Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/03/27 - Minutes - PC-HPCCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA pLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting March 27, 1991 Chairman McNiel 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 McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitlea, Larry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter Tolstoy, Wendy Vallette ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Bullet, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Jerry Guarracino, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Larry Henderson, Principal Planner; Anna-Lisa Hernandez, Assistant Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner; Betty Miller, Associate Engineer; Scott Murphy, Associate Planner; Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary , , , , , ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that a memorandum with suggested changes to the Housing Element was at the Commissioners' desks regarding Item C and a letter requesting approval had been received from the applicant on Item I. , , , , , APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Vallette, unanimously carried, to adopt the Minutes of February 27, 1991, as amended. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Chitlea, unanimously carried, to adopt the Minutes of the Adjourned Meeting of February 28, 1991. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Tolstoy, unanimously carried, to adopt the Minutes of March 13, 1991. CONSENT CALENDAR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-18 - BOOTH - The development of a building contractor's office and storage yard totaling approximately 8,500 square feet on 1.35 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 9037 Charles Smith Avenue, east of Rochester, north of 6th Street - APN:: 229-271-41. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Commissioner Melcher requested that Item A be removed from the Consent Calendar. He commented that the architecture seemed to relate more to residential areas than to the surrounding industrial-style buildings. He thought the roof treatment being used in an apparent attempt to mask the appearance of a flat roof of the main building may look like a device. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the design, configuration, layout, and architectural statements were the preference of the developer, and the Design Review Committee felt it would be a positive addition to the area. He said the mansard roof was thought to be a different approach to handling the screening of roof equipment. Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner, stated that when the project was first received, staff asked the Design Review Committee for initial feedback as to whether the concept was appropriate for that location, and the Committee thought it was appropriate. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to adopt the Consent Calendar. , , , , PUBLIC HEARINGS Be TIME EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 14055 - MODERN CORPORATION - A request to modify a one-lot subdivision for condominium purposes to a three-lot subdivision of 115 units on 10.27 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-14 dwelling units per acre) located north of Arrow Highway and east of Baker Avenue - APN: 207-201-32 and 12. (Continued from March 13, 1991.) Beverly Nissen, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy requested clarification of the three phases, which Ms. Nissen then outlined. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. closed the hearing. There were no comments, and he Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he was in favor of the project because Phase I will include the loop road and the connection to the mobile home park to the north. Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 27, 1991 Commissioner Vallette asked if the loop road would be landscaped with Phase I. Ms. Nissen responded that the landscaping was required in connection with the completion of the project, but was not required in Phase I. Commissioner Melcher thought the loop road and the connections to the mobile home park had always been part of Phase I, and tonight's request was merely to allow three lots instead of one to assist the developer in securing appropriate financing. Ms. Nissen replied affirmatively. Brad Bullet, City Planner, stated that the purpose of requiring the loop road and mobile home park connections with Phase I was for public safety access to the park. He suggested the Commission may wish to condition the project to require some interim landscaping if the subsequent phases are not built within a certain period of time. He said the developer has indicated they intend to build the project as quickly as possible. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that any landscaping along the road would be destroyed when Phases II and III are built. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing. Ernest Perea, PlanTech, 10535 Foothill Boulevard, #490, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was speaking on behalf of the applicant. He said they concurred with the conditions of approval. He indicated the three lots were requested for financing purposes and they intended to move rapidly forward with all construction without significant lag times between the phases. Chairman McNiel felt that if there was significant lag time between the phases it would behoove the developer to keep the area as attractive as possible. Commissioner Vallette asked the anticipated time between Phase I and the completion of Phase III. Mr. Perea indicated they projected Phase III would be constructed within 18 months. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, suggested the Commission could require construction of landscaping and irrigation in the parkway along Arrow between the sidewalk and curb. Mr. Perea stated the developer would have no objections to such a condition. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Chitlea felt Mr. Coleman's suggestion was a good one. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the Resolution approving Time Extension and Modification to Tentative Tract 14055, with modification to require installation of landscaping and irrigation in the parkway along Arrow. