Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/05/29 - Minutes - AdjournedMay 29, 1996 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Adjourned Meeting A. CALL TO ORDER An adjourned joint meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council and Planning Commission was held on Wednesday, May 29, 1996, in the Tri-Communities Conference Room of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The meeting was called to order at 6:39 p.m. by Mayor William J. Alexander. Present were Councilmembers: Paul Biane, James Curatalo, Rex Gutierrez, Diane Williams, and Mayor William J. Alexander. Present were Planning Commissioners: Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy, and Chairman E. David Barker. Absent was Planning Commissioner: John Melcher Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Rick Gomez, Community Development Director; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer; Brad Buller, City Planner; Alan Warren, Associate Planner; Diane O'Neal, Management Analyst II; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk. B. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION B1. DISCUSSION OF RELATIONS REGARDING CITY POLICY, HOW INTERPRETED AND DIRECTED Mayor Alexander stated over the years, it has always been a difference of opinion how projects were perceived, reiewed and approved. He felt the job of the Planning Commission was to keep the Council on line with development. He realized that there is a lot of dedication and commitment involved from the Commissioners. He hoped the Commission and Council can discuss how they really feel about issues. He continued to point outthatthe Council only has two weeks to reach a decision on an issue, while the Planning Commission has had weeks and months to study and vote on something. He also added he heard many good comments at the ICSC Conference in Las Vegas about the Planning Commission and the plan of the City. Chairman Barker stated he has always understood that the Council has the authority to overturn the Planning Commission's decision. He felt the role of the Planning Commission was to make recommendations to the Council for their consideration. He pointed out that all of the master plans and specific plans are not cast in concrete and can be changed if needed. Mr. Barker said that the citizens developed a plan and that we used to brag about being 'the City with a plan." He expressed concern that comprehensive long term planning is in danger. He stated the Planning Commission and staff needs to be able to be concerned with planning issues and not have to attempt to interpret politics or count votes and determine whether there is a special relationship City Council/Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 1996 Page 2 each time a particular developer or individual appears. He felt there has always been a coordinated effort between the Council and the Planning Commission, and that when a Commission decision is overturned they could use this as a guideline for the future. He felt the City needs to continue to work towards a vision. He stated there is no challenge or question about the authority of the Council, but that the Planning Commission needs to know what direction the Council is headed. Councilmember Curatalo stated he felt the Planning Commission should continue their good work and that he is totally satisfied with the job they are doing. He stated if there is a problem, that possibly they need to look inward to see if it is the Council creating it. Councilmember Gutierrez stated he is proud to be raising his family here. He realized there is going to be differences of opinion. He pointed out how the golf course and the Epicenter were not originally in the plan, but have now proved to be very successful. He felt the City should be very selective in what is being developed on Foothill towards the 115 Freeway. He felt Lewis was treated differently, and wished that all developers knew the rules going in and that they were all treated fairly. He felt the Foothill Corridor needed to be revisited. He stated this is not political and that he just wants to do the right thing. He stated he is not against anyone and felt the Planning Commission has done a good job. He felt it was more difficult for the small or mid-size business to come into the City than a larger business. He felt the Council needed to be flexible but still have a vision for the City. He realized there are differences, but nothing that could not be overcome. He stated his main concern is Foothill Boulevard. Councilmember Williams stated the Planning Commission has always been selected because they were the best to do a big job. She stated she would never want the Planning Commission to be "yes" people for the Council. She stated just because there is a difference of opinion does not mean they are not doing a good job or their job at all. She felt sometimes the Council mixes people into a situation instead of the information the Planning Commission looks at. She agreed with Councilmember Gutierrez that everyone needs to be flexible. She stated she definitely does not want the Planning Commission to be "yes" people to whatever the Council would want. Councilmember Biane stated he stands behind the hard work the Planning Commission did in creating the General Plan. He felt flexibility was very important. He felt the Council was more people oriented because they are elected, whereas the Planning Commission is just looking at the facts. He felt Foothill Boulevard from Haven to Etiwanda should be full retail and that this was his vision. Commissioner McNiel thanked the Council for getting this meeting together. He felt there is more of a division between the Planning Commission and the City Council than there ever has been. He stated if the Council has a change of goals, then the General Plan needs to be changed to reflect this. He stated he did not feel the Planning commission process is any more or less arduous than any other one in the City. He stated he hears the Council is constantly "beating up" the Planning Commission, and added that he did not agree with this. He felt the approval of the Masi and Wohl projects were a step down in standards when approved, but that the golf course and Price Club center was a step up. He stated the Lewis' do not get special treatment, and that he did not think small businesses were being treated poorly, just being held to standards. He asked that the Council at least read the Planning Commission meeting minutes before making their decision. He stated when he has come to a Council meeting to speak it is because he wants the Council to get the full picture of the issue. Commissioner Tolstoy wanted to know what standards the Wohl project will be held to. He felt Rancho Cucamonga was the jewel of the Valley because of the standards that have been set. He felt the Planning Commission needed to hear from the Council if the Wohl project will be held to previously approved standards, or are those standards coming down and exceptions made. Councilmember Biane felt the Wohl project will be held to current standards. City Council/Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 1996 Page 3 Councilmember Gutierrez felt standards should be kept as they have always been. Commissioner Lumpp realized that the Council is the final decision maker. He stated the Council needs to give the Planning Commission direction in order for them to make their decisions for the future. He felt if the goals of the Council are not in the General Plan, then it needs to be changed. He stated some people from the Council have worked hard to get the quality of life in the City that everyone enjoys. Commissioner Tolstoy felt Foothill Boulevard should be revisited and that the Council allocated the funds to do this. He felt spot decisions never have worked and that the whole plan should be looked at. Councilmember Gutierrez felt the General Plan, if looked at, should focus on Foothill Boulevard. Commissioner McNiel stated he did not know why the Lube business ever got approved for the site and that it would create a real problem. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed. Chairman Barker stated he had been told over and over again by Masi that they had votes by the Council to get their changes approved for their project. Commissioner McNiel commended the Planning Department staff for their expertise, customer service and good job they always do. He stated he had heard from Masi that they just wanted to get through the planning process so they could hurry up to get to the Council to get their project approved how they wanted it. Councilmember Biane felt the developer not only played a political game with the Council, but also with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Lumpp felt all builders should start a project at the standards that are set and if they have a reason to change the standards he would listen to them then. Commissioner McNiel asked the Council if they have ever told him how to vote on a project, and then asked them how many times they have ever called him to ask questions about a project. He stated he does not feel comfortable with appeals when they go to the Council. He felt things were deteriorating. Councilmember Biane stated he totally disagreed. Councilmember Curatalo stated he felt something is wrong some place when the Council overturns the Planning Commission five times. Councilmember Gutierrez stated he did not feel the Council and the Planning Commission were on the same page. Commissioner McNiel stated if the Planning Commission is going in the wrong direction then they need to know this. Councilmember Gutierrez asked Commissioner McNiel what his vision was for Foothill Boulevard. Commissioner McNiel stated Office and Light Commercial with ancillary services because that is what the General Plan states. Chairman Barker stated the Planning Commission has to go by the rules of the General Plan. Councilmember Curatalo concurred that the Planning Commission is to follow the General Plan and that is their City Council/Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 1996 Page 4 guidance. Mayor Alexander commented that it can also be changed if needed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated if the vision has changed, then that needs to be stated. He pointed out there is a lot of vacant centers on Foothill already built. Councilmember Biane stated he felt all commercial centers go through periods where there might be vacancies or there are transitions. Councilmember Curatalo stated he is satisfied with the Planning Commission's work and felt they should stay on course. Councilmember Gutierrez stated he is very satisfied with the direction the City is taking although he disagrees with some of the steps taken to approve a project. He feels everyone should go by the same standards. He stated he values the quality of life in Rancho Cucamonga like everyone else does, and did not want anyone to think he did not care and was only making political decisions. He felt it was a good idea to get together and look at the General Plan so that everyone is on the same page. He stated he hopes that the Planning Commission will give the Council the benefit of the doubt as he will try to give them. Councilmember Williams felt the General Plan needed to be looked at, including the Foothill Corridor. She felt there were some awful strip centers along Foothill Boulevard and wondered how the standards were set. She stated she didn't think that standards were always applied evenly. She didn't feel standards should be cut, but left as they are. She also commented that Foothill Boulevard should be looked at. Mayor Alexander felt everyone on the Council should draft their concerns about the General Plan and that they should possibly be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review in order to make modifications to it. He suggested a land use consultant look at what the Council comes up with before the changes are made. Councilmember Williams did not feel they should keep saying "change" the General Plan, but that they should say "revisit" the General Plan. Councilmember Biane felt the Planning Commission should keep on saying "no" to people when something isn't going to work and also treat them with respect. He also felt the General Plan should be revisited. He stated he did not know if a land use consultant was really needed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he did not feel the staff had the time to review the Council's changes in order to change the General Plan. Jack Lam, City Manager, pointed out there is a lot involved in changing the General Plan and a lot of things that need to be considered. He felt infrastructure needed to be looked at and other various elements. Councilmember Williams felt the 4th Street area should also be looked at. Commissioner McNiel stated if the direction is changing he would appreciate the Council letting the Planning Commission know. Chairman Barker felt when the Planning Commission is overturned that it is sending a message to them and that is something for them to consider and incorporate. Commissioner Lumpp felt there is a change in direction, and that he likes the idea of revisiting the General Plan. He stated his intention is not to relax standards. He asked for the Council's support when the Planning Commission does make a decision so there is not a perceived division. City Council/Planning Commission Minutes May 29, 1996 Page 5 Councilmember Williams stated it would help her to get the Planning Commission minutes sooner than she is receiving them. Chairman Barker thanked the Council for bringing everyone together. B2. DISCUSSION OF ITEMS OF MUTUAL INTEREST No items were discussed. C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC No communication was made from the public. D. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Biane to adjourn both the Planning Commission and the City Council with the Council adjourning to Thursday, May 30, 1996, 5:30 p.m. for a Budget Workshop to be held in the Tri-Communities Conference Room located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Motion carded unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. e~s, pectfu limbmitred, City Clerk Approved by Planning Commission: June 26, 1996 Approved by City Council: August 7, 1996