Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994/09/28 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting September 28, 1994 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. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, John Melcher ABSENT: Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT: Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; L. Dennis Michael, Fire Chief; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Diane O'Neal, Management Analyst II; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary , , , , , ANNOUNCEMENTS PROCLAMATION FOR PAMELA S. HENRY Chairman Barker presented a proclamation to Pamela S. Henry for her work on community trails. Commissioner McNiel thanked Ms. Henry for her assistance. CONSENT CALENDAR Ae ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-16 - AMERON - A request to construct an 18,600 square foot industrial building on 20 acres of land in the Heavy Industrial District (Subarea 15) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the west side of Etiwanda, south of Arrow Route - APN: 229-131-03. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-20 - PARKER - A request to establish the sale of antiques and artwork within the existing Demens- Tolstoy House, a local historic landmark, on 3.16 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (2 dwelling units or less per acre) at 9686 Hillside Road - APN: 1061-561-04. Chairman Barker removed Item B for discussion Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Melcher, carried 4-0-1 with Tolstoy absent, to adopt Item A of the Consent Calendar. B. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-20 - PARKER Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the applicant had submitted a letter withdrawing the application for Conditional Use Permit 94-20. He said that although there was therefore no action before the Commission tonight, the record of the two public hearings and correspondence received up to this time would be placed in the file and would be used as reference in the event a future application is submitted. Chairman Barker asked for assurance that the information would be provided to any future Commission if an application is received. Mr. Buller responded that was correct. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ce CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-08 - SANCHEZ (BABE'S CLUB 66] - A request to establish a night club and sports bar, including entertainment, amusement devices (video/arcade games), and the on-site consumption of alcoholic beverages, within an existing building in the Community Commercial Designation (Subarea 3) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1077-601-07 and 09. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He noted that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301. Commissioner Melcher asked if the two parcels each have two Assessor's Parcel Numbers. Mr. Murphy responded that was correct. Commissioner Melcher asked if the applicant would be permitted to process a Parcel Map application and thereby avoid the added expense from the new conditions. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated the applicant would be able to process a Parcel Map application, but that application would still trigger the requirements even with the existing buildings. Commissioner Lumpp asked if the revised landscaping plan with landscaping in front of the convenience store is consistent with codes. Mr. Murphy replied it will be a slight variation because that area will be within the ultimate right-of-way for Foothill Boulevard. He said it is therefore an interim fix until ultimate improvements can be constructed. Planning Commission Minutes -2- September 28, 1994 ...... Co~unissioner Lumpp asked if the applicant is aware of the requirements. Mr. Murphy replied there have been numerous discussions with the applicant regarding the matter. He said there will also be additional improvements required in the future in front of the night club. Commissioner Lumpp asked if a condition is needed to provide reciprocal parking between the convenience store and the night club parcels. Mr. James replied the applicant will be processing a lot line adjustment. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. John Sanchez, 604 Toland, West Covina, stated he understands the conditions and realizes he has to comply. George Guidera, 7363 Garnet, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he owns the adjoining property to the east. He said he was not opposed to a business going in on Foothill Boulevard. He said he had spent almost two years participating in a study of Foothill Boulevard and he felt there has not been any progress in that end of town regarding the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. He felt there has been no con~nitment for redevelop~ent. He said Turner Avenue and Hermosa is a major channel street. He asked if the rear parking lot will be improved and, if so, if it had been engineered. Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer, stated the parking lot will be improved and the engineering will be done prior to approval of the permit. Mr. Guidera stated he would like to see it engineered for cross lot drainage from Hermosa Avenue. He said he was concerned because last year he lost $15,000 in strawberries on the adjoining parcel because Hermosa and Foothill flooded and cut across behind the night club onto his property. He said he was also concerned about lighting, in that he has had a lighting problem for a number of years at his personal residence caused by a nearby property owner. He thought the intersection was designated as a node in the Foothill corridor study. He felt Foothill Boulevard from Archibald to Haven Avenue has been neglected even though portions of the area are designated under the Redevelopment Agency and he wanted that to be addressed prior to any permits being issued. He did not feel the developer should necessarily incur the charges but he stated the area has a problem with flooding. He thought there is a master plan for the drainage. He thought the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan calls for an overall master plan for the entire area when new development occurs. He acknowledged that this application does not constitute new development. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Commissioner McNiel asked if there had been any preliminary engineering regarding the parking lot in the back. Mr. James responded the applicant's engineer had submitted a plan showing the existing topography which shows 5-1/2 feet of drop from the north end of the Planning Commission Minutes -3- September 28, 1994 properties to the low spot at the corner of Hermosa and Foothill. He said the site currently sheet flows due south. He said therefore any flow from Hermosa would have to jump the curb and go across the flat sheet flow downward at 5-1/2 feet. He said that typically there would be a 6-inch high curb around the proposed parking lot which would provide a barrier for flows traveling easterly and redirect it due south. Commissioner McNiel asked if Hermosa has been prioritized for drainage work to be done. Mr. James did not believe it has been scheduled. Mr. Bose said it is on a high priority list and is ready but awaiting funding. He said some work has been done on the Alta Loma basin which should help reduce the flow coming south. He said Engineering is aware of the problem. Commissioner McNiel noted that the applicant will be investing money in the property and Mr. Guidera has already encountered problems and he felt attention should be paid to somehow deflect the water flowing south. He asked if a lighting study would be done for the parking lot. Mr. Murphy replied a lighting study will be done. Commissioner Lumpp said he understood that the applicant would be improving the parking lot. He asked if that meant they would have to retain the water on the parking lot or channel it toward Foothill or Hermosa. Mr. James replied that was correct unless the applicant received an off-site easement. Commissioner Lumpp noted the drainage should improve as a result of the improvement of the property. Mr. James responded staff felt it would improve. Commissioner Lumpp stated he had a concern with one of the conditions of approval adopted at the original public hearing. He said it was his understanding that the public hearing was now open on all conditions which had previously been adopted. He noted that one of the previous conditions called for security personnel in the parking area and he requested that the condition be clarified to require uniformed security personnel. He thought that would add more credibility to the control of any nuisance. Chairman Barker suggested that the security personnel be trained as well. He reopened the public hearing. Mr. Sanchez stated that the security personnel will be from an outside security firm, so they would be uniformed. Chairman Barker again closed the public hearing. He felt that night clubs can often mean trouble. He noted that a night club had previously operated at Planning Commission Minutes -4- September 28, 1994 this location. He agreed that development along Foothill Boulevard should not be piecemeal but he noted that this is an existing building. He was not sure that 6-inch curbs will stop the water that runs across the area, but he assumed Engineering would address the problem to ensure that the problem is addressed. He asked if the conditions adequately address that matter. Mr. James stated that on-site grading of the parking lot is reviewed by the Building & Safety Division. He did not know if perimeter walling is being required of the project. He felt the 6-inch curb would be a deterrent to flows. He said the on-site parking lot would be designed to drain toward Foothill Boulevard. Chairman Barker asked if the requirement could be strengthened. Mr. James said that if there is a problem with waters traversing the applicant's property from flowing down Hermosa Boulevard, that is an existing condition within the City and the applicant would be improving that condition by the nature of the project. He questioned if it should be part of the applicant's responsibility to provide an extensive drainage study to determine the amount of flows coming down Hermosa and to determine what type of walling would be needed to keep that water within the right-of-way since it may be an existing condition. Chairman Barker said it does get wet in the area. Mr. James noted the water may be coming from the properties to the north. He said that staff did not observe any signs of erosion from Hermosa over to the strawberry patch. Chairman