HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes Jul-Dec 1985 December 17, 198
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
teen � "zr
A special meeting joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga met on Tuesday. December 17, 1985, in the Lions
Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga. The meeting was
called to order at 6-35 p.m. by Mayor Jazz D. Mikels and Planning Commission
Chairman tennis Stout.
�I
Present were Council members: Pamela J. Wright, Charles J. Runner 11, and Mayor
Jon U. Mikels.
Present were Planning, Commissioners: Herman 1E mpel Suzanne Chitiee, Larry
cNiel, David Barker, and Chairman Dennis Stout.
Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Clerk, Beverly A.
Authelet; Assistant City Manager, Robert Rizzo Community Development Director,
Jack Lam; City Planner, Brad Buller; Community Services Director, Bill Holley.
Absent were: City Council era: Richard M. Dahl and Jeffrey King.
2A. +" Y rsa NOR EI n. Mr. Wasserman introduced the purpose of the: meet-
ing, and then turned the meeting over to the City's architect, Duke Oakley.
(1601-04 CIVIC CENTERS tl�
r. Oakley, architect, presented slides depicting a variety* of structures with
different surface treatments. Mr. Oakley then naked for comments.
Commissioner Barker started the meeting by stating we needed to have a theme.
There was no statement. He felt we needed to start by finding the type of im-
age we wanted.
Commissioner Chitiea said she liked the very clean, reflective glass. she was
interested in the visual impact. Something with a strong bold statement.
Commissioner Hempel would like to be able to bring the outside inside -- to be
able to see the inside from Haven. Also, to have the main entrance coming off
the parking lot.
Chairman Stout want to see concrete and glass, but the proposed building was
very complex and difficult for the masses to like it. He liked texture. He
also would like to see something different on the front of the building -- per-
haps to be able to look in, but not to the degree that everyone thinks that is
the main entrance.
Mayor Mikels stated that the east rendering is the one that will welcome people
to the building. We don't want Haven entrance to have the massive ;look.
Councilman Buquet stated the appearance on Haven is grandiose. He felt the
spate around the opening sbould be built into the entrance. He would like to
see some texture to the building. He wanted the building to establish an iden-
tity; be tasteful, but different from the County building. Councilman Bugsuet '
also expressed concern that the press might take a picture of the drawings and
people feel this is the civic center,
Commissioner Rempel stated that the basement should be extended. He felt the
bolding should be built now completely, at least the shell since it is often
difficult to add on in the future.
M
City Council Minutes
December 17, 1985
Page
Councilwoman Wright felt a theme was lacking. She felt the proposed buildL
appeared like just another office building. We needed to give directions f
the building so it will be able to stand out on its own. She also felt the e'
trance on Saver was too massive. We needed to focus more on the theme and make
a statement about our heritage.
Councilwoman Wright asked if a contemporary !building could reflect the heri-
tage? Mr. Oakley answered that it Would be difficult.
Commissioner Stout suggested that a small group of people Work With Mr. Oakley
and bring something back for the group to look:at to see if they liked it.
Mayor Maels Wanted to look at the givens and; bow restrictive the floor plan
'really is. He suggested snowing pictures of some city halls to see What we
lake and don't like.
ACTION: Council to set up another meeting and decide how to proceed at the
next meeting. At the next meeting have some pictures of city halls to look at;
and have a time line of What want-to do-.--There set up a subcommittee to Work
directly With the architect
vas
"here being no further business, Mayor Mikels and Chairman Stout adjourned the
meeting at 8:1 p.m.: ,
Res ectfully s bmit ed.
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk..
Approved, January 15+ 1dfa
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM NGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
December 11, 185
Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rance
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held a
Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel
Herman Hempel...., Dennis Stout
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner, Dan Coleman, ,Senior Planner;
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil.
Engineer; Curt Johnston, Associate Planners, Otto Kroutil,
Senior Planner; James Markman, City Attorney; Janice
Reynolds, Secretary
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the Planning Commission would
adjourn to a special joint City Council/Planning Commission workshop t
discuss the Civic Center and Public Safety Facilities design. The workshop
will he held at the Rancho Cucamonga: Neighborhood Center, 9791 Arrow Highway,
Rancho Cucamonga, beginning at : 0 p.m.
CONSENT" CALENDAR
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-40 - BANDS - The
de elop ent of a two-story professional office building consisting of
8,515 square feet on .53 acres of Land in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area
Specific Plenty located on the north ,side of Civic Center Drive, west of
Red Oak ;Street (Lot o) in the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park - APN 08-
08 -06
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - - KIRSHBAUM - The
development of an office/professional. center comprised of two2-story
buildings of 17,97 square feet and 27,700 square feet, respectively, on
. 14 acres located on the southwest corner of Grove Avenue and ;fan
Bernardino Road in the Office Professional District - APN 207-120-01 .
C. TENTATIVE TRACT 1291 - HIGHLAND VILLAGE - Grading revisions that require
additional :retaining walls at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and
Highland Avenue,'
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by MeNiel, unanimously carried, to adopt
the Consent Calendar,
PUBLIC HEARING
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12991 - SHELBOURNE - A total
residential subdivision and design review for 49 single family` lots on 8.9
acres of land in the Low Medium "Residential District, located at the south
side of Leman Avenue, 00* feet east of Archibald Avenue APN 201-2 2_21,
22. (Continued from the October 2 , 1985 meeting.)
Chairman Stout advised that the Planning Commission had received a letter from
the applicant for Tentative Tract 1991 requesting a continuance of the public
hearing to March 12, 1986. Chairman Stout, then opened the public hearing.
There were no comments.
Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, ; to continue the
public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 12991 ,
helbourne, to the March 12, 1986 Planning Commission meeting.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT B -03 - CITY €1F
RANCHO CUCAMONGA" - An amendment to Tithe 17, Revisions/Modifications,
Section 17.02.070 B, Development Review, Section 17.06.01OG and 17.0 .02CG
regarding language changes and additions. (Continued ' from November 27,
1985 meeting.)
Nancy Tong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
James Markman, City Attorney, advised that It was necessary to add Section
17.04,0 0(H) to include language relative to Conditional Use Permits to the
proposed Ordinance. He additionally advised that a section entitled
17•02.070(C) should be added relative to reconsideration precluded stating
that "no application for a revision or modification shall be accepted for
filing within one year from the date of any approval if the final decision
making body rejected the substance of the proposed revision or modification in
the process of granting that approval."
Planning Commission Minutes -2- December 11 , 1985
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore
the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Re pel seconded by Barker, to recommend issuance of a
Negative Declaration and adoption of the Ordinance, as ended by the City
Attorney, to the City Council. Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RE EL, BARBER, C BITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Chairman .Stout announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Commission.
R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 2 487 - BRUNSWICK CORPORATION A
division of 8.97 acres into 4 parcels in a General Commercial cial evel rp en
District, located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of Foothill
Boulevard - APN 1077 401-22
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT S° - 7 BRUNSWICK
The development of an integrated shopping center consisting f a 36,025
square foot bowling center, a 59,400 square foot retail building, and
5,000 square foot restaurant on 8.97 acres of hand in the General
Commercial Disstrict i located 1,000 feet north of Foothill Boulevard, west
of Haven Avenue - A N '1077- D1-2 .
