk, seconded by Chi ti ea,, to adopt the Resolution approving the modification with the following amendments: installation of a masonry fence required along the south property line along the Hi rsch's lot, submittal of a landscaping plan along the southern property line to fill in the existing landscaping subject to City Planner approval , a wrought iron fence with pilasters required along the east property line from the southeast corner going north to the existing wrought iron fence, submittal of a landscape plan subject to the City Planner' s approval along the east property line. Deletion of condition 3a and inserting language modifications, and deletion of condition 14 from the exception list. ti on carried by the following vote- AYES: COMMISSIONERS E ERIC , CHITIEA, ;BARKER, MCNIEL,, TCLSTCY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ,ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 10238 - CUCAMONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT su vis1on o acres oT landin o parce s in oo on ro designation located on the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and San Diego Avenue - APN 207-1O1-43. (Continued from January 14, 1987 Chairman Barker announced that the Planning Commission was in receipt of a AM letter requesting withdrawal of this item until completion of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study. O. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-21 TA LOMA C RISTIA reques o convert ah ex s ng , square foot-single amp residence to an office for the Alta Loma Christian Church on .25 acres of land in the boar Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Sapphire, across from Orange - APN 1062-332- 23. (Continued from January 14, 1987 Chairman Barker announced that staff requested a continuance of this item. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that staff was recommending continuance of for a period of 30- S days in order to allow the applicant time to complete some outstanding items of their Conditional Use Permit relative to grading and reseeding of property immediately to the north of the existing building. He pointed out that some grading has occurred and the applicant would soon o reseeding the site. As soon as staff was notified that the reseeding had occurred, the item would be rescheduled. Planning Commission Minutely - _ January 28, 1987 i Commissioner Mc i el stated that if the applicant reseeds within the next few days all of their efforts may be lost as a result of the potential February rains. He suggested that the reseeding might be delayed until after that time period. Chairman Barker opened the public aearin . A representative of the church advised that the reseeding would be done as soon as the grading was completed. He concurred with a continuance to the second meeting in March. William Unles, 675 Sapphire, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that irrigation was required under the original conditions of approval , however had never been installed. He suggested that this also be addressed and questioned why this condition was not enforced in 1983. Chairman Barker stated that these issues would be addressed at the time of the public hearing in March. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded;by Mc Niel , to continue the public hearing the Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 84-21 to the Planning Commission meeting of March 25, 1987. Staff was directed to research the irrigation issue. UU p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 8:1 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Hb-USA KA EER - regdds o amen a an se ElWeht 6f7enera-!­-PT-anfrom Floud Control to Low Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 40 acres of hand located at the southwest corner of the extensions of Banyan and Milliken - APN 01- 71-SS. (Continued from January 14, 1987) Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, presented the staff report, Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Alvin Kaufer, applicant, 445 South Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, stated that when he decided to sell this property it was insisted that the ;buyer agree that they would propose something for the entire parcel that would be consistent with the surrounding area. He believed that by making such ,a requirement, when it came before the Commission it would be favorably received. He felt that K&B had submitted a proposal that is consistent with the surrounding area and urged the Commission's favorable consideration of their ;proposal . He stated there should be some method to assure that the developers would develop the site as proposed, and offered his assistance as the property owner to the Commission. Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 28, 198 .N « «,, - .� . � � � � f � . � -� W rar !1 �. �w m � R � r ., � i® s # Qp® � � � x . "Nm • � # � !M ► i * �. �.. ►r �� • � + ,� + � x �.. h � M� r � * • �. � • x ° N. . � s 1 # .� „, + � " M' + tA :: •® ,,:: 1 W � � � M �. i . i y � �. � � � e �, k * � �y � � • � "'� � � # � r � � � • � � �" � �- * � ., �� # � , � � • �: ,, i � * s,* � 'Mltli ® *a ! � r� r a � r' i �> t � � • "* *� N:� Chairman Barker was concerned with the impacts on grading and the lot widths. He advised that the City would not allow any more developments where the primary focus of:the s re t c pe is garage doors. He did not consider Low Medium to he an appropriate designation; however would entertain 'a different density and believed the total pac a e should be looked at by; the Commission. Commissioner Tol stay ;agreed and further Mated that the biggest problem with the higher density is the slope. He concurred that the grading, drainage, and garage door issues are very important, He stated that higher density is something we have too much of in the City Motion: Moved by Chi ti ea, seconded by McNiel , to recommend denial of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment o- A to the City I Council . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA CNIEL, BARKER, EMERICR TOLSTCY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ONE -carried I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENUMENT 7-01A - CITY 4F n' app ica 'on o amen e an sd even d e ahem an` rom Office to either Lew Residential (2-4 dwelling units per arcre) or Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 1. 1 acres of land at the northeast corner of San Bernardino Road and Carnelian Street APN; 0 - 9- 9, 32, 60, 74, 77. Otto Kroutil , Senior planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what is proposed for Lot 77 and how many owners are associated with 'these 1 ots. r . Kroutil referred the question to the property owner' s representative. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Steve Lucas, 949 Apricot, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the property owner, stated that all of these parcels and the 4-acre site adjacent to the east are owned by the same person and have been for over 30 ,years. He gave an overview of the history of the property. The position of the property owner was that a buffer is deeded between the commercial 'on the south side of San Bernardino Road and the residences on the north side. To place more residential units in that area or an increase to the density he did not consider Bauch of a buffer. He felt an office use nicely landscaped and maintained would be a nice visual use of the site and a visual buffer between the more and less intensive uses. He stated that the site on the south side is not ;lust a commercial use behind the winery, it is the winery site. It is a 10 acre site Planning Commission Minutes -1. - January 28, 1987 and is going to be awfully hard to develop because of the Ci ty' s wishes to maintain the historical facilities® He felt that residences across the street would create more problems and additionally the corner is a bad location for residential because of the traffic at the intersection. He advised that the owner was not comtenplating selling this office site separate of the residential piece adjacent to it and that piecemeal development of the site is not contemplated. Commissioner Tol stoy asked if tni s particular piece of property is zoned for office, was the intent that the existing houses would be eliminated and the entire site master planned as one parcel . Mr. Lucas advised that this is the intent of the property owner. He suggested the possibility of a lot line consolidation as a guarantee, which would be consistent with the property owners intent. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that whether this General Plan Amendment goes forward as suggested or the site remains Office Professional , a lot consolidation into one lot would be a wise choice and encouraged the applicant pursue that course of action. There were no further comments, therefore' the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Ch tiea stated that Mr. Lucas's arguments regarding; the use of the site in terms of desirability make a lot of sense. From a traffic standpoint, single family homes would be desirable to minimize impacts to San Bernardino Road; however, she couldn't imagine anyone wanting to live there. She supported the concept of master planning this piece of property and the consolidation of lots. She felt the landscaping going up Carnelian to Hemlock eight make a much better window on that corner. Based on these considerations, she suggested the site remain Office Professional . Commissioner McNiel stated that he could not picture an office building setting on than corner; however, felt that a' restaurant might not be a bad idea. He felt it would be to the property owner's advantage to ; go to residential to al 1 ow for the possibility of a restaurant use. Commissioner Tol sto,y stated that tow Medium Residential would be the beat interest of the land as long as it was master planned as one lot. He felt the site should be master planned even with a commercial designation and stated it would be essential to get the separate parcels into one large usable piece. He felt Low Medium would be the best use for that piece of property and provide a better transition with the adjacent properties'. Commissioner Emerick concurred with Commissioner Tolstoy that Low Medium would e the appropriate designation." Planning Commission Minutes -11- January 28, 1987 Chairman Barker pointed out that the lot directly south of this site is the winery which he hoped would be developed in some thematic design and would be commercial . He stated he could see a restaurant on that site, but coul do"t see the site used for office, He felt It would be an an uncomfortable for _r esid-' • sit e res idential . al;. Since a restaurant would be appropriate for an • Office Professional designation, he would be inclined to support that designation. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how the residences on Hemlock would be protected from the parking lot situation that is going to occur; with a restaurant on this site. Chairman Barker stated that it would not be easy; however, he felt the situation could be mitigated. His major concern is that he- didn't know too many people who would want to live on that site given the lights and noise of traffic on Carnelian. He pointed out that these issues would also have to be mitigated with residential development. Motion: Moved by McNi el , seconded by Chi ti ea, to recommend denial of General Plan Amendment 87-01A to the City Council . Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS MCNIEL, CHITI A, BARKER NOES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICk, TOL TOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NO NE -carried J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12870 4 ANDERSON - A resi en a su tvs on' o cos om s an one rema n er parce on 66.9 acres of l anal �n the Ver L Rena d .y entail District (less than dwelling units per acre, "located on the north side of Highland Avenue between Etiwanda and East Avenges - APN 12, 13, 19, 20, 21, and 30. In addition, the applicant h'as requested a Tree Removal Permit to remove two ( ) east-west Eucalyptus windrows and one (1) north-south Eucalyptus windrow. Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, presented the staff' report. Commissioner Chitiea advised that the Trails Committee reviewed this tract and determined that the crossings proposed on a very busy street would be unsafe,; therefore, the Committee revised their recommendations for the circulation to include only one crossing at that street. She pointed out this this decision would be A-typical of the intent of the Committee in terms of internal ci rcul ai on. Chairman Barker opened ;the public hearing, Tony Mize, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project. Planning Commission Minutes -1 - January PH, 1987 * * a m * ` , r * # iw s a i i � i:. i . ♦ i m � � � is � . i s� �'� is i « i:.. .'i i �i '. i ♦..: i i * ! m •a , i * ri * .� ♦ � * * Mid" « � # * ` * , * '' • * i ror* i r . « i aii i !M a i . m i i � � e i i i �-•� i . a . i i a e • Commissioner Chitiea stated; that the windrows are beautiful as they exist and liked to see preserved whenever possible. She concurred, however, with the statements of the other Commissioners and thought that future people will still have the beauty of the windrows with the replacement ent trees and Eti wanda will again retain the windrow effect it has today. She further stated that from a ;safety and liability standpoint, she would support the amorist and staff recommendations. Chairman Barker asked if a report by another arbrist as suggested by Mrs. Al l erton would make any difference in the Commissioner's opinion of this project It was the concurrence of the Commission that a second arbori st would not be necessary. Chairman Barker recalled that there was somewhat of a tradeoff with this development in that the developer could have increased the density considerably in this project; however, this particular design reduces the density to much less than what it could have been. He felt them had been sensitivity attempted in the maintenance of three east-west major branches of the windrows and an interesting bit of sensitivity in that the trees are being planted now so that they will develop some size when the freeway does go in. He stated that he did not like to see trees removed; however, in this particular instance he agreed with rest of Commission. Motion: Moved by " olstoy, seconded by Emerick, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 12870. otion carried by the following vote. AYES COMMISSIONERS TOL TOY, EMERICK, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT, COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried r. Buller advised that notices for this meeting were mailed on January 15, 1987. Chairman Barker asked if the site was posted with 4' 8' signs. Mr Buller advised that the site was ; not posted with the lame notification signs; however, 6 public hearing placards were placed on the property. Chairman Barker stated that in Etiwanda the removal of trees is a sensitive issue and sites within that area should be posted with 48 signs. r', Buller asked if that direction would include any subdivision in Etiwanda. Chairman Barker stated that a subdivision of any size in Etiwanda, should be posted. Planning Commission Minutes -14- January 28, 1987 Commissioner Chltiea added that sites which include historical trees or something on the site that would be of interest to the Commission should also be posted. Commissioner Tolstoy advised that later in the meeting he intended to propose that the Commission go back and look at; the Tree Ordinance in light of the beetle which has come to our area and is destroying Eucalyptus trees. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 86-08 - SPETNA EL - A request to wad ve a maximum e7 regu remen ee tar radio antenna to allow n existing antenna 5C feet in height to a extended to 7Q feet on a sore parcel 1 n the Very Low Residential District (less than �w 1 i tig units per acr4e 1 ocate at Carol Avenue - ARN 1 1-1 1 Greg Gage, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Emerik asked if the regulations are 35 why the applicant has an existing 54 foot antenna. r. Gage advised that the antenna was installed without the Cit 's review or approval Chairman Barker opened the public hearing; Charles Spetnagel , 5327 Carol Avenue, stated that on May 29, 1986 he attempted o secure a building permit for a 35 foot antenna tower. His intent was to erect the tower and then seek permission to construct the tower to the height e desired, The Planning Division and Engineering Divisions both approved his application and signed off on the building permit form. Building and Safety informed him that his drawings for the footings were unacceptable and the tower would have to be installed as if it were a flag pole. He was told that the depth of the footing would have to be 1 foot for every 2ifeet in height. He informed Building and Safety that this was ridiculous and that the drawings were done by a reputable erector of commercial and amateaur towers. He became frustrated and cancelled the application and obtained a refund of permit foes, He advised that the tower is of proven design and has been on the market for over 20 years and the footings are capable of supporting towers up to 300 feet in height.. He acknowledged that the City has legitimate health, safety and welfare concerns but the footings were installed per manufacturers instructions. These instructions had been reviewed and approved by registered civil; engineer licensed in the state of California. He stated that his station operates under automatic control as a relay station available 24 hours a day for amateurs in four counties. He felt that an extraordinary condition does exist, that a nonconformity ; does not exist, consequently nothing was self-imposed and the only special privilege was his privilege to operate an amateur radio station. He indicated th at t staff fails` to address the exclusion of public service, public welfare, and emergency radio from Planning Commission Minutes -1 - January 28, 1987 height restrictions. He felt his supporting documents proved that part of the justification of the amateur radio service is to provide emergency communication and an amateur radio is continuously involved in public service activities. He Mated that his request for 70 feet is the minimum height required to accommodate reasonable communication on the frequencies on which he operates. Chairman Barker questioned the height of the tower. r.. 5petnagel advised that the tourer is 50 feet in height: Chairman Barker asked if a vertical antenna was placed on top of that height. r petnagel replied that this Was correct and that he used a high frequency agi antennae Commissioner Emerick asked Mr. 5petnagel if he had any feedback from his neighbors as far as the current antennas. Mr. 5petnagel' stated that he contacted the three properties directly abutting his and those property owners indicated no objections to the tower. He indicated that he had poled Dan and Hiedi Burns, Thomas and Martha Stanton and Betty and Don Anderson., Commissioner Emerick asked if the height of the antenna; would impinge upon anyone's view of the mountains. r» Spetnagel stated that he didn't feel the tourer would impinge any more than the current transmission lines. Commissioner Toltoy asked if Mr. Spetnagel was prepared to show the Commission what is planned for the top of the tower. r 5petnagel replied he was not and indicated that, this information had not; been requested before tonight. Chairman Harker asked if Mr. Spetnagel considered crank up antennas when this equipment was purchased r. Spetnagel advised that he had owned this tourer for a number of years. Wayne Cverveck, 900 Avenida Salvatore, San Clemente, professor of: communications, California Mate University Fullerton, supported the applicant's request. He presented slides which he felt illustrated why a radio amateur would want a high antenna. He stated that what amateaur radio is all about is emergency communication, which is why the FCC has recently issued an order pyre-emting local regulations that unreasonably restrict and deny reliable amateaur communications. Planning Commission Minutes -16- January 28, 1987 Chairman Barker: asked since this particular piece of property is located at the northern part of Alta Loma on a slope what kind of impact would that location have on the signal 's angle of entry. r. Overveck advised that a location on a slope working in the uphill direction raises the angle and makes communication more difficult. In the downhill direction, it makes long distance communication easier because the angle is lowered by the terrain. Chairman Barker asked if Mr. Overveck was an expert on antennas. r. Overveck advised that he had written a book and a number of ,journal articles on antennas. Chairman Barker asked if there were any advantages of self supporting towers over the crank up antennas. Mr. Overveck advised that this is a question of economics. A self supporting tower is more expensive. A typical model crank up guyed tower is a much less expensive tower.: A crank up tower that is self supporting and could meet the i ty's code of stayingbelow 35 feet and going up to 5U' feet would be quite a bit more expensive than one that doesn't telescope without guy wires. Commissioner olstoy questioned the 80 Rueter frequency and asked if it was correct that there are other frequencies for emergency communications. Mr. Overveck stated that there are other frequencies for emergency communication. He advised that the applicant proposes to communicate on 'a variety of different frequencies. Each of the various frequency bands have different propagation characteristics. 80 meters comes up sometimes because historically during the Mexico City earthquake it was used extensively for long distance night time communication. Commissioner Tol'stoy asked the communication distance of 80 meters at night. Mr. Overveck advised that the operator would be capable of : world wide communication assuming conditions are reasonable. Tony Petrone, 125 Morgan Way, Upland, supported the request. He pave an overview of the emergency communications aspect of amateaur radios. Ronald Verdon, 6068 Ada Court, Chino, supported the applicant's request and pave an overview of emergency communications. Dan Burns, 5321 ;Carol , adjacent property ;owner stated that he had no problems with Mr. etnael "s antenna as presently constructed. He did not feel the presence of the antenna would affect property values. Planning Commission minutes -17- January 28, 1987 i t Sandy Spetnagel wife of the applicant, supported the request® She advised that the Spetnagels work with the Boy Scouts and urged the Commission's support of'the request. ,d Combs, 7027 Val i na, Rancho Cucamonga, staters that he felt the tower could be seen at the 35 foot height, therefore could not understand the height concerns. He stated; that Mr. Spetnagel has one of the best sites in the area for the private radio tower. The following individuals addressed the Commission in opposition to the Variance request based on aesthetic concerns, interferrence with television reception and loss of property values John Waymeier, 8149 Lucinda Click Miles, 5252 Sapphire Barbara Frye, 5327 Della Penny Senro, dldl. Lucinda Jeff Frye, '5327 Della Sonny Senzari o, 8181 Lucinda Tom Arme o, 5249 Carpal Cheryl Ward, 8153 Lucinda Elliott Cousins, 8214 Lucinda Ethel Waymeier, 81.49 Lucinda Commissioner Chi ti ea asked the applicant if he was only person with a tower - n the West End area, `r. Spetnagel advised that he was not. Commissioner Chi ti ea asked if ;there are other people communicating on these frequencies. r. Spetnagel assumed there are. He rebutted the comments grade during the public hearing by stating that the existing tower was erected ten months ago, and clarify that it was installed the last creek end in ,August 1986. As he previously stated, he attempted to obtain a building permit but 'felt he was getting no where therefore decided to pursue another course of action. He advised that since these proceedings, he had spoken to the City's Building and Safety Department again and asked them what the requirements were for footings. He indicated he met those requirements. He had a California License cense Civil Engineer's calculations and data sheets signed off by him and was not concerned that this tower is unsafe in its present condition or at the proposed height. He advised that he visited Scott Cable, who furnishes cable for this area, and was informed that entire system outages as well as section outages during the past few months were due to the merger of Scott Cable with Acton Cable. Further, that Scott Cable agreed to conduct test if complaints of interference continues to '. verify that Mr. Spetnagel 's station