Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/04/26 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting April 26, 1995 Chairman Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Chairman Barker then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROTT, CAT.T. COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Mike Olivier, Senior Civil Engineer; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary , , , , , ANNOUNCRM~NTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that today was Secretary's Day. Chairman Barker expressed appreciation for the Secretary's efforts. APPROVAT. OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, carried 5-0, to approve the minutes of March 22, 1995. PUBLIC HEARINGS ENVIRONMRNT~L ASSESSMRNT AND CONDITIONal. USE PERMIT 95-01 - FRNT - A request to construct an 8,166 square foot day care facility within an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial designation, located on the east side of Haven Avenue, north of Highland Avenue - APN: 201-271-92. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker felt that the service station would not necessarily have a risk management and prevention plan in effect which is mandated by Assembly Bill 3205 for all hazardous materials users or generators which are located within 1,000 feet of a school. Because the service station already exists, Chairman Barker asked what obligation the service station would be under to prepare such a plan. Mr. Murphy replied thought the applicant would then need to prepare such a plan necessary to satisfy the County Department of Environmental Health. He said the legislation was originally worded that a service station could not be erected within 1,000 feet of a school, but the County has interpreted the legislation both ways, in that a school cannot be placed within 1,000 feet of a service station unless a plan is in effect. Chairman Barker asked if the applicant was aware of the requirement for the plan. Mr. Murphy replied that the applicant is aware and has expressed confidence that they can adequately address the issue. Commissioner Tolstoy thought the rendering on the wall did not reflect one of the changes requested by the Design Review Committee of breaking up the roof line. Mr. Murphy replied that the renderings on the wall did not reflect any of the Design Review Committee's recommendations. He noted the Committee had requested that dormers be installed to break up the roof line and that requirement had been added as a condition of approval. Commissioner Melcher thought that the design of the building is foreign to the design of the shopping center other than a token effort to match materials and he questioned why staff had allowed the applicant to proceed to Design Review. Mr. Murphy replied that the process is set up so that staff cannot hold up an application because of a design issue and is obligated to proceed forward if an application is deemed complete. He reported the applicant was made aware of staff's concerns regarding the design of the building and the relation to the center. He noted that comment was also made to the Design Review Committee. Chairman Barker questioned the drop-off and pick-up layout. Mr. Murphy indicated the building would be pushed out closer to the drive aisle and the parking would be relocated to the south side of the building. He pointed out the parking spaces. Chairman Barker asked if parents would be pulling up and letting children out of the car. Mr. Murphy replied that the drive aisle would be striped as a fire lane with parking prohibited. He said that Kindercare requires that parents sign children in and out so the parent must get out of the car. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the building shift and parking to the west of the building would preclude landscaping. Mr. Murphy pointed out that the resolution requires an additional 2 to 3 feet of landscaping along the west side of the building. He said that 6 to 10 feet of landscaping could be provided on the west side of the building by shifting the building. He stated there should be room for ~everal feet of landscaping at the tightest point on the south side. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there would be adequate room for a sidewalk and landscaping. Mr. Murphy showed the newly proposed landscaping plan. Planning Commission Minutes -2- April 26, 1995 Commissioner Tolstoy thought there was a wall along the walkway to shield the play area. Mr. Murphy replied that a wrought iron wall would be located adjacent to the play area. Commissioner Lumpp thought the Design Review Co~eittee had requested that revised elevations be provided for tonight's meeting. Mr. Murphy replied that was not his recollection. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. James Kent, 23832 Rockfield Boulevard, Suite 225, Lake Forest stated he is the Construction Manger for Kindercare. Chairman Barker asked him to discuss the safety aspects and procedure for dropping off and picking up children. Mr. Kent replied that the parents are required to sign in the children and take them into the classroom and then sign them out at the end of the day. Chairman Barker asked the age of the children. Mr. Kent replied they range from 6 weeks through kindergarten on their regular school program and up to 12 years old for the after school program. Chairman Barker asked if anyone supervises the sign-ins and sign-outs. Mr. Kent replied their Director's Office is in the front by the entrance. Chairman Barker noted that parents are often in a hurry when they bring children in the morning. He feared the inclination is to pull up, let the child out of the car, and take off. Mr. Kent stated he understood the concern. He said that in some cities where they have located, they have been required to provide a circular drive with drop off area and Kind~rcare has strongly opposed such a layout because it encourages the situation