Nand Fond, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Phil Fitzgerald, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the
project. Mr. Fitzgerald concurred with the findings of the staff report and
Resolutions of approval.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.;
Motion: Commissioner Barker stated that recognizing that the ;trees are In the
parkway right-of-way, he would nuke the motion to approve, seconded, by McNiel
to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving
Environmental Assessment and Parcel... Map 9487. Motion carried by the following
vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, RE PEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
Planning Commission Minutes _ December 11, 1985
I
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
Motion: Moved by Ehitiea, seconded by Rempel,, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional
Use Permit 7. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NITIEA, RE EL, BARKER, M NIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE E TRACT 13027 WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
- A residential subdivision of 157 teal lots with the development of 144
single ;family homes on 45.5 acres within the Victoria Planned unity
(Low Residential, -4 dula ) , located at the southwest corner of Highland
and Etiwanda Avenues, east of North Victoria Windrows Loop - ARN P 7- 71-
, 02, 7- 91-1 , 2, .
Than Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Coleman advised
that staff: recommended a change to Condition 11 of the Resolution relative to
perimeter wall on Highland Avenue to read as follows: "The 6-foot high
perimeter wall along Richland Avenue shall' be set back a minimum -foot
distance behind the Highland Avenue right-of-way".
Rarrye Ranson, Senior Civil Engineer, recommended the following modifications
to the Engineering Division's condition of:, approval: Condition R - The
developer shall Pay to the City an in-lieu fee for one-half the cost of
undergounding the existing overhead utilities fronting the tract on the
opposite side of Highland and Etiwanda Avenues prior to tract- recordation:;
Condition 9 - The parcels fronting Etiwanda Avenue may be exempt from the
requirement of immediately providing sewer connections if approved by
Cucamonga County WaterDistrict; Condition 1 - The parcels fronting Etiwanda
Avenue shad be graded and grading easements as needed provided as 'approved b
the City Engineer to enable driveway connections onto Etiwanda Avenue when
reconstructed with the future freeway to the north.'
Commission Earner referred to Exhibit "Ell of staff report and asked if of the
three east/west ;windrows, two of them were being saved.
r. Coleman replied that this was correct.
Chairman Stout referred to Condition 17` of the Resolution relative to the
CC&Rls for the tract not prohibiting the keeping of horses on the lots that
front Etiwanda Avenue. He asked the City Attorney if this was the groper
wording for this condition.
Planning Commission Minutes - December 1'1, 1985
James Markman, City Attorney, advised that the Commission might consider
adding no private agreement among , property owners shall prohibit the keeping
of horses
Chairman Stout was concerned that this condition was written in the negative 1
and all the developer would have to do is to be silent on the issue.
Mr. Markman stated that this condition could be placed on the developer, but
somewhere down the line the homeowner's association theoritically could change
or modify the CCR's,
i
Commissioner Rempel suggested that :the lots be annexed into the Equestrian
Overlay District.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Steven Ford, William Lyon Company, advised that the applicant would be willing
to include in the CC&R's appropriate provision to unsure the keeping of
horses. Mr. Ford referred to condition '3 of the Resolution relative to the
staining or sealing of wood fencing and requested a modification that this
only include fencing exposed to public "view. He additionally referred to
Condition 16 relative to the trail extension along North Victoria Windrows
Loop to connect to Victoria Park Lane and advised that this was the subject of
a recant Etiwanda Specific Elan amendment to remove this trail connection.
Additionally, the lots referred to in Condition 16 should read dots 11 and
7 . Regarding Condition 8 added by the Engineering Division relative to the
undergrounding of utilities on Highland Avenue, Mr. Ford stated that since
Caltrans might underground utilities when the freeway is constructed, this
would be an unnecessary burden to not only place on this development but
others as well. He suggested striking ;.the requirement for Highland Avenue
utility underroundinE from the condition.
There were no further comments, therefor: the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated that he would life to see some sort of affirmative
statement in the CCR's relative to the keeping of horses on those logs
fronting Etiwanda Avenue.
Mr. Markman suggested the addition of "but rather the CCRs shall provide that
those lots shall be allowed for horse use'".
Commissioner Hempel suggested that the developer also be required to annex
those lots into the Equestrian Overlay District.
Commissioner Barker stated that it made sense that the Euestion Overlay
standards apply to that particular strip.
Chairman Stout asked staff ghat would happen if the under rounding of
utilities is not provided for now, given .the fact that the freeway may not b
constructed' for some time.
Planning Commission Minutes - - December 11, 1985
Rarryp Ranson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that staff would have no
guarantees that Caltrans would underground the utilities, they might merely
move them. _
Chairman Shut suggested that if Caltrans did underground the utilities, the
developer would then be refunded the monies.
Commissioner Barker was concerned with the time frame which would be used.
Chairman Stout Mated that the utilities would be undergrounded at the time
the tract across the street goes in, unless Caltrans constructs the freeway
within: that time.
James Markman, City Attorney, stated that the language_ would state that the
fee shall be placed in an interest bearing account and if not used to
underground the utilities within the specified amount of time, it would be
refunded to the developer.
Mr. Hanson suggested that 10 years was a common time used; however, it was not
known whether or not the freeway would be under construction within that time
frame. He suggested that it might be more appropriate to refund the monies if
Caltrans does underground the utilities.
Chairman Shut asked for discussion regarding the wood fencing treatment.
Commissioner Hempel stated that cedar and redwood fencing was best left in its
natural state, therefore would not recommend staining or sealing. However, i
the rest of the Commission voted to stain or seal, he would recommend the
fencing along street frontages be treated
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she would prefer to have all fencing exposed
to public view treated.
Commissioner McNiel stated that he would prefer not to have wood fencing at
all, but would agree to sealing or staining the wood fencing exposed to 'public
view.
Commissioner Barker stated that he would prefer sealing or staining all
fencing exposed to public view.
Chairman Stout concurred.
Motion. loved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and "tentative
'bract 1307, with modifications to include all wood; fencing exposed to public
view to be treated with 'stain or sealant; deposit in an ;interest bearing
account of the fee for undergrounding utilities on Highland Avenue; CCR's to
insure provision for the keeping of horses on the lots fronting Etinwanda
Avenue and requirement of developer to apply for the annexing of those lots
into the Equestrian Overlay District; Resign Review Condition 11 modified to
state that the -foot perimeter all along Highland Avenue to be set back a
i
Planning Commission Minutes -6- December 1`1, 1985
minimum of 6 feet behind Highland Avenue right-of-way; and the addition of
Engineering Condition d, 9, and 10 as proposed by staff. Motion carried by
the fallowing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, REMP L, ;STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
I. INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN 'REVISIONS - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -
Planning Commission review and comment of general revisions and update'of
the Industrial Area Specific Plan, Part III (Development Standards and
Guidelines).
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff" report.