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 27, 1991 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE .... NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried , , , , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT REVISION 90-03A - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - In accordance with Article 10.6, Section 65588 of the California Government Code, a revision and update to the City Housing Element has been prepared. The changes to the document include: an update of the Technical Appendix consisting of documentation and analysis of current demographic trends, statistical information and housing assistance needs; update and revisions to the City's housing objectives and policies; and development of a five year action program designed to implement the City's overall housing goal. In addition, staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from March 13, 1991.) Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, presented the staff report and suggested minor wording clarification to some of the text. Chairman McNiel asked if the Housing Element approached the target with respect to low income housing in the City or if it only reflected where assistance is concerned. Mr. Henderson responded that the state housing law requires that cities make reasonable efforts in reaching the goal, but it is often beyond the local jurisdiction's ability to meet the goal established by the regional agency. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. closed the public hearing. There were no comments, and he Commissioner Melcher thanked the staff for meeting with him to help him understand state law requirements. He thanked the Commission members for their patience in allowing the four-week continuance. He said he understood there may be adjustments when the City Council acts on affordable housing strategy. He requested that the Planning Commission be permitted to view how the two aspects would be blended together. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Vallette, to recommend approval of a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Housing Element Revision 90-03A. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 27, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13693 - LUNA - A subdivision of 1.0 acre of land into 2 parcels in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Northridge Drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration· (Continued from March 13, 1991.) VARIANCE 91-04 - LUNA - A request to allow a reduction of the minimum average lot size from 22,500 to 21,540 square feet for a two-lot parcel map in the Very Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Northridge Drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29. Betty Miller, Associate Engineer, presented the staff report for Parcel Map 13693 and Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report for Variance 91-04. Commissioner Melcher asked if the streets are public or private. Ms. Miller responded that the streets are public. Commissioner Vallette asked if the street connects to the development to the west. Mr. Coleman stated that Northridge Drive is the only street from this community which abuts other undeveloped parcels. Commissioner Melcher asked the intent of Northridge Drive at the time the project to the south was approved. Mr. Coleman replied the intent was to provide access to the projects to the north. He said at the time the neighboring project was approved, the land to the north was zoned Low Medium, but it was subsequently rezoned to Very Low. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if Northridge Drive was originally intended to be a cul-de-sac. Mr. Coleman replied there have been several master plans, some as a knuckle street and some as a cul-de-sac. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that the street was constructed to cul-de-sac standards. Commissioner Melcher asked if a solid block wall was being added as a condition on the trail. Ms. Miller responded affirmatively· Commissioner Melcher questioned the equestrian easement. Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 27, 1991 Mr. Coleman stated there is a 15-foot private easement for equestrian purposes. Commissioner Melcher asked if the amount of frontage left at the southeast corner of Cabrosa Place would be enough curb face for a standard residential driveway. Mr. Hanson responded affirmatively. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steven Luna, 8990 19th Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was available to answer questions. Chairman McNiel asked how soon he planned to build. Mr. Luna replied that he hoped to build two single family residences within a year. He said he planned to live in one. He said that following the neighborhood meeting, he redesigned his lots to accommodate the desires of the neighbors. Linda Frost, 10340 Mahogany Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she is President of the Northwood Homeowners' Association, which represents 294 homes immediately south of the project. She agreed with the staff report and the decision agreed to by the developer. She requested that residents from the Homeowners' Association stand up in the audience, and approximately 20 people stood up. She said she had over 150 signed letters from residents, and the major concerns were in the area of CC&R enforcement, particularly concerning landscaping and traffic/parking control. She said they felt that the addition of equestrian lots on the north side with an egress to Northridge Drive would not be in keeping with the higher density neighborhood to the south. She objected to disturbance of the slope's landscaping which is maintained by the Homeowners' Association. She said the CC&Rs restrict street parking. She indicated the Homeowners' Association supports the present configuration with the lots backing up to Northridge Drive. Mike Nickles, 10409 Northridge Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, stated everyone felt they had purchased in a semi-private community and they liked the limited access and were opposed to any houses taking access from Northridge Drive because of increased traffic. He also felt the limited access deters crime. He thought if either of the new homes were to take access from Northridge Drive, they would potentially have large horse trailers which could cause traffic problems on Northridge Drive. Charles Doskow, 222 North Mountain, Upland, stated he had been asked by the homeowners to comment. He said the maintenance agreement requiring that the Homeowners' Association maintain the slope to the north of Northridge Drive constituted a morally persuasive covenant, if not a legal document, between them and the City that the integrity of the neighborhood could be maintained. He said the residents feel the neighborhood's security and privacy would be threatened if any lots to the north are given access to Northridge Drive. He felt that the change of zone to larger lots to the north Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 27, 1991 would change any original idea that there should have been access to the north. Wayne Graf, 6347 Northridge Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had worked hard to buy his home and he had thought there were no plans to open up the street. He opposed access to Northridge Drive for any houses from the north. He was afraid people would cut through the community as a shortcut. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Chairman McNiel stated that the Planning Commission must make sure that traffic can flow throughout the community. He thought that everyone would like a private community, but not all communities can be private. He said that people should not assume that lots will remain vacant or streets will remain closed merely because they are currently vacant or closed. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if Cabrosa Place is in place and improved to Wilson Avenue. Mr. Hanson responded that it is in place, but not fully improved to Wilson Avenue. He said the cul-de-sac is currently served by a temporary access to Wilson Avenue, and the eventual street alignment to the east and to the north of the jog is not dedicated or improved. Commissioner Melcher observed that the Planning Commission's job is to ensure good planning. He felt the proposed plan appeared to represent planning by the neighborhood, which does not necessarily produce the best results. He thought that Parcel 1 would be undesirable because it would have a horse trail on one side and a roadway to Parcel 2 on the other side. He felt the map was a bad plan with poor access and said he would prefer that Parcel 2 would be entitled to future access to Northridge Drive, as he felt that the owners of Parcel 1 might one day block access to Parcel 2. He did not feel that allowing one lot to gain access to Northridge Drive would negatively impact the community. Commissioner Chitiea stated she agreed with Commissioner Melcher up to a point. She did not feel that concerns of excess traffic were justified because the streets were not planned to go through. She did not feel it would be appropriate to access both parcels off Cabrosa Place. She also felt Parcel 1 should not face Cabrosa if Parcel 2 faces Northridge. Commissioner Vallette stated that the community to the south of the proposed lots decided a long time ago to be an association and she felt further access to the community would invalidate the controls of the association. She said she had seen similar driveways in planned communities and although she did not feel it necessarily represents good planning, she did feel it to be an appropriate compromise to the needs of the community to the south. Commissioner Tolstoy did not feel the two lots should face Northridge Drive, but thought there should be a better plan to provide access for Parcel 2. He felt the plan should be studied further, as he felt each lot should have access to Wilson Avenue in some other way. Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 27, 1991 Chairman McNiel asked what plans there were for access for the lots to the ~"~ east of the site. Ms. Miller responded that staff had prepared the master plans included in the staff report, and there are no concrete plans for the area as no projects have been submitted as yet. Mr. Hanson felt the current decision made by the Planning Commission may well set the precedent for which way other lots will face. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to ask if the applicant would consent to a continuance to allow further consideration. He asked if it would be possible to contact the other property owners to master plan the area, because he felt cul-de-sacs may be placed where they do not make a lot of 8en88. Mr. Luna responded that he hoped to start building within a year, but it was not necessary to receive approval this evening. Chairman McNiel asked if it would be acceptable to the applicant to continue the item for two weeks to address a better master plan. Mr. Hanson stated that two weeks would not allow enough time. Ms. Miller stated that staff had sketched out the master plans and not asked the applicant to do a lot of master planning because it was felt that might be excessive for a two-lot parcel map. Commissioner Melcher felt a better layout could be found. Co~nissioner Tolstoy agreed that more thought should be given to the layout. Mr. Coleman stated there was considerable discussion at the Trails Committee as to where the trail would be located on the two parcels. He recommended that the project be returned to the Trails Committee if changes were proposed. Commissioner Chitiea stated that if the lots were split with one facing north and the other facing south, horsekeeping on both properties would be effectively eliminated because of the distance from the neighboring house. Brad Bullet, City Planner, stated that providing access would not necessarily mean that a home would architecturally front a street. Commissioner Melcher stated he was in sympathy with the idea that the zone change is a significant one because it is a matter of equestrian lots adjacent to non-equestrian lots. He said he would like the land north of Northridge Drive to be developed without access to Northridge, but he did not feel the proposed plan was a good one. He felt time should be taken to consider if a better plan could be developed. Ms. Miller asked if the current proposal could be considered as a temporary solution until development is proposed on the adjoining parcels to the east. Planning Commission Minutes -8- March 27, 1991 Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that any plan drafted at this point would have to be treated as purely conceptual and action could only be taken on the two parcels under consideration. Commissioner Melcher felt a public street could potentially be brought down to the northeast corner of the applicant's lot to allow access for both parcels to the north. Mr. Buller stated that any master planning would simply be used as a reference document to