Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983/04/11 - Minutes - AdjournedApril 11, 1983 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Adjourned Meeting An adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga met on Monday, April 11, 1983 in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road. The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Mayor Jon D. Mikeis. Present were: City Council members: Richard M. Dahl, Charles J. Buquet II, Phillip D. Schlosser, James C. Frost, and Mayor Jon D. Mikeis. Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Attorney, Robert Dougherty; Community Development Director, Jack Lam; City Planner, Rick Gomez; City Engineer, Lloyd Hubbs; Planners Tim Beedie and Otto Kroutil. Mayor Mikeis made two announcements: 1. Flood Insurance was still available to those in the flood plain who wished to obtain it. There was a vacancy on the Parks Advisory Committee since Jim Banks had submitted his resignation. Council requested all those interested in applying to get an application in by 1:00 p.m. on Friday, April 29th. The position will be filled at the May 4th city ¢-uncil meeting. Mr. Beedle presented an overview of the process i~volved in the preparation of the Plan, and an overview of what was contained w'thin the Plan. Mr. Kroutil, project manager, presented a report on the major issues which have been discussed. Mayor Mikels opened the meeting for public hearing on issues relating to circulation. Addressing Council were: John Rignotti, land owner, questioned where the money was coming from to implement the streets and to maintain them afterwards. Mr. Hubbs responded that a large part of the circulation plan are existing streets which will be expanded through the development process. The extra dedications and improvements would come with the development of each fronting property. In areas with existing development, there is the possibility of other types of funding such as Assessment Districts or city funded projects. The primary funding source would be the developers. Tony Zenz, representing two major property owners and one block of land north of Route 30, east of Etiwanda Avenue, and west of East Avenue, requested that the equestrian overlay should be moved back and north some distance from the Route 30 corridor. Robert Lawrence, property owner, suggested that Route 30 on East Avenue was necessary and adequate. was a good plan. the interchange of the He concurred that this Andy Barmakian stated that the shopping center at the Devore freeway would create considerable traffic coming from all directions including traffic off the freeway. This center would probably include a major market which would be open late at night and draw mare traffic than the city wants. He recommended a smaller type center at Etiwanda Avenue and Base Line with a smaller market. City Council Minutes April 11, 1983 Page 2 Betty McNay, land owner, was distressed because of the lack of major east/west streets. With the high school located on Victoria Avenue there should be more east/west circulation to accommodate the traffic created by those travelling to the high school. David Flocker, land owner, stated that at the last Planning Commission meeting a change was made in the equestrian trail system that came south of the equestrian ara with a linkup with the future trail area in Fontana. He felt it was a mistake to remove Alternative 1 as it was presented to the Planning Commission. This was replaced with Alternative 3 which created new trails down Etiwanda Avenue connecting with the Victoria Planned Community to the west, and between Victoria and Route 30 north of the high school, and under the freeway connecting with Fontana to the east. He felt this system was not necessary and brings an equestrian trail through an area where people were not allowed to keep horses. He wanted this go back to Alternative 1. Jim Banks, resident, asked the following: Why make East Avenue worse by putting a major shopping center on it, and Why put an interchange on it? Why do we have to have these at all, and why on E~st Avenue? There were other suitable places for a shopping center. There were three interchanges within two miles - Deer Creek, Cherry, and Base Line ant East Avenue. He felt three were enough since some communities don't have any. Chief Feuerstein, Foothill Fire District, asked if they would be making a decision on this tonight. He said their staff had made some recommendations, but had done so from outdated materials. Mayor Mikeis assured him there would be several other hearings. Joe White, a resident, felt that if you look at where people live, shop, and work, then council should go back to the bypass road. It would be better for the high school to get the kids east and west. The bypass would be the best plan. The bypass would get people where they need to go without impacting the rest of the City. It would be immediately west of the high school, and would benefit those travelling to and from the high school. He did not see the need for two neighborhood shopping centers within such a close proximity. He felt the one planned off Highland Avenue next to the wash would better serve the people in the north and northeast part of the city. Ultimately something will be put up there to serve those people. Mary Catania, property owner, favored the widening of East Avenue and not the bypass because she felt the City should be obligated to the people on East Avenue to fulfill what someone else had planned. Some people say they don't want four lanes on East Avenue, but some people have had to do that and have already paid for it. There should be some obligation to continue what some other Council started. Alex Catania, property owner, felt the bypass road was rather close to East Avenue. He was opposed to the bypass. If they had to have the bypass cutting through his property, then the zoning should be at least "M" to compensate for the road. Neil Westlotorn, resident, did not feel the Plan did the community any service at all. In fact, it did exactly what they did not want. He felt it impacted the heart of Etiwanda. He said the Planning