The Planning Commission expressed support for revisions/update to Part III, as
presented in the staff report with the following exceptions. Revised language
will be presented at ;a follow-up meeting.
1. Page I1I-9 - Automotive Rental: Conditional Use Permit required with
keeping of vehicles on-site based on available parking spaces.
. Page III- - Section A. metal Buildin s: Preclude all-metal buildings
from General, Industrial and General Industrial/Rail Served. categories`.
Add provisions for quality design of metal buildings in the Heavy
Industrial categories ;
. Page III- 6 B- - Open Areas: Replace word "loggias" with "gazebos".
4. Pa e 111- 6; - Pedestrian and. Bicycle Facilities: Clarify intent of
pedestrian connections in the Industrial Area.: Primary function is to
serve persons working in the area,, as opposed to shoppers in commercial
development
' . Page I1I-16 - Equi ment Sereenin : Add statement discouraging massive
roof equipment. Require effective screening or painting of equipment to
mitigate aesthetic concerns.
6. Page II-17 - StoraSe Area: Allow limited outdoor storage in the
Industrial Park category. Conditional Use Permit may be required.
Require complete screening and establish maximum height (6 feet
suggested)
Planning Commission Minutes - December 1'1, 1985
. Pl ure Ill- - tre is a e SetbackSchedule: Consider special
circumstances where the streetacape setback could be de termined by the
function of a street as a local or secondary, versus the right-of-width
(i.e. in cases where a developer provides wider streets than required by
the City).
d. Page TIT- Ida - "Trees: Add statement that box size trees ( 411 or
larger) may be required where appropriate.. Also, trees are required to be
planted along property lines at a minimum rate of one tree per 30 linear
feet or less depending on tree species.
9. Paoe III- 9 - E.3 Parkins Sipaces Required: Research appropriate
definitioan and parking requirement for Multi-use tenant buildings. Add
statement restricting conversions of industrial space to office if
additional parking is not provided to,meet City standard.
There were no further comments.
ADJOURNMENT:
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to
adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned to the December 17, 198 ' joint
City Council/Planning Council/Planning Commission workshop.
9:00 p.m, - Planning Commission Adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
n
o _a
Brad Buller
Deputy Secretary
Planning Commission Minuted December 1 1 , 198
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regul"ar Meeting
November 27, 1985
Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7.00 p.m. The meeting was held at
.ions Park Community enter, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS. PRESENT': David Barker, Suzanne Chiti'ea, Larry McNiel
(arrived at 7:10 p.m. ), Herman Rempel ,
Dennis Stout
ABSENT, None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner;
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate
Planner, James ' Markman, Ci ty Attorney; John Meyer,
Assistant Planner, Laura Pso as,- Landscape Designer; Janice
Reynolds, Secretary, Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that staff would conduct a workshop with
the Planning Commission to discuss the shopping center proposed at the
northeast corner of Haven and Base Line. He advised that the workshop would
°ol l ow the regularly-scheduled December '19th Design Review Committee meeting
held at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, located at 9791 Arrow
Highway, Room 4, beginning at approximately 7: 0 p.m.
Mr. Buller additionally announced that the Planning Commission would have an
opportunity to comment on alternative architectural concepts for the Civic
Center at the conclusion of this agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion-, Moved by Rempel , seconded by Stout, unanimously carried, to approve
the September 11, 1985 Planning Commission Minutes.
Motion-, Moved by McNi-el , seconded by Rempel , carried, to approve the Minutes
of October 23, 185 Commissioner Barker was not in attendance at that meet-
ing, therefore abstained from vote.
i
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-34 - A IPT `-
con struact o square cot n strl mane a tuFing
facility on 11.19 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Toronto
Avenue an 7th Street in Subarea 10 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan -
AN 209s401-7,8,9.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-2 - LUSK BUSINESS PARK
e development o three spew stave industrial buildings conssting
1 ,600 square feet, 900 square feet, and 900 square feet, respectively,
on 2.17 acres of land in the Industrial Area Specific Plan (Subarea
located on the north side of Trademark and west of Haven Avenue - APN 210-
3 1-2, 3, 4
Motion; Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to adopt the Consent
Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, BARKER, REMPE , STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS. NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MC`NIEL -carried
Stout commented that the To a /Seri to project was excellently designed and
that he was happy that they were a part of this community.
Commissioner McNiel arrived at 7:10 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 950 WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - A
evasion o net sores in o p r I ceTsin the is or°aa ann d
Community, located on the north side of Base Line between Milliken and
Rochester Avenue - APN 227-081-II6. (Continued from the November 1 , 195
meeting)
Joe Sofa, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. ,
Steven Ford, representing the William Lyon Company, stated concurrence with
the findings of the staff report and related Resolution of approval .
Planning Commission Minutes -2 November 27, 1985
6
f
i
There were no further comments, therefore the public heaving was closed.
Motion: moved by Darker, seconded by Rer pel , to i ssue a NeRati ve Decl arati on
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map
qSD. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: DARKER, REIP L, CRITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 0 - WOLFE
pr5oposa o operate T27R square oo image oau sa 'on to e ocated
in an existing industrial park located on the west side of Haven ,avenue,
south of 7t , within the Haven Avenue Overlay District - APN 09 62-17.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Greg Wolfe, applicant, stated that only recently was he advised that there was
a concern with the number of parking spaces available for this proposal. Mr.
of fe indicated that he had surveyed a number of neighboring cities which
require approximately A parking spaces per 1,000 square feat and felt that
Rancho Cucamonga's requirements ents were excessive. Mr. Wolfe also stated that
the broker for this industrial park informed him approximately two Months ago
that an executive health club also had leased space within the complex.
Chairman Stout asked the applicant what number of parking spaces would be
adequate to meet the requirements of his business.
r. Wolfe replied that approximately 20 spaces would be adequate because he
would be contracting with a l i mosi he service to pick up and drop off club
members.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker stated that the reason for the inadequate parking
situation is that the businesses which are leasing space within this
industrial park are commercial and not office uses as originally intended.
Chairman Stout agreed and further stated that the brokerage firm which is
leasing the spaces within this complex should be made mare that 'i t is not a
commercial center;
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that staff had met with the property
owner to discuss lease commitments for the existing office spaces{
Planning Commission Minutes - - November 27, 1985
Commissioner Barker stated that based on the parking situation, he would have
to agree with staff"s recommendation to deny the project
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she would have to agree and that
unfortunately for the applicant, the crux of the problem really goes back to
the developer because the enter is apparently being marketed for commercial
uses
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, to duty Environmental
Assessment and Conditional Use Permit SS O. Motion carried by the following
vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHIT EA, fCNIEL, RE PEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS; NONE
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Chai rinan Smut directed that staff prepare correspondence to the developer
advising their of the parking concerns and' that more appropriate uses should b
solicited to lease vacant space within the complex.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SS- 1 - HILL - A
propose o u� a sguar•e o rsi erg i s care a er s garters
attached to the garage on two and one-half acres of land in the Very Lour
Residential district located north of Hillside on Deer Creek Lane, at the
end of the cul-de-sac APN 01- 4 -1 .