Chairman Barker feared. He said he has not heard of any situation where the sign-in program has caused a problem. Chairman Barker asked if parents sign in 12-year olds. Mr. Kent replied that school age children are brought in from the grammar schools by mini-buses and are under the guidance of one of the care givers. He noted the parents then sign out the children when they pick them. He said the mini-vans would park next to the walkway which is adjacent to the handicapped stalls. He thought moving the parking to the south would avoid the impact of traffic. Commissioner Tolstoy commented that the trucks from the market oftentimes use that route to leave the center. Mr. Kent said that the trucks are generally there early in the morning and late at night. He stated they have never had a problem in any of their other locations which are located in commercial centers. He remarked that the 7-foot high tubular iron fence around the play area will have pilasters using the same stone feature which is used throughout the shopping center. He said they will Planning Commission Minutes -3- April 26, 1995 also put in a hedge adjacent to the fence providing a buffer between the play area and the center. Commissioner Melcher asked if Mr. Kent had worked on the project from its inception. Mr. Kent responded affirmatively. Commissioner Melcher asked if Mr. Kent had been made aware of the City's normal philosophical requirement that all buildings within a shopping center be of a common design. Mr. Kent said he had been informed they would have to use common materials. He said they noted that McDonald's has the same materials as the rest of the center so they decided they would match the materials and colors. Commissioner Melcher noted that the center is designed with flat roof buildings with a heavy, handsomely detailed walkway on all the facades. He thought the McDonald's building only tokenly matches the center and this project matches even less than the McDonald's. He asked if this building is not similar in form and mass to one of their facilities on Foothill Boulevard west of Haven. Mr. Kent acknowledged it is similar in form and mass, a large rectangle with a gable roof. He stated that as a chain they have standard plans which are changed to fit into City requirements. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Commissioner Melcher felt the building does not fit the center and stated he could not support the application. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed with Commissioner Melcher that the project does not reflect the walkway that the rest of the center enjoys. Commissioner McNiel stated he had served on the Design Review Committee. He said they had considered the building for what it is and taken into account that the building will eventually be adjacent to the freeway. He felt that the building does not have to look identical to the remainder of the center if common materials are used and there is some suggestion that they are related. He noted the renderings do not reflect the changes requested by the Design Review Committee such as gables which will break up the roof and a trellis which will be on the north end connecting it to the existing walkway. He thought the use is reasonable and the building can be attractive. He supported the project. Commissioner Lumpp stated he had looked at the building as being free-standing versus being an in-line part of the center. He felt it should be somewhat different architecturally from the in-line center. He did not object to the architectural styles or the roof materials. He noted that the conditions of approval call for dormers which will be consistent with the other buildings in the center. He noted the Design Review Committee had approved the project subject to certain conditions and he thought the intent was to have the applicant bring revisions to the architectural plans for the entire Commission to see. He felt the renderings seen by the Commission look worse than the proposal. He supported the project because of the conditioned changes. He observed that the site plan does not reflect the proposed location for the trash enclosure and he requested that staff make sure the enclosure is appropriately designed and placed so that it will work cohesively with the existing shopping center. Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 26, 1995 Chairman Barker observed that both Commissioners McNiel and Lumpp had indicated that the renderings look worse than the proposed project. He thought the Commission is paying a price for forwarding projects to the full Commission prior to having corrected plans, in that the full Commission does not know what the project will look like. He said he strongly supported the Design Review process, but in this instance he could not tell what the final product will be. He felt the Commissioners seemed to have a philosophical difference as to whether the building should be viewed as a stand-alone building matching only the materials versus whether it should be an incorporation into the project. He recalled that when the center was established, there was cheering because it was one theme and thematically consistent. He thought the Commission has an obligation to sit down and discuss the philosophical differences. He was uncomfortable with approving the project because he did not know what it will be. He felt that if there are going to be changes to a proposal, the applicant must be urged to present updated plans and/or renderings. He reopened the public hearing to find out when a rendering could be available. Mr. Kent thought they could have a rendering available by May 10, 1995. Chairman Barker suggested they take into consideration the fact that two Commissioners had expressed an intention to vote against the project and see if they could do anything to appease the two negative votes. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that the applicant present the site plan and elevation changes to the Design Review Committee prior to its coming back to the full Commission. Commissioner Melcher expressed appreciation for the applicant's willingness t~ look at the project again and support from Commissioner Tolstoy and Chairman Barker. He noted that there are two buildings in the center on Haven Boulevard, the gas station and McDonald's, that do not address the center's architecture as well as they could have. He thought this proposed building is part of the L-shaped arrangement of buildings along the east and north sides of the shopping center. He noted that Willie and Pie's building is freestanding at one corner of the "L" and completely matches the architecture of the rest of the buildings. He said he would be looking for that in order to support the project. Chairman Barker echoed Commissioner Melcher's expression of appreciation to the applicant for his willingness to work with the Commission. He felt that in order to facilitate matters, the Commission is sometimes being asked to vote without fully knowing what they are voting for. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that one of the nice parts of the center is the walkway in front of the stores and he said he would like to see it reflected in the plan if possible. Chairman Barker commented that he also is concerned about safety. Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Conditional Use Permit 95-01 to May 10, 1995. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY - carried NEW BUSINESS Planning Commission Minutes -5- April 26, 1995 DEVET.OPMRNT PRVIEW 94-22 - BOSTON MAR/<~T - The design review of detailed site plan and elevations for a 3,046 square foot restaurant on Pad N within the Terra Vista 'Town Center in the Community Commercial District of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue - APN: 1077-421-76. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Lorenzo Reyes, The Reyes Group, Inc. 17853 Santiago Boulevard, #107-174, Villa Park, stated they had met with staff and Lewis Homes to be sure that the concept and design are in keeping with the balance of the center. He requested that Condition No. 3 be deleted so they would not be required to provide a 10 x 12 foot sample plaster panel because he felt they should be able to match the center and the building could be the palette. He stated that the black, white, and red striped awnings are a corporate symbol and he asked that the exterior awnings be approved as submitted. He felt that the terra cotta roof tiles are a beautiful architectural feature that gets lost at night and he asked that they be permitted to retain the proposed light fixtures on the hip roof tower. Commissioner Lumpp asked if staff had indicated why Condition No. 3 was included. Mr. Reyes felt it was a holdover from the original center construction. He said they want to match the exterior stucco finish but he felt putting up the test panel would be a waste of time. Commissioner McNiel asked what color the applicant would suggest the awnings b~ if the stripped awnings are disallowed. Mr. Reyes suggested the red which is used in the center. Commissioner McNiel commented that when the project first began there were several different types of plaster applications being used in the center and there were some that were not attractive, so the City asked that test panels be used because several of the buildings had to be refinished. Mike Lasley, Lewis Homes Management Corp., 1156 North Mountain, Upland, stated he had been involved after Buildings A and B were plastered and worked with the plasterer to try to straighten out the problems and developed the finish which is now used for the whole center. He said he will be involved with this project and will watch to make sure it matches the other buildings. He suggested they use their plasterer. He said they have not been required to do a test panel on recent buildings they have constructed. Chairman Barker asked if Lewis would accept responsibility for the final outcome of the plaster. Mr. Lasley said that as long as he is there, he would work to be sure it is done correctly. Commissioner Melcher stated that Vice Chairman McNiel had voiced a concern. He noted that as the applicant will be building their own building, the City would not have the kind of leverage that it does with Lewis. He supported retaining the requirement for the test panel. He requested details on the outdoor dining area and noted that there appears to be an enormous amount of trellis to shelter the proposed four tables. He asked how customers would access the area and what sense of enclosure would be provided by a trellis. Planning Commission Minutes -6- April 26, 1995 Mr. Reyes indicated the access area. Commissioner Melcher asked if there will be an enclosure from the ground up to table height or if it would just be columns with a beam on top. Mr. Reyes replied it will just be columns with no lower enclosure. Commissioner Melcher asked if their restaurants typically have outdoor dining. Mr. Reyes replied that many do. Mr. Lasley noted that the outdoor dining is on the west side of the building where it needs the most protection and they have therefore created a parapet wall with openings in the large columns that come down to try to mitigate some of the sun control problems during the hot part of the day. Chairman Barker asked if any other hip roof towers are lit in the center. Mr. Lasley commented that the roof of Chile's is lit. He thought it would be appropriate. He said Lewis wished that it could add lighting to a number of the buildings. Ms. Fong stated that Chile's have light fixtures which project a little above the roof overhang, but it is not a hip roof. She said that if the Commission approved the lighting, it would be the only lighted hip roof for the entire center. Mr. Lasley said that Chile's has a hip roof that wraps around the front of th~ building but it does not have