Barker asked about lighting studies. Mr. Buller stated the standards cover the amount of foot-candles at property line and sufficient level of lighting within the parking lot to provide level of security required by Police. Chairman Barker recalled that when a church was approved in Etiwanda, cutoff fixtures were required so that lighting would not go into surrounding private property. He thought that had been established as a procedure to be followed throughout the City. Mr. Bullet replied that has occurred in some projects which are adjacent to sensitive land uses such as existing residential development. Mr. Murphy replied the study would indicate foot-candles within property lines and any extension into adjoining properties to determine if there is a need for the cutoff type of fixture to prevent spillover from occurring. Commissioner Lumpp suggested that the resolution be modified to require a contribution toward construction of the Foothill Boulevard median only if CalTrans does not allow installation at this time. Planning Co~nission Minutes -5- September 28, 1994 Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by Melcher, to adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 94-08 with modifications to require licensed, uniformed security personnel, to require contribution towards construction of the Foothill Boulevard median only if CalTrans does not allow installation at this time, and to indicate the project is categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15301. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER NONE TOLSTOY -carried , , , , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 89-23 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to construct a hellpad and to base a helicopter at an existing fire station and training facility (Station #174) in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial designation (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Jersey Boulevard - APN: 229-111-34. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and requested that the resolution be modified to use the term heliport instead of helipad. Commissioner Melcher noted that there was a comprehensive design for the entire site which has not been fully built out. Me thought the helipad is to be constructed in an area that is presently undeveloped. Me asked what would be constructed, if anything. Mr. Murphy replied that at this time there are no plans to construct anything else. He said that Mercy Air is looking for a 5-year lease rather than a permanent relocation. He acknowledged that as the site is further developed for the fire station, that may affect Mercy Air's ability to remain at the site. Commissioner Melcher asked if the crew would have to traverse an unimproved surface which could cause problems in wet weather. Mr. Murphy thought they will be using a concrete slab which will be removed upon termination of the lease. He said that is a temporary fix until the ultimate improvements are installed for the overall fire facility. Commissioner Melcher asked if that would put all or part of the property back on the tax rolls. L. Dennis Michael, Fire Chief, stated the property would not go back on the tax rolls because it would be a private/public partnership arrangement with Mercy Air paying lease payments to the Fire District. He said Mercy Air wishes to move from La Verne because there is a serious security problem at Brackett Field in La Verne. He said staff felt this would be an excellent opportunity which would require fewer helicopter landings at local intersections, as it will permit ground transportation of victims to the fire station for evacuation by helicopter. Planning Commission Minutes -6- September 28, 1994 Commissioner Melcher asked how ground transportation to the helipad would affect the time in getting the victim to the hospital. Mr. Michael replied it would probably cut down on that time in many cases because the ground ambulance crew would be transporting the victim while the air ambulance crew was preparing to accept the patient and would then be ready to fly immediately to the hospital rather than flying first to the accident site to pick up the victim. Commissioner Melcher asked if the finished surface of the lot would support the ambulance transporting the patient to the helicopter when the ground is wet. Mr. Michael responded affirmatively. He said the driveway supports fire engines. He stated it is compacted dirt with added aggregate and the intent is to further complete the driveway as part of the redevelopment activities to finish off Phase I of the site construction. Commissioner McNiel asked if there are any plans to do anything other than adding the aggregate in the immediate future. Mr. Michael replied it is aggregate that is compressed and rolled down. He said Phase II construction is several years away based on current economic conditions. Commissioner McNiel asked if engineering feels that would be sufficient. Mr. Murphy replied that it will be similar to a base laid down in preparation for a street. Commissioner McNiel felt it could be messy during a storm. Commissioner Melcher stated his concerns had been addressed by the answers staff had supplied. He asked if there is sufficient housing for the Mercy Air personnel. Mr. Michael replied the station was designed to house 11 on duty and currently only has 6. Commissioner Melcher felt the use will be a good fit. Commissioner Lumpp agreed. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, to issue a negative declaration and adopt the resolution approving Modification to Conditional Use Permit 89-23 with a change in terms to heliport. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER NONE TOLSTOY -carried Planning Commission Minutes -7- September 28, 1994 DIRECTORS REPORTS E. CONFERENCE UPDATE Brad Buller, City Planner, commented that the California Chapter of the American Planning Association is scheduled for San Diego from October 20 to 23 and the League of California Cities is scheduled for Long Beach from October 23 to 25. Chairman Barker observed that he and two other Commissioners would be attending a Planning Commission workshop put on by the California Chapter of the American Planning Association on October i which only cost $30. He said he did not plan to attend the State APA conference or the League of California Cities Planning Comn~issioners Institute and offered his share of monies to be used by someone else. Mr. Buller suggested that one or more Commissioners may wish to attend the California Preservation Foundation conference to be held in June in Riverside. He said the registration fee is estimated at $95. Commissioners McNiel and Lumpp indicated an interest in attending that conference. Chairman Barker indicated that if any of the Commissioners were interested in attending any of the conferences they should bring it up. , , , , , PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. , , , , , COMMISSION BUSINESS Commissioner Lumpp commented that at the last Planning Commission workshop regarding the Masi project, the applicant led him to believe that the reason for the design of the project, particularly the street design, was as a result of some type of bonding agreement with the City and therefore, the street layout had to stay where it was. He asked for a memo to verify that there is some type of agreement with some City entity regarding the street layout. Chairman Barker recalled that at the workshop it had been stated that the project could be handled by the Design Review Committee rather than having the whole Commission workshop the project. He asked if that was still the desire of the Commissioners. Commissioner Melcher felt the project deserves the utmost and fullest attention of the Planning Commission as a whole. He thought that most of Masi Planning Commission Minutes -8- September 28, 1994 Drive will run through a field of parking on both sides. He said that earlier a lot of attention had been given to how to deal with the buildings lining the on-site roadway parallel and north of Masi Drive between a row of building facing Foothill and a row of buildings facing Masi Drive. He thought most of the buildings facing Masi Drive have since been deleted and the view from Masi Drive may now be of the back of the buildings facing Foothill Boulevard. He thought the Commission should be provided an overall site plan drawing for the entire 27 acres. He felt the entire project is being piecemealed and the City will be losers if vigilance is not maintained. Chairman Barker agreed. He felt that the project has been piecemealed and had involvement from too many sources other than the Planning Division and the Planning Commission. He directed that the Commission act as a whole for Design Review. Commissioner McNiel stated he had been to countless meetings on the project. He agreed that potential leases are driving the project and cause the Commission to react and Mr. Masi is suffering tragically. He felt there have been erratic and dramatic changes and he thought the Commission should pay close attention to the project. He agreed that the entire site plan should be reviewed for views to backs of buildings from the streets. He said the project has been workshopped from the beginning in an effort to assist the applicant and expedite the project. Chairman Barker observed that the changes have not been initiated by the Planning Commission. , , , , Commissioner Melcher noted that a comment had been made earlier in the evening regarding piecemeal development along Foothill Boulevard and he thought the Commission had been piecemealing when the project with the four historic houses and the cafe was approved. He suggested that once the Commercial Study is launched, the Commission turn its attention to Foothill Boulevard. He thought a lot of the results since the plan was adopted have been disappointing. Chairman Barker thought the work program should be placed back on the agenda and directed that it be added to the October 12 meeting. , , , , Chairman Barker commented there will be a farewell dinner for Mayor Stout in ,November. He noted that Mayor Stout had been active on the Planning Commission for a number of years and he felt Mayor Stout had continued to show his concerns regarding design excellence during his tenure as Mayor. He recommended that the Commission present a plaque for his efforts and contributions. Commissioners McNiel and Melcher agreed. , , , , , Planning Commission Minutes -9- September 28, 1994 ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by Melcher, carried 4-0-1 with Tolstoy absent, to adjourn. 8:17 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -10- September 28, 1994