Bruce -Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore
ore
the public hearing was closed.
Motion- Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 1, Hill . Motion
carried by the following vote:
COM
MISSIONERS:ISSION ERS. CTIEA BARKER, ICN I, , EL, REMPEL, 'STOI`
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
E
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Planning Commission Minutes 4 November 27, 1985
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9415 - DIVERSIFIED - A division of
IT.-34 acres o an ntd parce s n the NeigT5orhood Commercial
District, located on the east side of Haven Avenue, between Highland
Avenue and Lemon Avenue - APN 201-271-58.
Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Smut opened the public hearing.
Gary Madison, 10550 Leman, Rancho Cucamonga, expressed concern that this
project may turn out like the existing 'center on Lemon Avenue which has not
completed construction.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel stated that this project would be a complete shopping
center, unlike the center Mr. Madison referred to which is located at Lemon
and Haven:
Motion:on. loved by Rempel ,= seconded by McNi el , to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 9514, Diversified. Motion
carried by the following vote.
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: - REIP L, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT, BARKER
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS. NONE -carried
C. CONSIDERATION OF REVOCATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 65-08 _ VERNACI - A
proposal o ovate sing e trailer for a caretaker' s acl ity in a
wholesale nursery located in the Edison right-of-way on the north side of
Base Line, east of Rochester - APN 7-091- 1..
Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that it would be necessary for the Planning
Commission to set the public hearing for consideration of the revocation for
his conditional use permit. He further advised that the applicant had
contacted staff and indicated that they hoped to complete the required
conditions of approval by January 1985. Therefore, staff recommended that
February 12, 1986 be set as the public hearing date. J
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Barter, to set the public hearing for
consideration of revocation for Conditional Use Permit 85-08, Verna i, on
February 12, 1986. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES; COMMISSIONERS. RFMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE carried
Planning Commission Minutes -5- November 27, 1985
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 85- 4 - CITY OF
n amen mint to the Devel6pment Code of t1fd'-City-of
anc o Cucamonga Ordinance 211, to revise Sections I7.0 .040 F and
17.0 . 4 I pertaining to ;landscaping and slope planting, respectively.
Bruce Cook;, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore
the public hearing was closed.-
Commissioner Chitiea advised that the study area should be expanded to include
public as well as private areas
Commissioner Rernpel suggested that the ordinance include language requiring an
inspection by qualified personnel testifying to the appropriateness of tree
size and health prior to planting.
Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested that this amendment be processed and
staff be directed to research other cities with regard_ to Commissioner
Rempei ' s request. He explained that staff could return with information and
possible amending rag language at a future meeting'.
Commissioner Barker agreed that it would be more appropriate to research the
feasibility and manner in which to implement tree inspection..
Chairman Stout stated that the Eiwanda Specific Plan contained language
relative to planting new trees to perpetuate a windbreak system and suggested
that this language be included in the Development Code amendment.
Commissioner Rempel asked what the maintenance and liability responsibility
would be to the City with regard to planting trees along the rear property
line of homes.
James Markman, City Attorney, advised that if attention was not given to the
care and maintenance of trees, the City would be liable and could face law
suits in the future.
Chairman .Stout suggested that the City Council be advised of this issue during
their review of the amendment.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, to recommend issuance of a
Negative Declaration and adoption of the Ordinance approving Environmental
,assessment and Development Code Amendment 85- 4 to the City Council . Motion
carried by the following vote,
Planning Commission Minutes -5® November 27, 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TUT, CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Staff was directed to draft language relative to the inspection of trees for
the Commission' s consideration at a future meeting.
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 35-03 - CITY OF
RANCHO--- - n men ment o Title , ecti on .
revisions and ications of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code by adding
language to further define the ' review process for major* revisions to an
approved project
Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that staff was requesting a continuation of
this item to the December 11, 1985 Planning Commission meeting to al 1 ow staff
to meet with the City Attorney on language modifications.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments.
Motion: Moved by Re pel , seconded by Barker, to Continue the public hearing
for Environmental Assessment and Development Code Amendment 85-03 ;to the
December 11, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the
following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE -carried
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 85-05
- ' - n amen anent to the Inaustrial AreaS pe F Ti T is
an to a researc an d velo ent/office use to Haven Avenue Overlay
District.
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout asked if the reference toR&D/Light Manufacturing in the
Resolution was in error.
s. Fang replied that it was.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore
the public hearing was closed.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- November 27, 1985
1
Moti on. Moved by Rempel , seconded by Chi ti ea to adopt the Resolution
recommending issuance of a Negative Declaration and adoption of the Ordinance
approving Environmental Assessment and Industrial Area Specific plan Amendment
5- 5, with an amendment to strike the reference to R&D/Light anufacturi ng.
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CRITIEA, BARKER, MC IEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
SENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Chaff rman Stout announced that Item "M'° was related to the following project,
therefore would; be heard out of order*
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9359 - WESTREND EVELOPMENT - A
yr s on o acres o an nto parce 7 n t e nera n us rial
categorySubareo }, 'located on the east side of Rochester Avenue, north
of Arrow Route � APN D-01�34 Related Eile� DR �35.
M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 05-35 - WESTREND
eve op c aster pan or seven' 7n us ria buf I Uin s
cemprTs,ng 143, C7 square feet on 10.43 acres and site specific approval
of buildings 1 and 2 comprising 25,700 and 33,700 square feet,
respectively Ion an 153 acre parcel and 2.24 acre parcel ) located at the
northeast corner of Rochester and Arrow Route in the Industrial Area
Specific Plan (Subarea D) APN 9-01-035.;
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Doug Mayes, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the findings
of the .staff report, Resolution and Conditions of approval .
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Darker stated that he would like to advise the i applicant of his
concern with the use of trees n an effort to hide buildings. He further
stated that staff and the Commission hoped to establish a policy which would
address this concern in the near future.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she was not against the use of the color band
and would not like to see it totally eliminated. She was concerned with the
accent color and suggested that the color be toned drawn, and additionally
suggested that the texture changes be incorporated into the elevations,
Planning Commission Minute - - ,November 27, 1985
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolutions approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map
9359 and Environmental Assessment and Development Revs B - S wi
th th an
amendment to the Development Review Resolution to state that the building
colors are to be toned down and texture changes are to be incorporated into
the elevations. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
7:55 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed
:10 p.m* - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present
L. ARCHIBALD AVENUE BEAUTIFICATION PROJECT = Regarding the proposed strut
improvements along Ar h Avenue etween 4th Street and the Foothill
Freeway. Improvements will include entry monumentation, sidewalks, there
walls, and landscaping within the public right-of-way.
Laura Psomas, Landscape designer, reviewed the staff report,
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Rick Gomez, Forma Planning Consultants, gave an overview of the conceptual
design.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Chitiea asked which areas would be addresssed first under the
phasing plan.