a square tower. He said it is a mansard roof that goes to a flat roof inside, but there are hips on the corners and the lights are on the corner. He said they have worked with the tenant and the Design Review Committee to be sure the building is compatible with the center. He requested that the multi-color theme awnings be permitted. Chairman Barker asked if Lewis would be pursuing lighting all the hip roof towers in the center. Mr. Lasley responded that they are not because of the cost factor. Commissioner Melcher noted that in the southwest corner of the dining room, tables are adjacent to the floor to ceiling windows and he felt seeing the edges of the tables and seats would be unattractive. Mr. Reyes said the seats are maple park benches and the tables are butcher block and he felt it is an attractive amenity that they want people to see. He said they will have a hand-painted mural inside the building and they want to highlight the quality to viewers on the outside. He said they would match the mullion height of the center. He showed pictures of another location. He noted that the Design Review Committee had approved having the glass extend down to the slab. John Baker, Project Manager for Boston Market, P. O. Box 61083, Anaheim, stated that the full-length glass is a major part of their concept. He stated that the full-length glass promotes the retail portion of their business. He commented that what they do on the interior is intended to translate to the outside. He observed that half of the kitchen is visible from the dining area and hopefully from the outside. He said the food is displayed in unique deli-cases. Planning Commission Minutes -7- April 26, 1995 Commissioner McNiel noted that "Meals to go" was printed on an awning in the picture shown by Mr. Reyes. Mr. Baker said that was not proposed for this project. Chairman Barker requested comments on the proposed stucco test panel. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that the condition be changed to require the applicant to provide a 10 foot by 12 foot test panel showing the plaster finish and noted that the test panel could then be done a wall rather than a separate panel. Con~nissioner Melcher stated the test panel should not be located in an area that would be shaded because it is important to evaluate it in sunlight. He suggested a south facing wall would be best because the effect of long morning and afternoon shadows could then be viewed. Mr. Buller suggested the test panel could be done on one of the parapets facing south. Chairman Barker asked for comments regarding the lighting of the tower roof. Commissioner Lumpp opposed lighting of the tower. Commissioner McNiel observed that the Men's Warehouse Store is well lit at night, but it is not roof lit. He felt Chili's is attractively lit, but noted that it does not have a tower. He felt lighting the roof would be the same as a sign and he disagreed with lighting the roof. Commissioner Tolstoy opposed lighting the roof unless the lights were installed on the roofs for the balance of the center. He agreed with Commissioner McNiel that lighting the tower would equate to a sign. Commissioner Melcher opposed the lights. Chairman Barker asked for comments regarding the awnings. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the awnings should be a single color, as he felt the multi-color awnings bring a circus to mind. Commissioner McNiel opposed the multi-color awnings. He felt that multi-color striped awnings are indicative of fast food and noted that the applicant had said Boston Market is not a fast food restaurant. Commissioner Lumpp did not support the striped awnings. Commissioner Melcher felt the awnings should be a solid color selected from the palette of colors in use in the center. Chairman Barker noted that the applicant had indicated they would probably use the red. Commissioner Melcher felt that staff, the applicant, and the center developer had done a good job trying to turn a little box into something that fits into the center. He expressed concern that there will be a request for a sign on the east surface. He was troubled by the relationship of the massive pre-cast concrete on the columns and the very thin arch element over the arch on the front and the side. He asked that they look at the detail closely to be sure there is a nice Planning Commission Minutes -8- April 26, 1995 connection between the arch and the column and a good sense of proportion. He suggested that the trellis use the same size tubing which is used in the balance of the center. Mr. Lasley said the trellis will match the balance of the center. Ms. Fong observed that Condition No. 2 requires that architectural details match the center. Mr. Lasley indicated they will work with staff to be sure the proportions are correct between the arch and the columns. Commissioner Melcher asked if there will be a request for a fourth sign. Mr. Lasley stated that the approved sign program only allows two signs on pad buildings, so one of the signs shown will be deleted unless they submit an application for a modification to the sign program. Commissioner McNiel felt that Commissioner Melcher had made some fine points and stated he agreed with them. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Melcher, to adopt the resolution approving Development Review 94-22 with modifications to permit the sample plaster panel to be on the building and to indicate that the awnings will be a solid red color. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY - carried Commissioner Melcher asked that the records show that Mr. Lasley had contacted him by telephone. The Planning Commission recessed from 8:25 p.m. to 8:31 p.m. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS C. FISCAT. YEaR 1995/96 ENGINRERING CAPITAT. IMPROVEMRNT PROJECTS Mike Olivier, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the railroad participates in the costs for improvements to railroad crossings. Mr. Olivier stated that the City is receiving 90 percent of the funding for mechanical parts and pads, but the City is paying for the road widening. Commissioner Tolstoy thought the City had previously tried to change the alignment of the curve on Carnelian between Base Line Road and San Bernardino Avenue. Mr. Olivier said the road is not super elevated and there is not enough room between the creek and the houses to totally straighten the curve. Planning Commission Minutes -9- April 26, 1995 Commissioner Tolstoy asked if some of the landscaping will be removed. Mr. Olivier confirmed it will remove some of the landscaping on the east side. He said the City is working on the concept at this time and has not yet started the final design. Commissioner Lumpp asked why a 7-year budget was prepared instead of a 5-year one. Mr. Olivier responded that the 7-year budget is a Regional Transportation Improvement Program requirement and it needs to contain all projects that are on the Congestion Management Program, any project on a state or federal highway, and any project for which the City wants to get state or federal funding. He said a 5-year program is also prepared because one is required for local Measure I money and that budget lists those projects which may be funded through Measure I. Commissioner Melcher suggested that the projected year of construction be included in the description under Design projects in the Executive Summary instead of merely indicating that construction will be funded in a later year. He also suggested that it would be easier to cross reference if the project numbers are spelled out in the same way in both the current year plan and the 7-year plan. He said he was delighted to see that the City has more than doubled the amount of money to be allocated for street repair. He thought the money will need to continue to grow as there are so many streets to keep up. Mr. Olivier agreed the need will grow and noted that the City will not have to do as much widening as it has done in the last 5 years. Commissioner Melcher recognized that the storm drain construction on Hermosa will be scheduled in years to come, but he noted that the street is rapidly deteriorating. Mr. Oliver responded that the FY 1995/96 budget proposes almost $300,000 just for rehabilitating the street. He said the storm drain is shown in the last year of the 7-year budget. Commissioner Melcher noted that three beautification projects are shown with a small amount budgeted for design. He asked if they will be designed in-house. Mr. Olivier responded that was correct. Commissioner Melcher commented there were some projects in the 1994/95 budget that have not been completed and do not show up in the FY 1995/96 budget. He questioned what had happened to the 19th Street traffic signal at Hermosa Avenue. Mr. Olivier responded that signal will be constructed by Caltrans in early 1996 and Caltrans will totally fund the project. Commissioner Melcher asked about Haven Avenue widening and improvements from north of Foothill Boulevard to north of Base Line Road. Mr. Olivier stated the money had not been received from SANBAG although they have given the City a letter of intent that they would provide $2.5 million. He observed the cost will be about $3.5 to $4 million and the City has requested additional money from SANBAG. He said the construction will take place in FY 1995/96 if SANBAG gives the City another $1 million. Planning Commission Minutes -10- April 26, 1995 Commissioner Melcher questioned what had happened to the north bound right turn lane on Archibald at Base Line Road which was included in the 1994/95 budget. Mr. Olivier stated the contract has been awarded and construction should be started within a month. Commissioner Tolstoy felt Southern California Edison should do the widening and street improvements on Wilson Avenue at Archibald Avenue. Mr. Olivier responded that Southern California Edison is conditioned to do the majority of the work and will be putting in $120,000 and the City's portion is $50,000 to extend the improvements. Commissioner Tolstoy recalled that Southern California Edison does not have to do the improvements until they are ready to develop that center. Mr. Olivier replied that Southern California Edison previously indicated a willingness to go ahead with construction. He said the City will not start construction without the funding from Southern California Edison. Commissioner Lumpp stated he had talked with an administrator from Chaffey College and she asked about the addition of sidewalks next to the college. He asked if there is any money available in'next year's budget for sidewalks at Chaffey College. Mr. Olivier reported that SANBAG administers TDA Article 3 funding and that funding is awarded on a competitive basis for areas that have a lot of adjacent uses such as banks, parks, etc. He observed such funding is proposed for widening and improvements on Beryl Street between Base Line Road and 19th Street and sidewalk construction near the Neighborhood Center. Commissioner Lumpp asked that staff see if any money could be allocated for the Chaffey College area because he felt it is an appropriate area. Commissioner Tolstoy stated such improvements have been discussed ever since the City was incorporated. Chairman Barker said that in the past the City had tried to be sure there are sidewalks available where students walk to school and it was felt that students going to Chaffey drive rather than walk. He said elementary and high schools were considered a higher priority. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he would like to see a street access from the far eastern end of the college to Banyan because it would be important in case of an emergency. Commissioner Lumpp stated that Ramona Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and Church Street has many patches and is very bumpy. He thought perhaps the street was improperly constructed and the base might not be correct. He feared that merely applying more patches will not help. He asked that staff look at the situation. Mr. Olivier indicated it may be possible to put on a leveling course before applying a top coat. He said he would look at it. Chairman Barker noted that slurry seal was recently applied to his street. He asked if there is any way to hold contractors accountable for not properly Planning Commission Minutes -11- April 26, 1995 filling in cracks before applying slurry seal, as the cracks had grass growing through them within two months of the resurfacing. Mr. Olivier noted that all cracks greater than 1/4 inch are to be blown out and sealed before application of the slurry seal. He said he would look into the matter. Commissioner McNiel noted that the 7-year budget indicates $1.58 million for street improvements on Milliken Avenue between Arrow Route and Foothill Boulevard. He asked if that would be for the completion of the third lane and the median. Mr. Olivier stated the $1.58 million is what was spent in 1994/95 and the balance should be done by developers. Commissioner McNiel thought that the Redevelopment Agency might be contributing toward the project. He asked that staff advise on the status. He asked if there are any future plans to do a Haven Avenue underpass. Commissioner Tolstoy thought he recalled that the state has some type of lottery to fund underpasses. He asked if such a fund does exist. Mr. Olivier said he had not heard of such a fund. He noted the Redevelopment Agency paid for the Milliken Avenue underpass. Commissioner McNiel also recalled something about such a fund. Mr. Olivier said there is such a program for gates and arms at railroad crossing~ through the Public Utilities Commission. He recalled giving a presentation on the proposed design for the railroad overpass design on Foothill Boulevard but noted that it was to be funded by the City. Commissioner McNiel noted that $250,000 is allocated for both FY 1998/99 and FY 1999/2000 for the Foothill Boulevard underpass at the Southern Pacific Railroad. He asked what that money would cover. Mr. Olivier replied that money would start the design and construction will follow in future years. Commissioner Tolstoy asked about the signal at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Baker Street. Mr. Olivier said that Caltrans is designing and constructing the signal. Commissioner McNiel asked when the Red Hill Country Club Drive realignment at Foothill Boulevard will occur. Mr. Olivier responded it will occur when the Foothill Implementation Plan is implemented, including widening Foothill Boulevard east from Grove Avenue and adding the median island. He said the City has purchased the land. Commissioner Melcher commented that some improvements have been made at the Metrolink station which were not part of the original design. He noted that small benches with glass above have been used to close in most of the corners of the triangular structure, reflecting the fact that wind blows through the area. He questioned the need for the $69,100 budgeted for construction administration of the Metrolink Station and facilities. Planning Commission Minutes -12- April 26, 1995 Mr. Olivier said that money was being carried over from this year. Commissioner McNiel suggested that the fund sources be better identified. Chairman Barker noted that recently there was some undergrounding on Base Line Road east of Archibald Avenue. He said there are still wires attached to the standing poles and the poles have been chopped off. He asked that staff look into the matter. Mr. Olivier said he would investigate and report back to the Commission. Commissioner McNiel felt the Milliken Avenue underpass was a terrific job. Chairman Barker agreed. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if Southern California Edison still gives the City money each year toward undergrounding. Mr. Olivier replied that is called Rule 28 money and the City gets several hundred thousand each year. He said the next location will be at 4th Street and Archibald in conjunction with Frito Lay. Commissioner Melcher noted that the beautification project on 19th Street goes from Hermosa Avenue to Haven Avenue. He stated that the properties on the south side of the street all front onto 19th Street while west of Hermosa almost to Archibald is barren with properties backing up to 19th Street. He asked if it would be possible to add that section into the design process. Mr. Olivier thought that it could perhaps be done, as in-house design staff will be completing the project. Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by McNiel, to find the Capital Improvement Program to be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY - carried PUBT.IC COMM~.NTS There were no public comments at this time. COMMISSION BUSINESS Chairman Barker requested that an item be added to a future agenda to consider renaming of 24th Street in Etiwanda. Brad Bullet, City Planner, observed that the Fire Department requested a number of streets be renamed and staff had presented a report to the Commission. He said street renaming was added as a work program item, but staff resources have not been available. Planning Commission Minutes -13- April 26, 1995 Chairman Barker asked that renaming proceed for streets which do not currently have residents in order to avoid future problems. It was the consensus of the Commission that Commissioners McNiel and Tolstoy form a task force on street names. Mr. Buller announced that staff had received notice that the California Preservation Foundation would be having a conference on June 1 through June 4 in Riverside. He stated he would forward the literature to the Commissioners when it is received. ADJOURNMRNT Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by McNiel, to adjourn. 9:21 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -14- April 26, 1995