is not i nterferri ng with the cable system. He also verified ;that he had no cable channels operating on frequencies assigned to the amateaur radios. he felt that objections to his station regarding aesthetics are subjective. if Planning Commission Minutes -i w January 28, 1987 i aesthetics alone are allowed to dictate in the neigirborhaod e what structures are or to the Color a , then everyone shouldhave the right on, neighbor paints his houseare not allowed the t to raise objections type of shrubs planted and so i meriCommissioner used if y prior td erecting the tower. Spetnagel mentioned h had r Spetnagel replied that he did, ontacted the Commissioner Emerfc questioned how many times the City had been contacted. r. Spetnagel advised that he had conta Comm issipner cted the pity once. Commissions. meric asked if r. Spetnagel was "informed of the Mr. Spetnagel advised that he was provided height the Development Code, with a copy of Section .60 of Commissioner Emerick ported out to feet height standard at is the Code apparatus that for a stationery tower section that provides for S goes up or down ano l,S feet additional r, Spetnagel Mated that for an contended that his stations available the conflict was is 24 the terra when in use, He Commissioner merick asked hors a day¢ if fir, Spetnagel was hems 24 hours a day. r. Spetnagel stated he was not. Ffowe e operated numerous times curio g the day his station is operating and could Commissioner mer�ic Spetnagel asked if Mrs. else i ne family had the ability operates the r y to operate the radio, ad�o� or if anyone r• Spetnagel replied that neither his wife ability to operate the radio. nor the rest Of the family has the Commissioner Amer a c asked If Mr. Spetnagelhad a 40 hour a week r Spetnagel replied that it wa ,fob. _ _s Chairman Barer asked if the more.: than: hours a station transmits all tooperating. ek} e time. term was operable or opeCa ti ra g• a asked if the r. 'Spetnagel ;stated that the station i not operating capable of repeating digital transmissions. all the time. but it Chairman darker asked f r. �ons, i s r. > S pesos e was as recording the messages. sages,. fanning Commission Minutes January 28,, 1987 r. Spetnagel replied that the messages are not recorded; however, they are stored in a buffer if he cares to access it. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if this is a repeater station, . Spetnagel replied that it is. a of thatpacket Chairman Barker asked i other units depend:. on the existence tence digit peter to continue to function during the day. Mr. Spetnagel Mated that on its present frequency he hasAngeles reception basin,t Palm Springs and Hemet that repeats both ways i the Cos ange County, and along the coast line up to LAX. Commissioner Chi ti ea recalled that Mr. Spetnagel id he decided contacted athe Ci tyd once and because of the information he receive he build his tower. She questioned why he didn't approach someone else or try to go through proper channels There were no further co ent , therefore the public hearing was closed. Chairman Barer stated he would like to try and eliminate li s on which i t some of the he side a issues so the Commission could identify the real issue decision. As fare as the television �f the applicant's equi pment other interference with i s od high fidelity equipment, he indicated that equipment and the neighbors equipment is good equipment there should not be a problem. He pointed out that traditionally am e ethe gon t of work hour eir w to notify their neighbors that they are available to help p problems so that their reputation as ham operators o suggested remains t verythe hi i psi He not did not think interference was a major issue sugg address that issue. He stated the reason for the discussion of the various types and designs of antennas was because otaah concern types of thanten safety ys facto can rs. The winds are emphatic and sometimes be dangerous. Aesthetics is important but he felt there was a technical point to be addressed which is that there can be an antennadoes not meet thosetswhichrds can crank up to 50 feet. This particular antenna there e advised that he had looked through recent antenna down a sales 1 an as d feet is number o antennas which can reach 50 fee which g t depressed state. He felt the two 'issues to be addressed are; is this an unusual enough situation to warrant a variance, was there n o uandei s available which could have been purchased and placed into operation, the regulation itself in need of being evaluated. commissioner Emerick stated that obstruction of view of shouldbe addressed owner not s froman aesthetic point but froma property right pnt property entitled to a certain view right of the mountains and the valley. An obstruction of that view impinges upon someone else°s property rights. Commissioner McNi el disagreed. He suggested that the Commission act on the issue of the illegal antenna. Planning Commission Minutes - C January fig, 198 a Commissioners Emerick and Tol stay stated their opinion that Variance and if the necessary findings could be met to approve issue was the Chairman darker suggested that the: Commissioners pp a variac , findings to see if they could be metago through each of the Commissioner Emerick addressed finding one and stated zoningdistrict should e treated equally unless they can situation. a say no hardship in tha show a hardship t everyone 1n a p this situation in that the applicant could move his antenna to another location or implement some mitigation such as a tower 3S feet station , w stationary w measure r, .y, with ; s h a that's not high enough to meet the required specifications as faras length of radio beam, so be it. f The Commissioners concurred. Chairman Barker suggested there are a number of alternative that could be used. which would comply with the ;Ci ty's code requirements. ,ypes of antennas asked that finding be addressed, eguir eats He Commissioner Emerick stated there has been no show' exceptional or extraordinary circumstances associated with hi s at there are applicant lives in the foothills of the City and there he is request. The n advantage and a disadvantage. The disadvantage is going faces ill herb the radio angle is increased; the disadvantage is that t g down h11 where on the uphill mountain side. He stated that this is not a unique that there are literally hundreds of other a angle is decreased of the foothills. er houses in that same stratio property ion With respent to finding 3, he did not concur that there was a deprivation of privileges enjoyed by others. The 35 foot standard towers applies to everyone in the City. nand for fixed this variance i s granted to allow a higher tower up g to 70 fee , he stated i f granting a special privilege that can't be demonstrated b an of presented in this hearing, t, that would be the facts Motion: Moved y Emerick seconded by Chitiea, to Motion carried by the follow" vote. deny Variance 86-07. AYES. COMMISSIONERS EMERICK, CHITIEA, BARKER MC IEt, TCIT#lY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Chairman Barker directed staff to conduct a surveyof market and the names of the manufactures to assure that there the materials on the types of towers that fir within the framework of t are apprppriate regulations. he Ci ty s current Planning Commission Minutes - 1- January 28, 1987 Commissioner Tot stay asked what would be the disposition of the illegal tower. Mr. Buller advised that staff will proceed with Code Enforcement action and the applicant will be given a, reasonable time to abate the antenna. Commissioner Chitiea commented that one trip to the City that ends with something a person is not happy with should not be cause to go out and do what ever that person wants to do because they are not happy with information that has been given to them. She advised that there are other approaches and other avenues to take. 10:55 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed 11:05 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened NEW BUSINESS L. HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT 86-210 - TAYLOR - Appeal of staff's decision enying "o—m-e--TFccupation Pe it 15 815"alachite Avenue (Continued from January 14, 1987) Greg Gage, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public= comment. The applicant for this item was not in attendance; therefore, it was the consensus of the Commission to continue the item for two weeks. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to continue Home Occupation Permit 86-210 to the Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1987. M. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 86-4111- ARICAL PROPERTIES - The development of a 47,392 square oo -s dryoffice building on-"". 4 acres of land in the Haven Avenue Overlay District (Subarea 61 of the Industrial Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of Haven and 6th Street - APN 209-411-15. Chris es an, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Ralph Hastings, project architect, concurred with the findings of the Resolution and conditions of approval . Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 86-41. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -22- January 28, 1987 AYES: COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, TIIL TOY, BARKER, E ERICI , MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried N. BAIT AND TACKLE STORE IN SUBAREA Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker was concerned with this procedure in that it may establish a precedence and people will begin coming before the Commission for pre- Conditional Use !Permit review before coming up with the formal permit request. Commissioner Totstay 'asked if parking requirements would be impacted by this use. Brad Buller;, City Planner, advised that this issue would be considered when a Conditional Use permit application is submitted. Commissioner Emerick shared Chairman Barker's concern that this type of review may be doubling the amount of items coming before the Commission in that they would be asked for advisory opinions every time someone has a doubt' as to their chances of obtaining a Conditional Use Permit. He preferred to have staff give their best assessment of the situation based upon facts given to them by the applicant and then the applicant should be required to make his application and go before the Commission for their, decision, He agreed that right now there aren't enough concrete facts before the' Commission as far a hours of operation and many other issues. Commissioner Chitiea concurred and advised that the reason for public hearings is to receive input that the Commission will not receive at this time. She felt it would not be appropriate to give someone an indication at this time that the use might be appropriate when information received later at a public hearing might make a totally different decision. Commissioner Eerick stated that since the applicant is before the Commission at this time, he should be allowed to give his presentation,_ but that future applicants be discouraged from this type of review if all of the facts are not pre sented.anted. , Commissioner Chi ti ea disagreed that the item should be discussed at this time and pointed out that in the past developers have asked for advisory opinions and were told that type of review was inappropriate. She did not wish to give advise without all the information. Planning Commission Minutes - January 28, 1987 Commissioner Mc gel stated he would agree that this applicant could presentation, but it should be established that this type of review will not be given again. Commissioner' Tolstoy st ated tonight is not going toe influence the t fihnal decision because ould be warned t all anything s Of aid information is not available and the Commission will not beprovilded the Public input at this hearing, p with Mr. and Mrs. Lub-och stated that they were not aware that they were ask special consideration by the Commission. Ong for Chairman Barker asked what percent of the business is going to consi retail sales of i ors the applicant does not nufacture, st o the Mrs. Luboch advised that she would estimate 50 percent. She advised large back room was required for the assembly work that is done on- k that a s te. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if by manufacture, the applicant was making or if parts were obtained by another means and assembled at their business. Mrs. Luboch advised they would be getting parts and assembling and further stated that they would be a custom fishing rod dealer. Chairman Barker questioned why this location was selected instead o locations which would be approved for retail sales, f other Mrs. Luboch advised that this location was selected ted Guastt becaus e se of its s proximity Mr. Buller clarified that staff felt this strip of land was in provide commercial uses than tended to advised that staff was seeking the Commission'seiter to he industrial uses ; fie bait and tackle shop is consistent with that direction. as to whether a Commissioner Chi ties stated if they manufacture on the premises then them in a commercial area would not be appropriate either because . putting not have the space to manufacture. She suggested that the flip sidets would considered, if we don't p should Put be p them here in type of situations is it appropriate to put them in a commercial gone. Commissioner Chitiea stated the question is does the Commission want the center continue in the present direction of strip commercial , or to let back to its original use. turn it Commissioner Cmerick stated it might be appropriate to recognize re rezone it or broaden the uses allowed. g a i ty and Commissioner McNiel thought it was a great idea but didn't know if this right location; ;however, he didn't find. this to be an offensive locations the I Planning Co fission Minutes - 4- January 28, 1987 Chairman Barker stated from what he heard, it would be a concurrence that applicant the should apply for a Conditional Use Permit. , Buller advised that staff would be asking the applicant for a full disclosure as to the extent of the use and would ask the applicant to address the question of what percentage of the use is in the category of light wholesale, storage and distribution or custom manufacturing. Commissioner McNiel stated that close attention should be paid to public health and safety issues for whatever type of nuisance factor would be generated for the adjacent businesses. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS O`. AWARDS FOR DESIGN EXCELLENCE PROGRAM UPDATE' 1 Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the report. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that the project be identified on the award plaque. Commissioner Emerick suggested that if a person wins the award, provisions should be made to allow the recipient, at his own expense, to get an enlargement of the emplem to afix on the outside of the building. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the entire Commission .should be involved in this Committee. Staff is to return with possible workshop dates. P. SAN SEVAI E/CTIWANDA PLANNING AREA; WORKSHOP - This item has been re erne y e esTj ev ew o eeI is requested that a Workshop be scheduled ;for full Commission review and policy direction. The applicant for this item was not in attendance; therefore, it was the consensus of the Commission that the item be continued to the February 11 1987 meeting. Q. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8 -04 - TOWER PARTNERS EDWARDS CINEMA) - The request Fo o o y a approve a eva' on, y eliminating a requ `red reveal , for a theatre located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue. Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes - 5- January 28, 1987 Chairman Barker invited public comment. David Michael , project developer, gave a history of the situation. He advised that he planned to determine some alternative that the Planning Commission • time is h reveal t this might cons der. e did not feel that putting �n the necessarily the correct thing to do. He felt the intent of the reveal had been satisfied, but also understood that it is clearly a condition of approval and understood that the condition could not just be omitted. He introduced Glen Gellatly to present the alternative Glen Gellatly, Bissell Architects, presented the alternative to use a 2 inch by one inch annodi zed gold aluminum channel and applying that in a horizontal fashion not unlike the trim that acts as the housing for the lighting tract. He felt that would be an element that could tie those two items together visually and yet look like it was always meant to bethat way. David Michael "stated that to try to retrofit the reveal in to correct the mistake and to put a gold band around the building would not accomplish anything. He offered a second alternative to contribute a set amount to the historical committee allow them to purchase artifacts, decorations, and displays for use within the grape crusher building. He suggested that dollar amount could be placed on what it would cost to address the reveal issue. Chairman Barker agreed that to retrofit the reveal would be a bandaid approach to the problem and was concerned that which goes on will come off. He suggested that another means of architectural enhancement might be used as an alternative and suggested one alternative might be the lowering of the light lumens. he felt those things that impact the total of the area should be addressed. He stated he would be willing to continue this item to allow the applicant to come up with specifics on those kind of alternatives. Commissioner Tolstoy hesitated to enter into any kind ofare ent which looks like a buyoff e thought the issue to be addressed by the developer is what is going to enhance the building in question. Chairman Barker stated he would prefer that alternatives not just address the building in question, but some architectural enhancement to the total of the project. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there was an architectural feature or element unique to this development that ties the entire center together. Mr. Gellatly advised that the tower element was introduced on the theater and the quadafoil was introduced in the tower, which were reoccurring themes, along with the trellis work at either side of the building. Commissioner of stoy asked if the reveal was a part of tying the buildings together. Planning Commission Minutes -26- January 28, 1987 r, Gel l atly replied that the reveal was required to create a logical line to make a color change. The reason for the color change was to 'reduce the visual appearance scale of the building. Mr. Buller advised that originally there was a furring detail which took a portion of the wall and projected it out from the rest of the wall . It was at the request of the applicant that the detail be deleted. In the discussion of that detail , the 3/4;inch reveal was introduced as a compromise. The original intent of the design of the theater was to have a furring detail for this lower color band which set out from the other. One of the elements which also ties the buildings together is the unique stucco texture. Chairman Barker suggested the architectural enhancement be of equal weight. e stated he would be willing to entertain that kind of compromise. Commissioner McNiel stated that for the developer to go back and cut a reveal creates an ;opportunity for water to get in and they would have a great deal of trouble as a result. r. Buller stated that one of the unifying elements of the center has been the trellis work. The color change and furring detail were intended to help break up the scale of the wall . proposed are two office buildings on either side of the theater. The building to the north has been reviewed by the Commission and there is to be some type of courtyard plea area between the two buildings. He suggested the possibility of trellis work to reduce the visual mass of the building, He further stated that because there may be a parking problem, if the south side of the building is used as a parking lot instead of a building, trellis work along that side would also help break up that expanse of building,. Commissioner Chiiea advised that the reason the furring was required to go all the way around was to also give detail to the back of the building. She stated the community trail is at the beck of the building as well as the parking lot, and she felt that architectural element was necessary and important. She was not unwilling to look at adding the gold element, if i was done well , in that it is an element that sticks out and achieves the layered effect first considered. She suggested that the roof` screening element be addressed as part of the architectural upgrading: along with the reduction of the light lumens. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to continue Development Review -04 to ; allow the applicant to develop alternatives for the Commission's consideration. Planning Commission Minutes' - January 28, 1987 COMMISSION BUSINESS Chairman Barker_ stated that a poll should be taken of the Commissioners who serve on various committees. an the issue of the Trails Committee he indicated his recommendation that the Committee expand its responsibilities so that they don°t review specifically equestrian trails, but the total of trails throughout the City." The following Committee appointments were established, Trails Committee - Commissioners Chi ti ea and Tol stoy, Commissioner Fmeri ck Alternate Under roue i Commissioner McNi el Work program ® Commissioners Tol stoy and Cmerick Foothill Specific Plan - Commissioner Chitiea Chairman Barker^ advised that he intends to meet with Commissioner Emerick and staff to review policies of the Residential Design Review Committee. At that point, Commissioner Cmeri ck will replace Chairman Barker on the Committee, and Chairman Barker will then serve as the alternate. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that Jeff Barnes, the Ci y's F r s Supervisor, be invited to give the same presentation to the Commission he gave to the City Council regarding the Eucalyptus Borer Beetle- He advised his itent would be for the Commission to review the City°s Tree Preservation Ordinance. PUBLIC COMMENTS Jim Bailey, William Lyon Company, stated his concern with the Planning Commission's recent direction to City staff that no small lot subdivision will be accepted without architectural design submittal He explained that with land sales within Victoria, the William Lyon Company completes the project t the completion of the infrastruture. This is done because if p e ause the hand is parceled off and solo then each building would be coming back to the City to work out the details. He stated that builders want to design their own product and will net want to build the houses the William Lyon Company designs* In this situation where land is sold to other builders, he felt this direction will not rk f the architecture has b d s to a developed, he I p a indicated this would take 8 to 12 weeks f b r e_ o e a final tract map which would mean a loss of $ Q million in sales. He agreed that innovative designs should be encouraged. He proposed a disclosure statement which he would have the builder review and sign which would include the conditions of the City. Staff could also provide input into the draft of the disclosure statement so that a builder would be aware of all the conditions and requirements. Planning Commission Minutes - g- January '28, 1987 Mr. Buller stated that it should be understood that with the small lot subdivisions that everytime the lot size is reduced it gets more and more frustrating for someone to try and put a unit in there because they dad net have the flexibility in designing that lot. He stated staff can work with the applicant to try and disclose as much as possible, but he didn't think the frustration would be alleviated. Commissioner Chtiea stated that it seems that this being a planned community as opposed to a lot of tracts tacked together, Mr. Bailey has a good point about making sure there is a certain continuity. Commissioner Tol stoy stated there needs to be continuity in Victoria so that it doesn't end up a number of tracts. He suggested that staff be given an opportunity to stunt the issue to insure the City gets what it wants. 