Lloyd Hbb , City Engineer, replied that staff and the consultant would first
begin working on the final design stages for review and approval by the City
Council . He explained that after approval by the City Council , staff would
return to the Planning Commission with a phasing plan,. He advised that the
first phase would more than likely involve the entry element at 4th Street and
Archibald and then focus on problem areas such as sidewalk and parkway
landscaping treatment south of Church Street and the area in front. of Central
School
Ehai man Stout asked if staff had received a copy of the letter from Jack Tarr
in which he expressed concern with respect to the monument sign in front of
the Stop 'N Co Market on Archibald and Base Line.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- November 27, 1985
r. Hubbs replied that he had received a copy of the letter and that staff
would involve the business community in the planning stages of the project.
Commissioner Rempel suggested that benches should be installed in various
locations for use by people waiting for buses.
Mr. H bbs replied
that Omni Tr ans has very particular id
eas
eas about what they
will l l ow,, wi
th i th regard to passenger waiting areas and that this would be an
issue staff would have to discuss with them.
Chairman Stout suggested that a standard h type and color _ used for irrigation
� yp
equipment in the landscaped areas.
r. Hubbs stated that Ms. Psomas recently been hired as the City"s landscape
designer and that one of her responsibilities was to establish standards for
parkway irrigation equipment.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Chi ti e , to recommend approval of the
conceptual design for the Archibald Beautification Project to the City
Council . Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: - NONE
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
*
NEW BUSINESS
N. PRELIMINARY REVIEW FOR MDR 85- 1 CIRCLE K A proposal to remodel the
eterfor o a 2,675 square foot---commerciaT convenience store at 12854
Foothill Boulevard, nest of Etiwanda Avnue, located in a Convenience
Commercial District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan P 7- 1 5.
Brad Buller, City Planner, advised that the applicant for this item had
withdrawn the request for preliminary review.
REVIEW OF PROPOSED ELEVATIONS RANCHO CUCAMON A CIVIC CENTER
Duke Oakley, Architect for the Civic Center, presented an overview of the
architectural elements for three design alternatives.
Chairman Stout stated that with the direction the Citys movie in regard o
e ar t
g g
development on Haven Avenue, a more modernistic, high tech look would be
preferrable. He suggested that heritage elements could be incorporated in
other ways.
r
Planning Commission Minutes - C November 27, 1985
Commissioner Rempel was concerned with the appearance that entry of the
building was on Haven Avenue, when in reality the entry would be to the rear
where the parking lot is located. He suggested that the portion of the
building which faces Haven should be designed with a plaza area rather than
with stairs. He was also concern with than only 30 to 35 square feet of
building area in the basement level was being utilized and suggested that the
additional space be excavated for use. He agreed that a modernistic approach
to architecture would be the more appropriate design.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed with the modernistic architecture and further
stated that clean lines and a high tech look should be achieved. She
suggested that the architect expand the window areas and not use the small
windows shown on the elevations presented. She questioned the parking area on
Haven Avenue, and pointed out that no other project has been allowed to front
parking lots on that street.
Mr. Oakley stated that both Community Development Director Jack Lam and City
Manager Lauren Wasserman had advised that the building `should front on Haven
Avenue so that it would have a Haven Avenue address. He pointed but that the
reasoning behind this was to make City Hall easier for people to find in that
it would be accessible from a freeway exit on I-1.0
Commissioner Chitiea stand that it would be helpful if the architect could
provide an overlay of what the elevation would look like when the building
wrings are added on.
Commissioner McNiel agreed that a contemporary, modern architecture would be
appropriate. He stated, however, that none of the elevations presented were
acceptable without a great deal' of upgrading in terms of aesthetics.
Commissioner Harker stated that the Civic Center should be a contemporary
design which is compatible with the direction the City is going on Haven
Avenue. He was concerned with the modern architecture elevation presented
because it was too boxy and without windows. He was also concerned with the
eroneous entry on Haven Avenue and stated that Commissioner empel "`s
suggestion 'regarding a plaza in that area; may be more appropriate.
The Commission also discussed the use of concrete on the building and reached
the consensus that concrete should not be rejected as a passible building
material
The Commission additionally suggested that the City Council consider directing
the planning Commission to work with the architect on the details of an
appropriate elevation design.
There were no further comments.
Motion: Moved by Remepl , seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to
adjourn,
Planning Commission Minutes -11- November `27, 198
I
The Planning Commission adjourned ,1to a workshop to be held on December 2,
1985, :00 .m. at the; Rancho ,Cucamonga a ihberhrad Center, 991 Arrow
Highway, Khan � Rancho Cucamonga,
California.
fnrni The purpose of the worksho
p
will be for discussion regarding Industrial Specific Plan amendments.
10:05 p.m. - Planning Commission adjourned
Res edtful l,y submitted,
Brad Buller
Deputy Secretary
i
Planning Commission Minutes 1 _ November 27, 198
l
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
November 13, 1985
Chairman DennisStout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order a :OO p.m. The meeting was held at
Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Darker', Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel ,
Herman Rempl , Dennis Stout;
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Brad Huller, City Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner,
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate
Planner; Otto k outi , Senior Planner;' Barbara Lorall,
Associate Civil Engineer; James Markman, City Attorney;
John Meyer,; Assistant Planner; Dino Putrino, Assistant
Planner, Janice Reynolds, Secretary; Paul Rougdau, Traffic
Engineer
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved ;by Rempel , seconded by Harker, to approve the Minutes of the
October 9,; 1985 Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Stout and Commissioner
McNiel abstained from voting as they were not in attendance at that meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. APPROVAL OF THE HERMOSA PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - Hermosa Park is a 10-acre
par s-te ocat a erm-_a, a acent to Deer Canyon Elementary
School
i
Commissioner Rempel was concerned that the driveway into the park would be a
shared access with Deer Canyon School . He suggested that the driveway be
reassessed during the final design stages and that some consideration be given
to making it a one-way drive.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Darker, to approve the conceptual design
for Hermosa Park. Staff was directed to re-examine the driveway issue during l
final design phases Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT I
NODES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
PUBLIC HEARINGS
R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85- 0 - HOYT LUMBER
COMPANY--
requos o construct an ' , square oo wage ouse a ng
at to n existing home improvement center and the development of a
Master Plan on 2 ages of land in the Office Professional District,
located at 7110 Archibald, northwest corner of Archibald and Lomita Court
- ,APN 20 -1S1- . (Continued from October 9, 1985meeting. )
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore
the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel suggested: that the applicant work with the adjacent
apartment developer to the west to assure the compatibility of adjoining
landscaping and block wall .
Motion: Moved by Rempel , :seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 85- 0, with an
amendment to Condition 11 to reflect that the applicant should work with the
adjacent westerly property owner to assure compatibility bi l i of landscaping
and
P y .
block wall on the westerly property line. Motion carried by the following
vote
AYES. CO ISSICENIS: REMPEL, STOUT, CHiTIEA DARKER, MCNIEE,
WOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
C. ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85- - BARMAKIAN - The
eve opment o unit apartments on acres o an ire e e gum High
Residential District (1 -24 du/ac) located at the north side and end of
Lomita Court - APN 202-151- 4. (Continued from October 23, 1985 meeting. )
Planning Commission Minutes -2- November 13, 1985
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Pete Pitassi , representing the applicant, advised that he would be willing to
work with the previous applicant on the condition imposed by the Commission.