Commission had no representative from Etiwanda on it; something which he has always opposed. Ruben Bermudez, resident, stated he favored the Plan with the bypass road. It would destroy the community to widen East Avenue. City Council Minutes April 11, 1983 Page 3 Ray Trujillo, resident and Advisory Committee member, felt we could have saved ourselves a lot of time, effort, and money by eliminating the committee in the first place because we are back to zero. He did not want the bypass road eliminated. He felt the bypass would provide a rapid way to get people in and out of the community. He felt an access to the high school should be considered. Mrs. Kleinman, property owner, expressed that a street next to the high school was not a good idea. She felt we would have the same type of problems as we do at Alta Loma High School with a main road next to the high school. She felt we are not looking far enough ahead and should plan for the freeway interchange at East Avenue. Alex Catania, property owner, added to his other statements that if Council does consider the bypass road, then when they increase the zoning around the bypass, then don't take the zoning away from other landowners in other areas in order to increase the zoning around the bypass. Larry Arcinage, property owner, concurred that there were not enough east/west streets. He was in favor of the bypass road and any additional east/west roads that would be planned for. Carl Shacklett, resident, concurred with Mrs. McNay regarding the high school and the traffic. We must be looking t~ the future and to needs in general and not to just those who reside in a ~rticular area. He felt the Plan of closing Victoria should be changed. Clara Murillo, resident, felt there was a need for both East Avenue and the bypass road in order to service all the traffic which will be created by the residents in the future. She also elaborated that Fontana may be funneling students into the new high school also. Robert Bruce, of Alta Loma, stated that there was a direct correlation between freeway accesses and crime. Crime goes up in proportion with the number of freeway accesses. He felt council may want to reevaluate the fourth access. Wayne Blanton, Upland, opposed the improvemenbs being completed on just the south side of 24th Street. He felt the people on the north side should have to pay for half of the improvements. Betty McNay stated that when the flood control goes in there would be land available to put in another bypass. Robert Lawrence stated that the number of access points were necessary. How can this help but get people in and out of the Etiwanda area. Theres always s problem with a lack of accesses. M~s. Kleinman asked if Victoria Avenue is going through? Mr. Hubbs said that a tract map has been finalized which does not contemplate Victoria going through. Mrs. Kleinman felt that this street should go through and wondered if this could be changed? David Flocker, representing the Etiwanda Landowners Association, approved of the changes made by the Planning Commission to add the access to Route 30. He said it was not a question of how many accesses there were in Etiwanda, but how many there were on Route 30. Adding this access would prevent surface travel through Etiwanda to the only other access at Day Creek. The Landowners Association was opposed to the bypass road because it was unnecessary and costly. Marge Silva, resident, objected to the placement of the trails system. It is not fair to put a trail along a road with existing homes. If they don't have enough room in front, it would put horses close to their homes. Trails should be placed in areas that can be developed around homes that allows for horses. City Council Minutes April 11, 1983 Page 4 Pat Gearhard, resident, wanted to keep the traffic away from the core of Etiwanda. She felt this circulation plan was a mess. She had heard that it would not be any more expensive to put in a new bypass road than to widen East Avenue. Ray Trujillo felt that because of the size of the area, the question is not how the streets are going to be paid for, but when it should be done. He felt it is imperative that the bypass road be built while the number of people affected by it is minimal. Presently, it would not require more than one or two homes to be moved. Rick Elias, resident who lived on East Avenue above Highland, stated for the record he did not like the Plan. With this Plan, there was no core of Etiwanda left. He would like to preserve Etiwanda and votes for the bypass. John Lyon, resident, considers circulation the most important part of the Plan. He supports the bypass and was opposed to the route 30 interchange. The idea for the Etiwanda Specific Plan was to preserve Etiwanda. He felt the Plan fails to do that. Liz Allerton, resident, was in favor of the bypass road and did not like the Plan without the bypass. There being no further comments on circulation issues, Mayor Mikels closed the public hearing on this item. Mayor Mikeis called a recess at 8:40 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:15 p.m. with all members of Council and staff present. Mayor Mikels stated that the Specific Plan Advisory Committee was appointed by the City Council. Their recommendation went to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission made some revisions to that Plan. The Plan is now before the City Council. It will be the City Council who will approve and adopt the final Plan. The Council will take into account the recommendations made by the Specific Plan Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission, and from the comments made before Council now. Mayor Mikels stated that other meetings will be necessary and felt the Council should set those meetings so people will know what to expect. Council set: Thursday, April 21, at 7:00 p.m. in the Lions Park Community Center for the next public hearing date. Tuesday, May 17, at 7:00 p.m. in the Lions Park Community Center for another date if necessary. Final consideration at the regular city council meeting of Wednesday, May 18, 7:00 p.m. in the Lions Park Community Center. Mayor Mikels requested