be used as future applications are received for adjoining properties. He asked if there was anything in the conditions prohibiting Parcel 2 from obtaining access from the east or the north. He thought the Commission could approve the project and further direct staff to develop a master plan for the surrounding properties. Commissioner Melcher stated he wanted to see the master plan developed first. He wanted to know what would be a logical street system which would eventually give Parcel 2 legal access to a public street without having to go across another property. Barrye Hanson stated he would like the developer to work on the master planning. Mr. Buller suggested that the item be continued to April 24, 1991, with the potential of continuing the item further if it were determined that more time would be needed. Chairman McNiel asked if Mr. Luna would object to a continuance to April 24. Mr. Luna replied that would be acceptable. Commissioner Chitiea stated that if temporary access were given from Northridge Drive, it would interrupt the landscaping and there would be no guarantee that access would ever be available to the north. Commissioner Vallette asked if the other Commissioners agreed that access should not be taken from Northridge Drive. Commissioner Chitiea did not feel it would be appropriate to preclude access from Northridge Drive as no streets were being proposed to be punched through to the north. She did not feel it would be a severe impact to allow access for two lots, with a potential of only three additional lots, to a public street built to regular City standards. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 13693 and Variance 91-04 to April 24, 1991. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -9- March 27, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 14410 - CUNNINGHAM BARISIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A residential subdivision and design review of 35 single family lots on 10 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located 364 feet south of 19th Street on the east side of Beryl Street - APN: 0202-041-01, 17, 22, and 24. Staff recon~nends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Related file: Tree Removal Permit No. 90-10. Jerry Guarracino, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel questioned the plans for the small triangular piece of land on the opposite side of the Hellman/Beryl Channel. Mr. Guarracino replied the area was being designated as Lot A and the project was conditioned to request that the developer make a good faith effort to deed it to the church located on the adjacent property to the north. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what provisions were being made to contain the slope. Mr. Guarracino responded that the existing slope is unstable and the grading plans call for stabilizing and engineering it as a 2:1 slope. He stated that some of the trees proposed for removal are located near the top of the slope. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Mike Porto, 18195 McDermott, Irvine, stated he was representing Cunningham- Barisic Development Corporation. He said the blue gum eucalyptus trees had not been maintained and their root system is shallow. He requested that the developer be allowed to remove the trees and replace them elsewhere on site. He thought the trees to be messy and felt the lack of continuous deep watering created a danger that the trees might fall and pose a liability risk. He said the trees are not in a windrow, which he felt made them more likely to fall. Chairman McNiel asked if the applicant had acquired the triangular parcel to the east of their tract and west of the channel. Mark Gerber, Cunningham-Barisic Develo~nent, 340 South Flower, Orange, confirmed that Agape Church is willing to take Lot A. Mr. Guarracino reported that the developer was requesting the removal of 17 trees, and the majority are located toward the eastern edge of the property close to the slope. He said approximately 80 trees will be planted on the slope when it is re-engineered. Commissioner Vallette asked what size trees would be planted. Mr. Guarracino responded that most will be 15-gallon, but some will be 5-gallon. Planning Commission Minutes -10- March 27, 1991 Ron Woodhouse, 6867 Eastwood, Rancho Cucamonga, stated his property borders the southeast edge of the project. He was concerned about drainage and how the work would affect his own slope. Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that the proposed grading would closely match and there should be no additional drainage to Mr. Woodhouse's property. Mr. Woodhouse stated he will also be building a fence before the grading is started on the new tract. Mr. Porto stated they would work with Mr. Woodhouse regarding the fence. Mr. Woodhouse responded that was fine. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the project will correct a potentially treacherous slope condition which currently exists. He thought the random tree placement did not make it viable to preserve many of the current eucalyptus trees. He felt the disruption of the root system by grading and the presence of the borer beetle necessitated the removal of the trees. Commissioner Chitlea concurred~ particularly because of the species and age of the trees. Commissioner Vallette thought it appeared that the developer had carefully considered the options and would adequately replace the trees. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Chitlea, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 14410. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCNER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried , , , , , Planning Commission recessed from 8:55 p.m. to 9:15 p.m. , , , , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 13527 - WATT INLAND EMPIRE - A request to modify the map to allow a temporary on-site detention basin of approximately 170,000 square feet for an approved tentative tract map of 201 single family lots on 51.6 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located north of 24th Street and west of Etiwanda Avenue - APN: 225-071-65. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Planning Commission Minutes -11- March 27, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 14139 - AHMANSON DEVELOPMENT - A request to modify the map to allow a temporary on-site detention basin of approximately 56,000 square feet located on Lots 1-5 for an approved tentative tract map of 119 single family lots on 54 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and 25th Street - APN: 225-082-01. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Commissioner Melcher asked how deep the basins would be. Mr. James replied that on Tract 13527 the levy system would vary from 4 feet above the top of curb to i foot above the top of curb. He said the basin would be approximately 15 feet deep from the south side but because of the grade it would be approximately 40 feet deep from the north side. He said that on Tract 14139 the basin would vary between 20-25 feet deep. Commissioner Melcher asked if the project was conditioned to fence the basins. Mr. James replied that all temporary basins include fencing. He suggested the type of fencing could be reviewed when the Design Review Committee approves the landscaping and screening. Commissioner Melcher asked if the Initial Study addressed the question of what would happen to the material that is excavated. Mr. James responded that it did not. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there is a direct line right-of-way from the tracts to the final destination when Flood Control approves the discharging of water from the tract. Mr. James replied that the 24th Street master plan storm drain will be constructed at the centerline of 24th Street and the City and County are currently negotiating a joint use agreement for the storm drain facility because 2 feet would be located on unincorporated County land. Chairman McNiel asked the projected life-expectancy of the temporary basins. Mr. James thought that construction may be begun on detention facilities within the Etiwanda spreading ground areas within 14 months. Me said the City is dealing with Flood Control, who is dealing with Fish & Game. Me indicated that a plan had already been approved for the area north of 24th Street, but Flood Control and Fish & Game are still trying to resolve disagreements regarding the area south of 24th Street. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Larry Lewis, Watt Homes, 9035 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, gave a brief background on his project. He indicated that 24th Street would not be Planning Commission Minutes -12- March 27, 1991 developed at this time south of the detention basin. He said the evacuated dirt will be bermed up around the basin and then be replaced when the basin is filled in. He said they would prefer to go ahead and build the permanent detention facilities. Chairman McNiel asked how far from the proposed curb of 24th Street the detention basin would be built. Mr. James responded that the toe of the slope would be approximately 25 feet from the curb. craig Page, Ahmanson Development, 1370 South Valley Vista Drive, Diamond Bar, stated they had the same design parameters as Watt Homes. Chairman McNiel agreed that he would prefer the temporary basins not be needed. Mr. Lewis said that an agreement has been drafted with the Flood Control District and they have agreed to give 50 feet of fee property to the City. Mr. Hanson said the County has an easement and an existing ditch along the alignment of the storm drain and the County has agreed to give the property to the City in exchange for the City's building of the storm drain because the County will save maintenance costs in the future. Mr. Page stated a combination of facilities must be combined for a working system. He said the ultimate detention basin facility is planned in the spreading grounds which is County owned and operated. He stated the developer will be building the 24th Street drain, which will be a City facility which will go through some property owned by the County. He said therefore cooperative agreements are necessary for ownership, operation, and maintenance of the facilities. Mr. Lewis distributed a March 15, 1991, letter addressed to Dan James which confirmed his understanding that Condition 11 of the original resolution would be satisfied by approval of the temporary on-site detention basins. Mr. James agreed that was true. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Melcher to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Modification to Tentative Tract 13527. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Planning Commission Minutes -13- March 27, 1991 Motion: Moved by Melcher to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Modification to Tentative Tract 14139. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried , , , , CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-06 - SOUTHWEST DESIGN GROUP - The request to establish an office use in a leased space of 2,696 square feet within the existing Arrow Business Park on 8.7 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 9007 Arrow Route - APN: 209-012-19. Anna-Lisa Hernandez, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Alan Smith, Southwest Design Group Limited, 8632 Archibald Avenue, Suite 201, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he represented the park managers and he had worked closely with staff to be sure he was not shortchanging any future users. He said the dance studio had moved out 60 days ago and the park is turning out to have mainly light industrial uses. He said they were requesting a conditional use permit for the second half of the second floor. Chairman McNiel asked if he was requesting a blanket conditional use permit. Mr. Smith replied that at the inception of the building the mezzanine areas were intended to be office use. Chairman McNiel expressed concern about the shared parking. Mr. Smith responded that when the park was new the owners had been aggressive in leasing any space available; however, they would now stay away from commercial uses. He said the complex was originally designed to house office use on the entire second floor. Commissioner Melcher questioned the access to the second floor. Mr. Smith indicated that there are currently two stairwells with two more proposed. Chairman McNiel questioned why the project had originally been built for office space but the parking was not set up to accommodate office space. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that when the original application was submitted, the City worked with the applicant to upgrade the business park and the Planning Commission thought that additional glass would enhance the Planning Commission Minutes -14- March 27, 1991 project. He said the applicant felt that would make the building more suited to an office project, but the Commission decided not to issue a blanket conditional use permit. , Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated the project was designed under the requirement of 1 space for every 450 square feet, but the new requirements dictate that each use be calculated separately. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Melcher, to adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 91-06. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried · , , , Je ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE 90-14 - SCHLOSSER FORGE - A request to reduce the required number of parking spaces in connection with the development of a 14,000 square foot industrial buildings within an existing manufacturing complex in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial designation (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-111-17. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. NEW BUSINESS Ke ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 90-21 - SCHLOSSER FORGE - The development of a 14,000 square foot industrial building within an existing manufacturing complex in the Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial designation (Subarea 9) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Rochester Avenue - APN: 229-111-17. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. Scott Murphy, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Vallette asked the construction of the 14,000 square foot building. Mr. Murphy replied that it will be metal, manufacturing buildings. similar to the existing Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Jeff Schlosser, Schlosser Forge Company, 11711 Arrow Route, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that his company is over 20 years old and anticipates hiring 16 new employees on several shifts. He reported that there will not be any equipment in the building along Arrow Route that would make enough noise or vibration to Planning Commission Minutes -15- March 27, 1991 be heard from Arrow Route. He said the building will be used as a buffer building from the more intense uses deeper on the site. He also indicated a long hedge blocks the view of the parking area. Mr. Murphy indicated the landscaping on site exceeds the City's standards. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Melcher commented that the site has an acceptable streetside appearance even though it has metal buildings. Commissioner Vallette asked why the buildings will be metal. Chairman McNiel reported that the buildings will be metal in order to blend in with the balance of the project. He said the original buildings were built before the City was incorporated and a Development Agreement has been entered into between the applicant and the City allowing the applicant to construct additional metal buildings. Mr. Murphy stated that the intent of the Development Agreement was to allow the applicant to expand consistent with the existing design and use. He said it was felt that a change in building materials would draw attention to the site. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Melcher, to issue Negative Declarations and adopt the Resolutions approving Environmental Assessment and Variance 90-14 and Environmental Assessment and Development Review 90-21. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried , , , , , PUBLIC COMMENTS Brad Bullet, City Planner, stated a letter had been received from John Potter of Hughes Investments requesting that the issue of the proposed banning of compact parking spaces currently scheduled for hearing at the April 10, 1991, Planning Commission meeting be continued to allow Hughes Investments and Lewis Homes a greater opportunity to study the economic impacts. Mr. Bullet said staff would be preparing a staff report with recommendations for Planning Commission consideration on April 10, and the Commission could receive testimony and take action or continue the item. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated the staff report would present several options in addition to a complete ban of compact parking spaces. Planning Commission Minutes -16- March 27, 1991 Commissioner Melcher stated he had read Mr. Potter's letter and he felt some rather compelling statements had been made. He challenged the developers to present their background data to the City. Chairman McNiel felt the item should be heard at the April 10 meeting and at that time the Commission may wish to continue the matter. Mr. Buller indicated that staff would contact interested parties to request that they present information on April 10 along with their source materials. , , , , COMMISSION BUSINESS Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that Chairman McNiel had requested that the Commission consider the construction and purpose of garage partitions on a future agenda. He asked how soon the Commissioners wished to discuss the matter. Commissioner Melcher asked how many apartment projects were in process. Mr. Buller replied there is a potential of 1,000 units being processed within the next six months. Commissioner Vallette asked if the issue could be included with the multi- family standards study. Mr. Bullet agreed that it could be one of the components of upgrading standards for multi-family development. Commissioner Tolstoy said he had been told by apartment managers that view fencing between the garage spaces is helpful in making sure that garages are used as garages. Commissioner Melcher stated that there are certain provisions in the Development Code to require protection of wall studs, etc. which would require larger garages if walls are required between parking spaces. He felt the issue of partitions between garages spaces is not a quality of life issue and he felt the Commission should address site planning concerns rather than property management ones. Commissioner Vallette felt that the material used does represent quality of life and is properly addressed by the Commission, just as landscaping is addressed. , , , , ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by Vallette, to adjourn. Planning Commission Minutes -17- March 27, 1991 10255 p.m. - Planning Commission adjourned to an April 4, 1991, workshop at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center to review Victoria Courtyard, phasing of Terra Vista Town Center, and Multi-family standards. Respectfully submitted, Secretary Planning Commiseion Minutes -18- March 27, 1991