Mr. Pitassi gave an overview of the project.
Commissioner Chitiea asked if the applicant would be willing to work with
Edison on landscaping their utility easement along the northern property line,
Mr. Pitassi replied that Edison can be difficult to work with on some issues;
however, generally does net have a problem with landscaping. He indicated
that he would be willing to work with them on landscaping.
'here were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Co issioner Mc'Niel stated that he was concerned with the layout of this
project because it eliminated much of the open space in the original submittal
by Calmark. He indicated that he had worked with Mr. Pitassi to see if an
alternative approach could be taken, but could find no solution. In light of
that, he stated that he would support the project.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that given the site constraints and alternatives
presented, she would be willing to accept this design with modifications. She
suggested that condition 5 of the Resolution be amended to include garage door
color variations. She was additionally concerned with the view of the
apartment units in the rear which face north and east, and suggested that the
applicant work with Edison to develop a landscape treatment for the easement.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the open- space in this project is inadequate
and that more open space needs to be developed in all market rate apartments
to meet the needs of families. He was also concerned that a parking problem
may be created for the senior citizen housing..
Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer, stated that if this becomes a problem, the
City could either restrict parking or post no parking signs along Lomita Count
any time after the project is developed.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the senior citizens would need that parking
area and that parking should be restricted to use for senior citizens only.
He suggested that some type of permit parking be considered.
Chairman Stout suggested that no overnight parking might be the best method
since it would be easiest to enforce
Commissioner Barker stated: that he was pleased with the design.
Planning Commission Minutes - - November 13,, 1985
Barnes Markman, City Attorney, advised that the Planning Commission could not
impose a condition relative to parking restrictions, but would have to ;suggest
that the City Council consider restricting i parking on Lomita Court. He
suggested the Engineering staff be directed to take the Commission's
suggestion to the City Council for their consideration.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Chitiea to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 85-33,, with amendments
to reflect that the applicant should work with Edison on easement landscaping,
the garage; door designs and colors to be approved by the City Planner. It was
further suggested that the City Council consider permit parking only on Lomita
Court. Additionally, Engineering staff was directed to take the Commission's
suggestion to the City Council to restrict the parking: on Lomita Court to be
restricted and posted a "No Overnight Parking". Motion carried by the
following vote
AYES:= COMMISSIONERS: RCMPEL, CHITIEA, `BARR, MCNIEL, STOUT"
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:S: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT" AND PARCEL MAP 9350 WILLIAM LYON COMPANY A
vi si on o net acres into parce in t e 7ctoria Fanned
Community, located on the north side of Base Line between Milliken and
Rochester Avenue - APN 227-08I-06.
Chairman Stout advised that the applicant for this item requested a
continuance to the November 2 , 1985 Planning Commission meeting. He then
opened: the public hearing.
There were no comments.
Motion: Moved by Banker, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to continue
the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map 9350 to, the
November 2 , 195 Planning Commission meeting.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 8787 - HIGHLAND-HAVEN ASSOCIATES -
vi si on o acres nto panes ocata n t e ow e i um
Development District ( - du/ac) located on the south side of Highland
Avenue, east of Haven Avenue, at 19th Street - APN 2 2-211-3C.
Barbara gall , Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the ;public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- November 1 , 1985
Larry Bliss, 6634 Carnelian, Rancho Cucamonga, gave an overview of the
project. Mr. Bliss concurred with the Resolution and conditions of approval .
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Chi ti ea, seconded by Re pel , to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map
6787. Motion carried by the following voter'
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
SENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 95`08 - LANDCO - A division of 2.26
ages o an `n o parse s 1 n t e enera n ustri al area (Subarea 10)
located on the north side of 7th Street, between Milliken; Avenue and
Bridgeport Place - APN 9- C1-7O,
Barbara Krall , Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Chairran Stout opened the public hearing.
Alan Gardner, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project.
Mr. Gardner concurred with the Resolution and conditions of approval .
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Re pel , seconded by McNiel , to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map
9508. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNiEL, BARKER, CHI IEA, STOUT
NOES, COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-17 - FOR KIDS ONLY,
LTDT
e on constructi o a , square oot,pres oo on acres o
an i n the Lots Residential District
d - du/act, located on the south
side of Base Line, east of Turner - APN 1077-061-09.
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Planning Commission Minutes -5 November 13, 1985
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Antoinette Holguin, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the
project.
Chairman Stout asked if the colors used on the exterior were of significance
to this preschool .
Howard Jones, 220 First Street, Santa Ana, project architect, explained that
the exterior colors were primary colors which are pleasing to young
children. He further explained that the windows had been lowered and the
attempt was to get away from the institutional look and achieve' a pleasant
environment for children. He advised that because of the landscaping, layout
and setbacks used on this project, it would be difficult to see from the
street.
Commissioner Mci el was concerned with the brightness of the colors on the
exterior of the building and preferred that it be brought to a more compatible
level with the surrounding` neighborhood.
r. Jones stated that one condition of the Conditional Use Permit is to
heavily landscape the parking area with trees. Therefore, he could not see
where there is a concern since the building would' not be visible to
surrounding residents.
Commissioner cRi el asked if the applicant conducted a meeting with residents
of the surrounding neighborhood.
r. Jones replied that two neighborhood meetings had been held, and that none
of the residents attended the last meeting.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner epel agreed that due` to setbacks and landscaping the building
was going to be difficult ,to see from the street; therefore was not concerned
with the exterior colors.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that this project had come a long way from the
original submittal . Further, that this design showed an interesting site plan
and that the changes made reflected imagination and thought for the
occupants. She was not concerned with the exterior color pallete.
Commissioner Mc i el stated that he was not concerned with the project itself,
but was concerned with the color scheme because It was not compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood.
Commissioner gamer agreed that the color scheme was a concern.
Planning Commission Minutes -6- November 13, 1985
Commissioner Stout agreed that the project has come a long way and that the
site plan ;and arrangement is going to work well . He further state that he
like the architecture and hoped that sufficient measures were taken to
mitigate concerns.
Motion; Moved by Chi ti ea seconded by Rempel , to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 85- , as
presented. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, RE PEL, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
DES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13066 CRESTVIEW ALTA; LO
A su a v7 s on an es gn revi ew or 7 single amp o on ages of
land in the Low Residential District ( -4 d /ac) located on the south side
of 19th Street, east of Amethyst - APN 0 -111-51 and 6 .
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Richard Denel , representing the applicant, concurred with the findings of the
staff report, Resolution and Conditions of Approval .
Clark Bosen, Rancho Cucamonga resident, Mated that his previous concern had
been the flooding problem which currently exists at this location; however,
was satisfied now that this situation would be rectified with construction of
this project.