that staff present a report on commercial locations under the land use portion of the Plan. Otto Kroutil presented the Plan as approved by the Planning Commission which included two ten acre centers -- one at Base Line and East Avenue and one at East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. Also included were several smaller type shopping areas scattered throughout the planning area. Both centers are located on East Avenue since there are only two major north/south streets in the planning area. One is Etiwanda Avenue and the other East Avenue. In City Council Minutes April 11, 1983 Page 5 trying to reduce traffic on Etiwanda Avenue as much as possible, the only other north/south street was East Avenue. There is a possibility of a third site located at 24th Street. Presently it is designated as a minor site, but with a provision if development occurs north of 24th Street, then that site could be considered for another shopping center. Mayor Mikels opened the public hearing to those wishing to comment on the commercial locations. Addressing Council were: John Rignotti felt a shopping center would be more appropriate at the corner across from the Regina Cafe since the winds were so bad in that area. Felt that this would improve the traffic and appearance of the area which borders Fontana. Jim Banks, resident, stated most of the people in Etiwanda did not want any commercial at all, in fact most indicated they preferred driving to other areas to shop. He felt that the Plan puts a lot of commercial into the south end of Etiwanda. When the upper area begins to build, we will end up with just what everyone wanted to avoid. He felt we should strike the commercial at the freeway and Base Line because this center has no redeeming value. It will be only a appendage to the freeway and have no aethestic value at all. When the Victoria Planned Community centers are added, then there will be too much commercial overlapping. He felt we should end speculation and get some of it out of there or at least to develop some ~thod to control the rate at which it is developed so that we don't have a brand new ghost town throughout Etiwanda. They don't want big block buildings ~.~ the freeway. If you could delete the Center at Base Line and the freeway an~ the one which is out of the Etiwanda Specific Plan by the winery, then go ak~ad and put a smaller one at Etiwanda Avenue and Base Line. As long as it is small and blends in, he would trade two large centers for one small one. Mrs. Kleinman wanted to draw attention to a piece of property which is bounded by the railroad on the north, the freeway on the east, and by East Avenue; this is an odd triangular spot of about ten acres. This type of property would be more wisely used for commercial. Presently it is zoned "M". Ray Trujillo felt that if we have commercial, then it should be situated so that it benefits the community. It should ~e put at the north at 24th Street and at Foothill and East Avenue. This will disperse traffic to the north and to the south. A commercial center at East Avenue and Foothill would make a good entrance to the community. Larry Arcinage stated he was in favor of a shopping center at East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. This would not impact the core of Etiwanda, create an entrance to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and will keep traffic from Fontana coming into the city. If we don't allow for one here, then probably the City of Fontana would be putting one in since it will be a major street. This would take tax dollars away from the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Andy Barmakian presented an architects rendering of a shopping center which could be a solution for the corner of Etiwanda and Base Line. It will have a more rural design and would be a smaller shopping center than the larger center proposed at East Avenue and Foothill. A similar one, Christian Farmers Market, is located along the 57 freeway in Diamond Bar. The design is their interpretation of this market and would answer the needs of the community in respect to keeping the traffic problems down, keeping the size of the facility down, creating a rural look to that corner, and eliminating a problem of trying to design a residential facility at a corner which will be impacted by two lanes of left turning traffic off Etiwanda onto Base Line. This situation is created at the Montclair Shopping Center on Moreno with a left turn into the shopping center at Broadway and May Company. Their type of design would create less vehicular traffic per day. John Lyon stated he would support the Barmakian proposal if council would delete some of the other designations. City Council Minutes April 11, 1983 Page 6 Joe White felt that with the regional shopping center located at Etiwanda and Foothill, then how could the other smaller centers support themselves. He felt people would rather shop at the regional center. Neil Westlotorn stated at Foothill and East Avenue a plan had been presented to preserve the trees at this location. He felt this was a good plan. Bob Lawrence recommended that everyone should remember this is a plan for what Etiwanda will be in the future, not what it is now. There being no further comments from the public, Mayor Mikels closed the public hearing on this item. Mayor Mikels requested staff present the report on the Residential Land Use Designations. Otto Kroutil presented the report. He stated the Plan as proposed by the Planning Commission proposed residential uses from one dwelling unit per acre to 14 dwellings per acre. The lowest intensity residential uses are found north of Route 30 and portions of the core area. Mayor MikeIs opened the meeting to land use issues. Addressing Council were: Tony Zenz, representing more than 120 acres of the 140 in the block, stated that an "L" designation would be better along Route 30 than a "VL" designation. This would make a better buffer. No "VL" has been used along 1- 15 as a buffer. Wayne Blanton felt you would not want to leave all 20,000 square foot lots next to a freeway. He would like to see a similar program adopted as in