1f staff' can do that, he would support the request; however, if staff can't do that the Co fission needs to know up front that it can't be done` and another dialogue is needed. Chairman Barker stated that since the City has a special relationship with a planned community that is not in existence with any other development this direction might work* however, design submittal might still be required for all other tracts. He considered it a good idea on small lot subdivisions to have those controls. Commissioner Chitiea felt: comfortable with that direction and concurred that situations within the planned communities are unique. Chairman Barker advised that Mr. Bailey would have to provide the proof that his alternative would work. He suggested that Mr. Bailey work with staff to dome up with something ng to help take care of the problem. r. Buller pointed out that the problem has not occurred outside the planned P _ _ to unities. Further, the only place it has occurred thus far is in Victoria because in the Werra Vista planned Community a project is submitted with the map. He advised that staff was only responding t 0 o a policy s direction on b h p �" p g p y_ by Commission. e fur d H that advised sad that staff would work with fir. Bailey to come _. op with a list of product types. He advised that when the Commission reviews tract maps they need to look closely at conceptual site layouts. He understood the o i ssi on's direction at this time to process the tracts Cyr. Bailey had submitted. Further, when the tract goes to design review it would be a snap showing units only for clarification that those lots work with that type of unit. Additionally, Mr. Bailey will develop a disclosure statement to alert the buyer of the tract. Planning Commission Minutes -29- January 28, 198 ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Emeridk, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, t adjourn. 1: 0 a.m. - Plannin g Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, /BradB l r Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes - C- January 28, 1987 i i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAtONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 14, 198 Chairman David Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:0'0 p.m. The meeting was held at Lions Park Community Center, 911 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Barker Mien led in the pledge of allegiance. City Clerk Beverly Authelet administered the oath of office to Bruce Emerick. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: E. David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Bruce Emorick, Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: Nome STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner-, Greg Gage, Assistant Planner, Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Bill Holley, Community Services Director, Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer, Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, Russell Maguire, City Engineer, Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, Janice, Reynolds, Planning Commission Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, introduced Russell Maguire to the Planning Commission. Mr. Maguire recently accepted the vacant City Engineer's position, Mr. Buller additionally announced that the Planning Commissioners Institute would be held on March 11-13. He advised that: staff would provide the Commission with details at a later date. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, carried, to approve the Minutes of November 1 , 18 . Commissioner Emerick was not present during that meeting, therefore abstained from vote, Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Tolstoy, carried, to approve the Minutes of December 10, 1986. Clarification of language was made by Commissioner Chitiea to pages 15 and 17, and by Chairman Barker to page 20. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 6-38 - BARTON - The development of seven multi-tenant industrial buildings totaling 103,854 square feet in the General; Industrial District (Subarea ) located on the north side of Jersey Boulevard, approximately 350 feet east of Utica Avenue' - APN 209-142-19, 2 , 21 B. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 1360 - THE MCCARTHY COMPANY - Review of site plan and building architecture for Tract D , an approved residential subdivision; of 19.5 acres within the Victoria Planned Community (Law Residential 2-4 dwelling units per acre) into 86 lots, located at the southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and 'Fairmont Lane - APN 202-211-13, 3 , Jim Barton, applicant for Item A, requested its removal from the Consent Calendar. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to adopt Item B of the Consent Calendar. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW' 86-38 - BARTON Mr. Barton thanked City staff for the timely processing of this project. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adopt Item A of the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Barker announced that the Planning Commission was in receipt of requests for continuance for the following projects; therefore, they would he advanced to the beginning of public hearings.' C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 1023 ® C CA ONBA COUNTY WATER DI TRICT - sub lvi ion o acres of land into 3 parcels in the 10o Control designation located on the northwest corner' of Foothill Boulevard and San Diego Avenue - APN 207-101-43. (Continued from December 10, 1986 meeting.) Chairman Barker opened the public. There were, no comments. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 10238 to January 28, 1987 _ Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 14, 1987 D . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT 86-0 =STERN ROPERTIES - A request to amend the Terra Vista Planned Community by establishing a Business Park Overlay Zone for areas designated as Office Park, Commercial and Muted Use, within the Planned Community boundary ® APN 1077-4 1-0b, 1077-091-17. (Continued from December 10,, 198E meeting. ) Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Terra Vista Planned Community Amendment 86-02 to February '1 , 1987. 1 G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-03A - LAING HOMES AUPE - A request to mend the Land Use Element of the General Plan from Flood Control to Low 'Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 40 acres of land located at the southwest corner of extensions of Banyan and Milliken - APN 01- -SS. (Continued from November 12, 198E meeting. ) Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to continue the public` hearing for Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 86-03A to January 28, 1987. N. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL` USE 'PERMIT 84- 1 - ALTA LOMA CHRISTIAN CHURCH - A -request to convert an existing square foot single faFTIy residence to an office for the Alta Loma Christian Church on S acres of land in the Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Sapphire, across from Orange - APN 10 -33 - 3. Chairman Barker ;opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chtiea, unanimously carried, to continue the public hearing for Time Extension for Conditional Use Permit 84- 1 to January 28, 1987. Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 14, 1987 E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86- 6 - CITATION - A request to establish an off- site model horses sales office complex on Lots 11-15 of Tract 138 located at the northeast corner of Church Street and Whitney Court for he purpose of lots sales within Tract 1 `830, located on the west side of Beryl Street, north of LaVine .Street - APN 08- -11, 1 , 1 , 14, and 1. . (Continued from December 1 , 1986 meeting.) Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing_. Jerry Linton, Citation Builders, questioned condition 2 of the Resolution. He stated that he attended both the Planning Commission and City Council meetings when Ordinance 293 was discussed and did not believe that on-site lighting was to be a requisite. He felt that the intent was that if on-site lighting is proposed, it would be subject to a lighting plan and required to be installed within 60 days of approval. Scott Murphy, Assist-ant Planner, advised that staff had researched Ordinance 93 and the Development Code and concurred with Mr. Linton's statement relative to on-site lighting. : He suggested that the condition be amended to reflect that if on-site lighting ;is proposed it would be subject to the condition There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chitiea to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt ;the Resolution, approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit'86- , with an amendment to clarify the 'intent of on-site lighting, Condition 2 of the Resolution. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS - MNIEL CHITIEA, BARKER, EMERIC , TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried E. VARIANCE 86-0 - MOBERO - A request to reduce the number of parking spaces required for a food establishment in a developed shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) located at the northeast corner of Archibald and Base Line - APN -731-1 . (Continued from December 10, 186 meeting. ) Brad Buller, City Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Barbara Moberg, 8079 Banyan, Rancho Cucamonga, gave an -overview of her request. She requested that she be allowed a minimum of twelve seats as a convenience to her customers and also indicated that twelve seats would` be the minimum due to the design ;and function of the establishment. Planning Commission Minutes - - January 14, 1987 Jan Krause, representing; the shopping center owner, Sycamore Investments, agreed that a yogurt shop would be at the low end of the restaurant continuum. She advised that the center has a lease which includes the regulation of parking. i Commissioner Tol stoy asked what the plans are for- the now vacant pad on the Base Line frontage and asked if the; landlord anticipated one tenant or multi- tenants. Ms. Krause replied that Sycamore Investments is talking with a financial institution, a furniture store and also a medical group as possible tenants* She advised that due to the size of the pad, there would probably be at least three tenants. Ronald Taylor, 9664 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he is the owner of Taylormaid Yogurt across the street from this ;proposal. He advised that he wanted to put a yogurt shop in a center on Foothill , however was denied his request die to inadequate parking and urged the Commission to treat applicants fairly Commissioner Emerick asked if the shopping center which denied Mr. Taylor his request contained outside eating areas. r. Taylor advised that it did. Commissioner Cmerick asked haw many seats are in Mr. Taylor' s current establishment. r. Taylor advised that he has 12 seats* Commissioner Cmerick asked how many parking spaces are allocated to his business Mr. Taylor ;replied that there is one parking space for every two and one-half seats." Commissioner Cmerick questioned if Mr. Taylor' s average customer comes in singly or in multiples. } Mr. Taylor advised that mo st users come to singly. Chairman Barker questioned how many; people Mr`. Taylor estimates actually sit down and consume the yogurt on the premises. Mr. Taylor :replied that very few people consume the yogurt on the premises and would estimate the number to be 10-15 per day. Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 14, 1987 Commissioner Emerick- asked if the denial of Mr. Taylor's request to open the shop on Foothill was by the center or by the City. r. Taylor believed that the request was denied by both the center and the City. ` Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that more than likely the leasing agent cane into the City office and ;, was informed by City staff that a yogurt shop was designated as a; restaurant and needs so many parking spaces. He speculated that the puns were checked which disclosed that there was inadequate parking on that site for the, yogurt shop. He pointed out the difference between Ms. Moberg and Mr. Taylor is that Ms. Moberg applied for a variance and Mr. Taylor accepted the fact that the Code required more parking. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea did not consider a yogurt shop as a typical restaurant use due to the - length of stay by customers and the number of employees. She pointed out that this particular request is unusual in that it is surrounded by rather high density housing,with very ample pedestrian connections between the projects and this center and outside eating areas are provided. She felt this was an unusual situation which would warrant the variance. Commissioner Mciel reiterated his previous position that the parking problems will occur when the "remainder of the pads are released. He staged he wound concur with the applicant' s request to increase the seating capacity to 1 . Commissioner Tolstoy` suggested that the Commission consider{ another kind of designation in the Code that would not include yogurt shops, ace cream stores, and donut shops in the restaurant classification. With respect to this request, he stated that he did not have a problems with the variance. His only concern would be that it might seta precedent for people coming in and asking for variances. If this proves to be the case, he felt that something is wrong with the Code, which was the reason he suggested the possibility of another designation. Commissioner Emerick agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy with respect to the need for fine tuning the Code to distinguish between a restaurant and other food uses that seem to generate less parking and are less intensive ire nature. He concurred that this dine tuning may avoid future need for variance requests. With respect to this particular project, he agree that 'there are special and unique circumstances in that it is proposed to be located in a newer center where certain amenities were provided such as outside eating areas. Further, the pedestrian access links with the adjacent apartment project and this lends uses within the center to more of a pedestrian-bike approach and less car traffic. He also noted that the center contains a video and pizza shop which lend themselves to multiple stop shopping and there is -parking allocated for multiple uses within the center. He advocated the granting of the variance with 12 seats in the interior and based his decision upon Mr. Taylor's testimony that the number of seats don't really have a bearing on the amount of traffic generated by the use in question. Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 14, 1987 r. Buller stated that the S seats proposed by staff are table seats and not necessarily for waiting without a 'table. He clarified that the applicant could have more than D under staff' s condition, , or more than 12 if that condition is amended; however, the seats cannot be at table but could be a bench seat for waiting. Commissioner Barker agreed with the statement that them is roam for work o the Code designation. He indicated that this would have given him the solution to his major problem. He was concerned on a technical utter that this shop could have been placed in another center in mother area and it was not mandatory that it be located in this center to begin with. He felt that in that case the regulation and its enforcement would not really create an unnecessary hardship and could not support the Variance request. 1 Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the menu set forth in the conditions met with the applicant's approval . Ms. Moberg replied that it did and was also included in the terms of her lease. Motion: Moved by Chiti a, seconded by Emerick to adapt the Resolution approving Variance d -07, with an amendment to Condition 2' to increase the maximum seating from 8 to 12. Staff was directed to incorporate the statement that the center has outdoor plaza areas that encourage pedestrian traffic, the fact that the center is adjacent` to Medium and, Medium-Nigh Residential development with pedestrian access, and the multiple use parking condition which exists in the center into the Findings of the Resolution. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES. COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, EMERIC , MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 86-0 0' - CITY OF RAN HO ` OCAMONGA A request to amendthe Land Use Element of the General P an fr6m Low Medium Density Residential (4- du/ac) to Lour Density Residential (2-4 du/ac) and/or Very Lowy Density Residential ('less than 2 du/ac) for 68 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Wilson (if extended) and Milliken (if extended) - APN 201-191-11, ` 17. (Continued from September 24, 19 meeting.) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT D -OS - CITY O RAN H U AM N A - A request to amen the Deae o ent District Map from " C" lood `Control ) and %M" (Low Medium Density Residential - 2-4 du/ac) for 68 acres of land located at the southwest corner of Wilson (if extended) and Milliken (if extended) APN 201- g1-1 , 17 Planning Commission Minutes ® - danuary 14, 1987 Otto 1routil , Senior planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Michael Vairin 8480 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the Deer Creek, presented letters from the Deer Creek Homeowners' Association and Chaffey College in support of a project proposal by the Geer Creek Company on this site. He advised that a tentative map had been filed by the Deer Creek Company on this site, based on -3 dwelling units per acre Commissioner Chitiea asked if the Deer Creek Homeowners' Association was aware that the Commission was also considering Very Loss designation for this site. Mr. Vairin replied that they were made aware that bath options were being considered and that the homeowners were also advised of the option through the public hearing notice. Commissioner Emerick asked if the impacts of lightingand crowd noise from the _p football field had been considered. Mr. Virin replied that spill over parking had been taken care of by the main spine street design of the project and indicated there would be no parking along those streets ;and also no lots fronting the football fields He pointed out that the stadium is 600 feet to the crest of this project. He advised that appropriate walls would be built and landscaping .could be used to mitigate lighting spill over. He further stated that the project has been designed with the least amount of lots backing up to the college which will help provide additional shielding and buffer. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that his inclination would-be that he would like to see a Very Low designation on this property; however, with Deers Creek coming in with; a proposal of: a very unique product type and the size lots proposed, together with the fact that their grading would be minimal , he would consider changing his opinion. He staged the City could certainly use the type of homesthat the Deer Creek Company builds. He felt this product type would meet one of the goals of the General plan to have varied types of housing in the City. He stated that the proposed plan addresses the edge treatment that the college desires. His concern was that the City can' t tie the proposed project to the change in land use designation. He suggested that the decision on the landuse should be continued until the applicant has the tract ma`p designed and ready' to 'go and approve the tract and amendments together as a package. Chairman Barker stated that if this issue that would make a difference in the Commission' s decision, he would reopen the public hearing for the applicant's comment. Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 14, 198 Mr. V'airin stated that the Deer Creek Company would prefer action tonight since they had entered into a legal purchasing agreement for this property. However, if the Commission ission could not make a decision on the site without processing the trace concurrently with the amendments, he would concede to those wishes. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Cmerick supported Commissioner Tolstoy's suggestion that the tract map,; design approval and amendments be processed concurrently. He felt this was a safer and more prudent course that would allow more control over the final product® Commissioner Mc Niel stated he would agree under normal circumstances; however, he had a good deal of faith in the Deer Creek Company with respect to their integrity. His position would'be to approve the Low designation. Commissioner Chitiea stated her inclination is toward the Very Low designation; however, knew that this particular company does very fine work. She believed the Deer Creek Company could probably come up with a product, grading plan and site plan that would satisfy her. Her concern would be that there are no guarantees and should for some reason their escrow fall through she would not like to see the City in a position where another developer wants to cone in at the top of this density and with an ;inferior product. She was concerned that such a proposal at the high end of the designation might meet the standards and, therefore, would be hard to control .. She was inclined to o along with Commissioner Tolstoy' s suggestion to tie the two together and continuing the decision on that basis, otherwise she would have to support the Very Low density. Chairman Barker stated there is no question that this is an excellent organization and integrity is high. "het were the Commission to make special arrangements on this amendment it would be the first time that has been done; He staged that he has arrays been a little paranoid in favor of protecting the community against unforeseen circumstances. He favored continuing the 'decision on the land use amendments until such time as the tract map is processed and reviewed by the Commission, r, Vairin asked if it would be possible to gain some vote of confidence that the product type submitted would be acceptable. Chairman Barker stated that if its proven that the project could be designed in an appropriate manner, and he had faith that the Deer Creek Company could o so, he would to inclined to vote in favor of the amendment and the dwelling unit per acre designation.' It was the consensus of the Commission that the applicant continue processing of the development proposed. Chairman Barker asked the length of time necessary in order to continue on to the next area of issues in order to process this product. Planning Commission Minutes -9- January 14, 1987 Mr, Buller stated that in order for the applicant to address grading and technical issues as a result of Committee reviews, he would suggest continuing the public hearing for three months. Mr. Vairin stated that ; the project is scheduled for Committee meetings beginning next week. He felt any concerns as a result of those meetings could be mitigated by a short period of time, and requested a continuance to the second meeting in February. Motion: Moved by Chitea, seconded by MNiel unanimously carried, to continue Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment 86-030 and Environmental Assessment and Development District Amendment 86--05 to the February 25, 1907 meeting I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 10351 - DICK SCOTT INC. - A subdivision of 172 acres of land Into two parcels within the Very Low du/ac) Development District, located on the south side of Ironmountain Court, west of Hermosa Avenue - APN 201-071-26. Barbara Krall , Assistant Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chtiea asked the widths of the two parcels. Ms. gall replied that Parcel 1 is approximately 110 feet and Parcel 2 is approximately 90 feet in width. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing;. Richard Fuerstein, 8331 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the applicant, advised that the easement that forced the large parcel has been obtained and recorded. He concurred with the findings of the Resolution and conditions of approval There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by McNiel ' to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 0351 Motion carried by the following vote. AYES. COMMISSIONERS TOL TO , MCNIEL, CHIT EA, EMERIC , BARKER NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE .ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes _10- January 1 , 1987 J. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 86- (SITE APPROVAL 97 6 - PATTCN - The request add a condition of approval 1 n existing shopping center located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 19th Street - APN 0 -171-46, 51 through 66 Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, presented the staff ;report. I Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea stated that this modification will be very beneficial to the City. She appreciated the cooperation ofthe landowner. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 86 3 . Motion carried by the following vote: i AYES: COMMISSIONERS MCNIEL CHITIEA, BARKER, EMERICK, TCLTDY LACES: COMMISSIONERS: NINE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS- NONE -carried K. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 66-01 - MAGIC LAMP INN - The review of providing live entertainment in E5636nEfion wit a restaurant use, located at 8189 Foothill Boulevard. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Anthony Vernol , 8189 Foothill Boulevard, applicant, concurred with the findings of Resolution and conditions of approval. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that it is a good idea to get entertainment in town and this is the perfect place for it because the neighboring uses are appropriate. He believed its location would not be a nuisance to surrounding neighbors.' Commissioner Chitiea did not see that it would have: any conflict with adjacent properties and concurred this is a nice establishment. Motions Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution approving Entertainment Permit 66-01. Motion carried by the following votes AYES: COMMISSIONERS MCIEL,' CHITIEA, BARKER, EMRICK, TOLSTOY NOES:, COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes _11- January' 14, 1987 L, TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 1277 - C.P. LANCE - A, custom lot residential ub 'ivision of 16 lots on 4.24 acres of land in the Low Density Residential District (2-4 d /ac), located on the south side of 19th Street, west of Hellman - APN 202-041-0 and 52. Scott Murphy, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report, Mr. Murphy advised that the applicant agreed to comply with the City' s current undergrounding ,policy; therefore, staff recommended the following condition be added to the Resolution An in lieu fee as contribution to the future underrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunication and electrical ) on the opposite side of 19th Street shall be paid to the City prior to final inspection or occupancy :permits, whichever occurs last. The fee shall be one-half the adopted unit amount times the 'length of the property frontage. Ralpha Hanson Deputy Cat Attorney, advised t r e . . . hat the staff report 7s correct p. � p _ y y y� . p a in that the imposition of a near condition on an extension o the tract ma is p in violation of the Map Act. However, in this case, the applicant has specifically agreed to this addition of the condition requiring dndergrounning. If for nothing other than the sake of notice and knowledge of _ this condition and the applicant' s willingness to comply, the addition of a utility undergrounding condition on this tract man would not be inappropriate. He : pointed out that such a condition while not normally subject to a tract map extension would be appropriate on other permits on this project, such as building permits or design review. He requested staff to include this identical condition on those approvals also. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Kathy womplier, C.P. Lange Engineers, 'concurred with the findings of the Resolution and conditions of approval. There were no further comments, therefore the ,public hearing was closed. Commissioner Chitiea was concerned that in the past the Commission wanted to make a minor modification to a particular tract and were informed they could not impose new conditions. She questioned why it could; be done in one situation and not in another. Ralph Hanson advised that it is more for the notification and to show knowledge on the part of this applicant agreeing to the condition. He further stated that this action would` only be binding on this particular applicant. Under normal circumstances without an applicant's consent, it would be in violation of the Map Act to add additional conditions after map approval ® Planning Commission Minutes 12 - January 14, 1987 Commissioner Chitiea asked if the alternative; would be to deny the extension without prejudice in order for the applicant to reprocess his map. At that time the language could be included. She was uncomfortable placing a new condition on the time extension request as it weld not be binding if the tract were sold. Mr. Hanson stated that a denial without prejudice would simply allow the applicant to process an entirely new reap; they would have to start at square one. The only benefit to denial without prejudice is that they would not have to wait a year before resubmitting. He pointed out that there wouldn't be; a problem even if this language was not added to this map; the condition can be added to other approvals for the project. It is only with the Map Act itself that adding an extra condition is in violation'. Commissioner Emerick stated if he understood the City Attorney correctly, if { the project sold tomorrow with respect to the` tentative rtract map the City is are not tying them down to the condition of paying in lieu fees. He suggested that the applicant state on the record that she is agreeable to have this condition placed on the design review or any other ;permit approval required. Ms. Womplier concurred with this requirement. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving the time extension: for Tentative Tract 1577,' with the added condition relative to utility undergrounding.` Motion carried by the following vote AYES. COMMISSIONERS MCNIEL, TCLSTCY, BARKER, EMERICK NOES- COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried M. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -Og - MOUNTAIN VIEW' COMMUNITY CRU _ A r�odificat on to a previously approve on" itlona tlse Permit to allow a church within an existing preschool facility within the Terra Vista 'Planned Community on 0.91 acres of land in the Medium Density Residential District 4_14 du/ac) located on the northeast corner of Haven and Valencia - APN 0 - 1 11. Greg Gage, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Niel Tibtt, 1039 Terra vista Parkway, Rancho Cucamonga, applicant, requested a modification to the conditions to modify the hours of operation from beginning at 900 a.m. to beginning at :OO' a.m. on Sundays, with the understanding that there would be no outside activities before 9:00 a.m. Commissioner Mciel asked the: approximate number of people who attend the Planning Commission Minutes -13- January 14, 1987 church and how long the church estimates they would use this facility, r» Tibbett replied that approximately 50-50 people now attend services at the church and that the facility could comfortably seat 150; therefore, he estimated that the church could use the facility for quite some time. There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Emerick, to adopt the Resolution approving the modification to Conditional Use Permit 85_09, with a codification to the hours of operation to Sundays at 8:00 a.m. with no outside activities until 9:00 a.m. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS TCESTO , EM RIC , BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried �r ® 5 .m, g p Planning Commission Recessed ' _ 8s50 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE_ AMENDMENT 85-0 - CITY OF RANCHO CICAM NOA - T regdest to amen t e parking section bf the Development Code, pertaining to parking lot striping standards. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner;, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.' Commissioner Chitiea stated that she initiated this amendment and she was strongly in favor of it. Motion- Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to recommend issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Code Amendment C-OJ to the City Council . Motion carried by the following vote; AYES: COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, TC STOY, BARER, EMERICK, MCNIEt NOES. COMMISSIONERS. NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would like for the Commission to take a look a parking standards, and compact stalls in particular. Planning Commission Minutes -14- January 14, 198 Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that this could be included in the upcoming amendments to the Development Code, NEW BUSINESS P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW B -B' - GENERAL DYNAMICS - The development of Phase II construction of an approved Master Par- on 75 acres of land. Phase II consisting of a 380,000 square foot industrial/warehouse building in the General Industrial District (Subarea 11) located on the south side of bth Street between Utica and Cleveland ;- PN 1 -081 -8, 9 10. Debra Meier, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker asked if there were any items to be placed on the roof. s. Meier stated that there would be vents and skylights on the roof. She indicated that, these items are to be screened. Chairman Barker' stated that he would like assurance that there would not be scattered screening on the roof, Chairman Barker invited public comment. Lick, Hattinger, representing the applicant, stated that sporadic exhaust vents would be located on the roof. He felt that it would take shields ,of different heights to shield each one of them. He `'advised that there is a two and one- half foot parapet around the ` perimeter of the building, which he felt was sufficient to shield the vents;. He stated that the design calls for very low ventilation units that should not be seen from the ground level . He advised that there' might be an exhaust stack in the cafeteria area, which is on the south side of the building and would only be visible to the inside campus of the facility. There were no further public co ents, Co issionr Tolstoy stated that he was surprised that the applicant was taking space from the building to put the air conditioning unit in; however, questioned what would happen later if the applicant remodeled and decided to place the unit on the roof. r. Buller suggested that if this was a concern of the Commission, a condition could be added which would require a roof equipment plan including all vents and skylights, and a sight line study from bth Street. Commissioner Chitiea suggested that the condition require a parapet wall of sufficient height to 'screen all roof equipment. Planning Co mission Minutes -1 January 14, 1987 Commissioner McNiel agreed with Mr. Buller that if the applicant prepared plans that show the sight lines to determine if there is a problem or not and then require that it be screened by a parapet wall if there appears to be a problem. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by-Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution as mod ified. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that he would like to clarify the language within Engineering condition 1a. He requested that the language include the exact location of the undergrounding and advised that it should be from the first pole east of Cleveland Avenue to the first pole on the west side of Utica Avenue. Chairman Barker reopened the public hearing. Mr. Hattinger objected to raising the parapet wall higher in an effort to shield the cafeteria exhaust stack given the size of the building.; He offered the suggestion that if the cafeteria stack is in the line of sight., it would be required to be screened as approved by the Planning Department* Commissioner Chitiea asked if the applicant concurred with the modification made by Mr.. Hanson Mr. Hattinger concurred with this modification. r. Buller commented that staff would. make ;sure that the parapet is high enough to cover the low profile vents, but if :there is one element such as the exhaust vent for the cafeteria staff, would work with the applicant on a means o screen i . Motion: Moved by Chitiea, ; seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development Review B -36, with amendments to include a roof equipment plan and line of sight study from bth Street, and clarification to Engineering Condition 1.a proposed by Mr. Hanson. Motion carried by the following vote: YE : COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, TCLT ERICE, BARKER, ME , CNIEL NOES. COMMISSIONERS* NONE ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Q. HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT BB- 1O - TAYLOR - Appeal of taff' s decision denying a Hone ccupation ermit at 8159 Malachite Avenue. Chairman Barker announced that the Planning Commission had received a request from the applicant to continue this item for two weeks. i Planning Commission Minutes -16- January 14, 1987' Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to continue discussion of Home Occupation Permit - 10 to the Planning Commission meeting of January 28, 1987. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS R. HUNTER'S RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FON ANA - Planning Commission review of land use a terniatives for the Hunters Ridge Specific Plan on 567.E acres of land with the City of Fontana, located on the north side of Summit Avenue, east of San Sevaine Creek, west of Oevore Freeway. Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea stated that as evidenced by the comments, the Design Review spent considerable time looking at the alternatives and particularly at Alternative 2. She reiterated that although the City has serious reservations about this project, Rancho Cucamonga very much wants to work with Fontana to develop a project everyone will be pleased with. Chairman Barker stated that the language within the staff report was diplomatic in that it indicated that Alternative 2 was the least dbjectiona ; he believed the word used ,at the time was least onerous. The option presented was pick the best of three worst. He stated that each time the City looks at this project, not much progress has been made;. The concerns' have= been stated :and repeated over and over. Further, we know that the property and the area can hold and support a much higher quality and much better design in usage and he was concerned that we are not getting higher qualityand better design. e g did not consider it an appropriate or productive use of time to repeat` and to re-emphasize the statements of the staff report because we have been saying the same thing over again for months. He was very concerned and frustrated. ' Commissioner Chitiea stated that density is certainly one of the major issues s well as the location of the density in relation to the freeway and to the adjacent property below Commissioner Mc Niel pointed out that the maps don't show land use designations around the property', specifically in Rancho Cucamonga, and thought such designations would better identify Rancho Cucamonga' s position. Commissioner Emerick found the information on the map not adequate to assess the environmental impacts particularly north of the power lines. He indicated that he could not tell how the street relates to San Sevaine Creek, if San Sevaine is a perennial or annual stream, or: if we are looking at critical wildlife habitat which the project will be eliminating. He stated he would like to see trees located on the map and also contours. He suggested the possibility of development tradeoffs whereby the San Sevaine stream area would be left alone and perhaps put little more density on the south side of the Planning Commission Minutes -17- January 14, 1987 site, but; not nearly as much as currently exists. He suggested that San Sevaine might ;lend itself to open space uses. He was concerned with the proposed 1 - 8 slope and stated that the only way to place lots there would be through massive padding or grading., He stated that this is inconsistent with how Rancho Cucamonga intends to treat its hillsides and would hope Fontana would be more sensitive in their treatment. He groped the City of Fontana would take a second look at this project and see that they have an open space opportunity here that doesn't exist in many places in their City and would consider public opera space uses as opposed to doing severe grading and padding. He felt the alternatives were completely inappropriate. Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that 'Fontana would take one of these plans as the direction or concept on which to base an Environmental Impact Report. j Fontana indicated that the other two alternatives which would be considered in the Environmental Impact Report would be of less density than Alternative 2, which would be considered the maximum density. He further advised that the Environmental Impact Report will address issues which have been raised as a result of the Planning Commission' s discussion relative to the upper portion of the project, Commissioner Chitiea stated that the Planning Commission had requested that all alternatives presented in the future have a lowering of density; these alternatives present an increase in all cases. She stated this needsto he addressed by the City of Fontana. Chairman Barker stated that staff has heard a number of concerns expressed by Commissioner Em,erick which were not utilized in the initial report. He requested that the comments made this evening as well as those prepared by the Design Review Committee be included with the report to the City Council . Commissioner Tolstoy agreed with all comments made and that sensitivity to the surrounding environment is certainly lacking. He was also concerned with the tremendous circulation em r b 01 _ p that Rancho > Cucamo nga g_a would have on Cherry 1 Commissioner Emerick was concern with having such a long road that cul-de-sacs at the end going up into the hillside. In case of fire, he was concerned that there would be a serious public safety issue. Mr. Boller stated that staff would notify the Commission when the City of Fontana reviews this project. Further, staff will continue closely monitor 1 the review_ of the alternatives and also the Environmental Impact Report process and would continue to keep the Commission informed. S. CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR THE NORTH TOWN NEIGHBORHOOD PARK SITE Bill Holley, Community Services Director, presented the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -18- January 14, 17 Chairman Barker asked if league play was planned for this park. His concern would be parking if league playing was intended. Mr. Holley replied that this park would not be intended for that type of use. Chairman Barker questioned if it wouldn't be likely that the park, might draw leagues in the future, given the growth in the City and the fact that; people might complain that there aren't enough parks to accommodate organized leagues. Mr. Holley stated that the possibility exists; however is not envisioned. There' is adjacent off-street parking across; the street, though not to any great degree, at the Middle School . Chairman Barker asked if there would be any type of barrier between the park and the railroad tracks to the south. r. Holley stated that a block wall would be built along the south side, not only to partially satisfy noise attenuation, but to provide visual blockage. He advised that the Department of Housing and Urban Development also voiced a concern with putting in a park next to a railroad without some type of major barricade. Chairman Barker asked if a club house was proposed to be located at this park site. r. Holley stated that a club house was not proposed. Commissioner Barker asked if the City had studied the type of lighting to be used, particularly the spill over lighting to the adjacent properties. Mr. Holley advised that a lighting study was conducted during the design of Heritage and Red Hill Parks, and when Beryl Park was e piped with lights. He Mated that low pressure sodium lights were found to: produce less ambient glare and have a longer cycle. Chairman Barker asked if there would be lighting throughout or ,;just on the ball Melds. r. Holley stated that sidewalk or security lighting will be provided, as well as restroom lights and lights in the parking lot area. Chairman Barker stated that it is obvious that drainage is a major' problem and concern in that area. r. Holley concurred and stated the problem is the Deer Creek project as i flows in a southerly direction. He advised that where drainage crosses Arrow and goes down the Crowell 'Leventhal project and across Rancho Middle School it comes out into a sump in the middle of Feron where it can't drain to the east or west, therefore ponds. This is why project is so clsel,y intertwined with Planning Commission Minutes _lg January`1 , 1987 the Master Plan Storm Crain systems that the City Engineering Division is working on. Mr. Holley stated this is a major problem that has to be dealt with before the park can be dealt with successfully and safely. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what kind of delays would this mean for the park. Russ Maguire, City Engineer, advised that the Basic Concept and Alignment report has just been completed. City staff has reviewed the report which disclosed that fill will be necessary on the park site and the adjacent development to achieve an elevation high enough to drain into the drainage facility and that an additional drainage line will be added. He further stated that the report will be cleaned up this week and staff will be going for design. Staff anticipated, to build the drainage system at a cost of $1.2 million daring neat Summer or Fall so that the following Spring the park can be constructed. He advised that monies are beingtransferred `in order t r o achieve an advance program on the drainage system Mr. Holley indicated that when the Pare Development Commission made their latest review and recommendation, the Preliminary 'Alignment Study and Report had not been received; therefore, they would be addressing this latest factor at their next meeting. He advised that the intent of the Parks Commission has been to recommend development of the park as as fast as prudently possible. Commissioner Chitiea stated that in addition to sharing ChairmanBarker's concern, she had an additional concern regarding the play area. Having visited park in Terra vista, she found one main problem to be inadequate seating around the play areas. She felt more seating should be required and they should be placed in appropriate areas so that more than one piece of equipment is in view, Nacho Cracia, 10'3 Humboldt, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the park and thanked staff for its work is accomplishing the effort. r. Buller stated that he and Mr. Holley would be reviewing the process for park review so that the 'lines of review would be" clean He asked for the Commission's direction relative to the architectural review of any structures within pans. Commissioner Chi'tiea stated that it would be appropriate for the Design Review Committee to review structures. However, for structures as substantial as those in Heritage Park, the entire Commission should review the architecture. Chairman Baker stated that the design of the picnic areas and out buildings deserve as much or more attention because they; are representing this City. He stated that as much' time should be spent on these items as what would be required of a private developer. Commissioner Tolsto, agree; however, stated that the City has a Parks Commission and that one of the charges of that Commission is the design of parks and the integration of these elements, Planning Commission Minutes - C- January 14, 1'987 Commissioner Chitiea suggested that the review start at that level , but felt that since parks are representative of the City the Planning Commission should review them for consistency with what is going on in the City. 1 Commissioner Tolstoy stated that if the Commission is going to review the out buildings, it should review all structures to make sure the design is consistent. Commissioner Chitiea asked if them were any restrictions for the hours or days of the week for lighting Mr. Holley advised that the ; City Council reviewed the policy for night lighting and established a 10: 0 p.m. curfew on all night lighted facilities. The report was forwarded to the City Council for their review. T. PLANNING DIVISION OR PROGRAM Oral Report' Brad Buller, City Planner, presented the ;report. He asked that a subcommittee be selected to work with staff on the Planning Division Work Program. Commissioners Tolstoy and Emery were selected to serve on the work program. Commissioner Chitiea asked if the Almond trail extension was included in the Trails Inventory. She saw it as a separate issue and felt it should be on the work program. r. Buller advised that the Trails Inventory includes an overall survey of the trails issue. Further, staff has expended some person weeks already but under Council direction the inventory was turned over to Community Services. He noted the inventory was not specific to the Almond Trail issue; however, he would be Meeting with the Community Services Director with regard to the Almond Trail and wound continue to be involved with the trails inventory. ADJOURNMENT Notion; Moved by Mc Niel, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adjourn. 10:00 p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned. A,,-B tf °�n` d1 er Deputy Secretary Planning Commission Minutes - 1 January 14, 198