Alta Loma with a graduated scale going north of the freeway. He would like to have some 10,000 up to I/2 acre lots. Dick Vanderhoof, property owner of seven acres north of Route 30 and east of East Avenue, wanted to support the comments that there should be a buffering zone along both sides of Route 30 -- either an "L" or "LM" designation. Don Rignotti, representing six acres at Miller and Etiwanda Avenue, felt the "M" and "LM" are not compatible for that area since they are on the other side of the freeway. There is no designation for apartments or condominiums which is the buffer zone from Foothill up to the freeway. He felt a complex in clusters would be more appropriate with a higher designation - at least 20-24 dwellings per acre. Mrs. Catania addresss the "ER" zoning stating this zoning wasn't in the general plan. She felt this area would be unmarketable since there is a park on one side, water towers on the other side, and small lots and houses in the middle. Also the land had no character for expensive homes -- it was too flat. Mr. Catania, owner of property in the "ER" area. Half of his property is zoned "VL", the other half in "ER". He felt trying to develop an area with two different designations would be difficult. If Council is going to keep the "ER" zone, then could they consider reducing it in size to exclude both halves of his property. James Thompson, owner of 25 acre parcel near the flood control channel (highway 30 to the north, flood control to the south, channel running to the east) feels that the "L" designation is not adequate and requested it be put back to the "LM" designation. City Council Minutes April 11, 1983 Page 7 Jim Banks strongly urged consideration of the lightest designations possible in all of Etiwanda. He also called attention to a housing tract south of Foothill. He did not like the Planning Commission's decision in making this an industrial park surrounding the housing tract. Mrs. Kleinman stated two areas west of the freeway on the south side of Victoria designated as "L". She felt this area should be a higher designation with the freeway 30 feet above it and running the entire length of it. She felt there should be something higher along the freeway side graduating to a lower density along East Avenue. Mr. Lawrence felt that we needed to zone along freeway communsurate with a good buffering philosophy. Chief Feuerstein stated that the area north of Route 30 is a very high fire hazard area, and Council should take this into consideration. Clark Shocklett, property owner of 10 acres at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Miller, addressed the area at 1-15, East Avenue, and Foothill Boulevard. He suggested that since there is a diversity of densities and in the interest of uniformity, he suggested that density be made the same in the whole area. Mr. Lawrence, owner of property along the S¢ thern Pacific Railroad, felt that buffering warrants consideration there sin.~e the property is locked in against the railroad tracks. He also felt d~nsities were too low to be practical. The need was to have affordable housi ~. Bob Flocker addressed the "L" and "VL" densities in the Plan. He felt it was excessive. In particular, he addressed the area south of Route 30, west of East Avenue, and north of Base Line. He felt the "VL" should become "L". Pat Gerhart expressed her resentment in the development of the City. Mr. Banks felt that the main issue was Profits versus Privacy. Mr. Trujillo stated that when the Victoria Planned Community with the higher densities was approved, they were under the impression that it would protect the Etiwanda area. While growth is inevitable, they are concerned about the intensity of that growth. Mr. Westlotorn addressed the issue of the commitment the Etiwanda residents feel was made to them when they agreed to the development of the Victoria Planned Community with such high density. They were led to believe that they could expect some support from the City for low development in the area we are now talking about. Mike Perez, resident, felt the lower density made a better place where people would want to live and stay. There being no further comments, Mayor Mikels closed the public hearing on land use issues. Mayor Mikeis called a recess at 10:45 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 10:55 p.m. with all members of Council and staff present. !,*!t Mayor Mikels stated that the meeting was now open to address issues unrelated to land use and circulation. Addressing Council were: Mark Schipold, representing the Myohoji Temple, stated they were concerned about the area being harmonized with the temple. They were concerned in City Council Minutes April 11, 1983 Page 8 particular with the "OP" designation to the south. They were concerned that 2 or 3 story buildings would be built that could overlook into their rectory. He suggested that a 35 foot side yard buffer be placed between their property and at least the "OP" designation. Chief Feuerstein stated that the Fire District was concerned that some kind of fire plan be provided for fire services. They would like a schedule be established of when services and facilities would be needed and to include methods of financing of such facilities and services. David Flocker stated that Section 5.4, Special Regulations, has very specific requirements on windrows. He felt the City would be creating an uninforceable ordinance. Who would be examining the trees to insure watering. Also, who would be maintaining them. He felt this should be examined again to be sure its feasible. There being no further comments from the public, Mayor Mikels closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Schlosser, seconded by Buquet to adjourn the meeting to an Executive Session regarding oending litigation, not to reconvene this evening, but to reconvene on Tuesday, April 19, 7:00 p.m. at the Rancho Cucamonga Library to discuss Route 30. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. The next hearing for the Etiwanda Specific Plan will be April 21, 1983 at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly Authelet Deputy City Clerk