Amos Harting, 9606 Hamilton, Rancho Cucamonga asked if it would be possible
to have a block wall constructed along the south property line. Mr. Harting
supported the project.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker was concerned with the adjacent property owners' loss of
privacy due to the construction of two story units. He recommended that, this
issue be mitigated to assure that the adjacent residents would not have all of
their privacy eradicated, whether it be through landscaping or placement of
certain units on those lots.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed and further stated that Design Review Conditions
, 3, and 4 dealing with walls and fencing should include language requiring
the review for consistency and approval by the City Planner, prior to the
issuance of building permits.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- November 1 , 1985
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative
Tract 13066, with amendments to include fencing and walls to be reviewed for
consistency and and approval by the City Planner; and lots 2 , 15 and 1 to
include measures to mitigate privacy for adjacent property owners, subject to
City Planner approval Motion carried by the following Vote:
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, RE PEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
:15 Planning Commission Recessed
8:25 Planning`Commission Reconvened with all members present
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 159 - BLANTO - A proposed
residential eve opmen or 135 custom singli:fimi ots, and 3 lettered
open space lots, on 67.67 acres of land in the Very= Low Residential
District -2 do ac), within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on the
southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and 24th Street - APN 225- 1 - 5y
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Chi ti ea stated that a trail behind lots 10 and 107 extending
across to Street `°C" to connect with the trail to the east was discussed by
the Trails Committee during its review; however, the condition was omitted.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing*
Wayne Blanton, ,applicant, stated that Commissioner Chitiea was correct with
regard to the trail connection and that it was not on the map due to an
oversight.
Ray Buxford, Etiwanda resident, was concerned with drainage and flooding
problems which currentlyexist on Etiwanda Avenue.
Paul Rouau, Traffic Engineer, explained that this project provided
detention basin on Lot D to detain the water on Etiwanda Avenue so that it
will never be any greater `than 'what currently flows.
r. Rexford asked if the project would necessitate the removal of the rook
curbs along Etiwanda Avenue.
Planning Commission Minutes November 13, 1985
Chairman Stout explained that the Etiwanda Specific Plan required that
Etiwanda's rock curbs be preserved along Etiwanda Avenue. He advised that the
curbs may have to be replaced in certain areas due to deterioriation. He
further explained that the City's Engineering staff is currently examining
various materials which would have the same appearance as rock curbs, but more
structurally sound.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the applicant had done an excellent job on the
design of this project.
Commissioner Barker agreed and stated that the applicant was willing to work
with suggestions made by the Committees and staff.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she was pleased to see this type of
project. She recommended that the landscaping along the trails system be
reviewed by the Trails Committee.
Commissioner McNiel agreed and stated that the applicant had done a fine job
on this project.
Chairman Stout stated that this project was one of the first large projects to
be submitted in the Equestrian Overlay District and that he was pleased with
this design. He suggested that a statement be included in the CC&Rs for the
tract so that future builders will be alerted to the fact that the roofs are
required.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 12659, with amendments to
reflect that the CC&R's are to include a statement that the roofs are
required; the trail connections between lots 106 and 107 are to be included on
the tract map; and landscaping adjacent to trails is to be reviewed by the
Trails Committee. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13022 - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY
- A—rie-sidentiAl-----s-Obdivision o tote ots on o a acres an
including the development of 275 single family lots on 44.1 net acres in
the Low Residential (2-4 du/ac), Low-Medium Residential (4-8 du/ac),
Medium (4-14 du/ac) Residential , and School/Park Community Facilities Land
Use Designations within the Victoria Planned Community located north of
the Southern Pacific Railroad, south of Highland Avenue, west of Milliken
Planning Commission Minutes -9- November 13, 1985
Avenue and East of the Deer Creek Channel - APN 202-211-13, 34 and 8,
02- 1- 7.
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout referred to the condition which required wrought iron fencing
consistent with the existing design on 'Victoria Park Lane and stated that he
thought the existing fence construction is a combination of masonry and
wrought iron. He asked if staff intended for the wall to be constructed
entirely of wrought iron.
r. Cook replied that the intent was that the wall would be constructed
consistent with what is currently on the street.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Jim Bailey, William Lyon Company, expressed concern with the minimum ten-foot
setbacks required for lots 211, 237 and 263 under Design Review conditions of
the Resolution. He explained that in order to implement this condition on
those single story lots, it would necessitate changing a great many lot lines
and suggested that five-foot setbacks be required: Mr. Bailey referred to
Engineering Condition -A and asked it to be noted that there would be an
emergency access across the median in Milliken Avenue.
Paul Rougeau, City Traffic Engineer, was concerned with providing a break in
the median. He explained that emergency vehicles could go the wrong way u'
the road bed and was concerned that vehicular` traffic would access across the
median.
Steven Ford, William Lyon Company, explained that it would not be an 'actual
break in the median but a rolled 'curb at that location to allow emergency
access into the tract.
r. Rougeau replied that a rolled curb would be acceptable.
Mr. Bailey referred to Engineering Condition C-2 regarding the coordination of
railroad crossing and arms installation prior to occupancy of first phase. He
was concerned that this could not be accomplished prior to occupancy of the
units.
garrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that Engineering staff would be
concerned with elimination of this condition because there would not be a
secondary access to be used in an emergency if a train was blocking that
access. He suggested that the Commission might consider requiring the
applicant to provide a secondary access to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer if the coordination of the crossing signal and arms; cannot be
accomplished prior to occupancy.
Planning Commission Minutes -10_ , ovember 13, 1985
Mr, Bailey stated that this condition would be acceptable to the applicant;
e referred to Condition -16 of the standard conditions regarding retaining
walls required to be provided with decorative treatment, and suggested that
only retaining walls which are exposed to public view require decorative
treatment.
r. Bailey stated that William Lyon would be installing the storm drain
facility as required by the Master plan of Storm grains. He asked if the
developer would then be clear of any drainage fees
Jim Markman.., City Attorney, advised that a Drainage Fee Ordinance was being
drafted for the City ounci 's consideration which treats the Planned
Communities differently, which he felt would satisfy Mr. Bailey's concern.
r. Bailey asked if a 1 -foot rear yard would be acceptable in lieu of the
required 1.5 feet.
Chairman Stout replied that 15 feet was established as acceptable for rear
yards.
Debra grown, representing the Victoria Homeowners' Association, supported the
project.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Miel was concerned with the crossing signal and asked if there
were an interim method to make that crossing safe.
Mr. Rougeau replied that he was not aware of anything that the public
Utilities Commission would accept. He advised that the crossing would have to
e installed to full standards.
Commissioner McNiel asked if there were a method to determine the time frame.
Mr. Rougeau replied that he did not know the time frame of the developer's
first phase or the latest status of the crossing improvements with the
railroad.
Chairman Stout asked if the other portions of the circulations system could
handle the traffic without that opening. He asked if there would be some way
o condition a certain number so that once traffic reaches that number and
alternate traffic needs aren't suitable, development will have to stop until
the signal is installed.
r. Rougeau replied that staff could monitor the intersection on Highland to
see if comes to point where could be unsafe. He suggested, however, than it
might be butter to continue the public hearing for this project so that staff
could.. ;get an idea of status from railroad along with the number of homes from
developer and come up with a reasonable estimate.
Planning Commission Minutes 11
November
e ber 1985
Chairman Stout asked for discussion of the 5-foot setbacks requested for Lots
211, 237 and 263.
Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested a modification to Condition 2 read
that if a 2-story structure was constructed on the lot the side setback shall
be 10 feet, if single story the side'setback may be 5 feet.
The Commission concurred with this modification~
Chairman Stout referred to the condition requiring wrought iron fencing and
suggested that it should read a combination of masonry and wrought iron
consistent with existing design. Regarding emergency access, he suggested
that language be added that emergency access shall be constructed consistent
with the standards acceptable to Eire Department and City Engineer. Regarding
decorative treatment for retaining walls, he stated he could see no reason why
low retaining walls only seen by a homeowner needs to be decoratively treated
and agreed that it should be those visible to the public.
r. Markman suggested that the condition read "walls visible to members o
public other than owners/occupants of lots on which the wal 1 s are located".
r, Markman asked for further discussion- regarding the phasing and railroad
crossing. He pointed out that the one phase proposes a boil out of 275 lots,
which meant a great many occupants living in that tract without a railroad
crossing,
Horrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that staff was concerned that
there would, be no east/west access.
r. Bailey of William Lyon Company asked if it would be ,possible that
secondary access could be provided should the railroad crossing not be
installed prior to occupancy of the first phase.
Paul Rougead, City Traffic Engineer,- stated that this would be acceptable with
the addition of the access being installed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
r, Markman suggested the following modification to Condition C*2. : strike
out "first phase" add "the railroad and signal arms shall be installed prior
to occupancy or developer shall provide secondary access to satisfaction of
City Engineer".
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Tentative
`bract 13022, as amended. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA BARKER, MCNIEL, RE PEL, :STOUT
WOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Planning Commission Minutes -12 November 13, 1985
1
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13052 - WILLIAM LYCN COMPANY
::' A FiMential subdivision o writh the development 5f 2 single
family homes on on 34.9 acres in the Low 2-4 du/ac) and Medium ( -1'4
du/ac) Residential Land Use Designations within the Victoria Planned
Community located north of Base Line Road, south of the Southern Pacific
Railway, east of Victoria Park Lane, and west of Etiwanda Avenue - APN
227-111-4, 5, 18, 20, 32 and 36.
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Commissioner Chi ti ea asked if there; was a reason why here were no sidewalks
or trail connections to the north.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Jim Bailey William Lyon Company, referred to condition B of the Resolution
and stated that there are four connections up to the railroad tracks and asked
that an additional connection to extend the trail not be required.
Chairman Stout was concerned that a person would not known there is a
connection and asked if anything could be done to indicate that the connection
would extend on up to the railroad track.
Mr* Bailey stated that practically speaking it was a short distance and would
become known by the residents of the tract.
Commissioner Banker stater] that there was a design element that was suppose to
go all the way through Victoria Lakes and this is one of those design
elements. Further, that every time a project cores in its chopped off or
cheapened. He additionally stated that this is not a continuation of a passed
statement and not a continuation of a theme.
Mr. Bailey stated that the applicant had done a decent jab in connecting
trails and that he couldn't understand the concern. He referred to condition
2.b. and requested the addition of language stating "upon City provided road
dedication".
Chairman Stout advised that it is impossible for the City to required
condemnation at a property owners expense. Further, that the laws implies that
the City has the duty to assist a developer if it is impossible.
Commissioner Chitiea pointed out that condition 13 should be checked.
Planning Commission Minutes -1 November 13, 198
Mr. Bailey referred to item M-3 of the Standard Conditions and stated that the
driveway apron is something to be dealt with by the individual buyer of the
custom lot and requested that this be clarified. He additionally referred to
item of the Standard Conditions which relates to master plan lines H-3 and
H-10 and suggested that this should be per revised Easter Storm Drain plan for
this project,
r. Hanson: stated that these lines are shown on plan and if the master plan
changes, the lines will change accordingly.
Chairman Stout ,stated that Etiwanda Street has some strong architectural
requirements and the feelings of local residents was that they wanted a street
scene upgraded with 'strong standards. He asked why good fencing would be
appropriate.
Mr. Bailey replied that the Chaffey Garcia House, which is adjacent to this
project, will be improved with wood fencing. Therefore this fencing would be
consistent with what is being proposed as part of the restoration project.
Chairman Stout stated that he had no problem if the fencing would be
consistent with what is ''being constructed as part of Chaffey Garcia House
historic restoration.
Commissioner Chitiea recalled a Design Review Committee question ofzero lot
line areas and the roofs without any overhang on the side and asked how this
was resolved.
r. Hai l e,y ;replied that the Mediterranean look had been researched and found
o use very minimal side overhang; however, this architectural concept would
not apply to this project.
Commissioner Chitiea asked that at the time this concept is introduced,
photographs of that style be provided.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker stated that he would like to be assured that staff would
involve the Trails Committee in all project which had any form of trail .
Further, he suggested that Condition B remain' intact but include the
requirement that the Trails Committee should review the trail .
There was concerned expressed by Chairman stout, Commissioners Harker and
Chitiea that a stronger trail connection to the north was necessary. ' Brad
Buller, City Planner, suggested that Street k drop down and the trail' which
was part of the green belt brought to the north side of the street. He
advised that this might emphasize more that this circulation is a direct
route
r. Bailey advised that he would work with staff and do whatever` the Trails
Committee recommended in order not to delay the project.
Planning Commission Minutes -14- November 13, 1985
I
;t
Motion. Moved
Barker sec. �#� +� � � � t� 1�Side�` , Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution adopting Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract
105 , with modification to condition 8 to require review and approval of the
passeo trail by the Trails Committee, and the drive approach condition of the
standard conditions to be deferred to time of building permits. Motion
carried by the following vote:
RYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85- 7 _ BROWN - A
proposa o ocate a executive e concep center wit in an existing
18,240 square foot building located in the Haven Avenue Overlay District
on the west side of Haven between 6th and 7th Streets - APN O'g- 6 19.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout stated that there was a condition for a plaza or luncheon area
between building 2 and the neat phase as part of the previously approved
master plan and was concerned that the proposed parking arrangement might
interfere with this condition. He suggested that the lot line might be
adjusted to assure that is accommodated.
,hack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that by recalculating the
parking spaces according to current pol i l y there is a way to accommodate the
required 14 spaces. He further advised that staff would look at prior
approvals to make sure there are no conflicts. He additionally stated that
the sale of another lot south of this site is possible and would necessitate a
modification to the master plan. Further, that the applicant would them b
required to remaster plan the other site and; would have to incorporate all
applicable conditions along with the additional 14 parking spaces. `
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Leonard Santoro, 1325 Se Rockefeller Avenue, Ontario, concurred with
conditions.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that the use was appropriate in this area if the
parking could be worked out.
Planning Commission Minutes _1 - November 1 , 195
Chairman Stout stated his only concern would be that the lot line adjustment
be creatively accomplished so that it does not disturb the master plan to
south.
Commissioner McNiel stated that an , unsuccessful attempted had been made on
this project to screen the doors immediately behind the building with
landscaping. He advised that when the new master plan comes before the
Commission this should be issue should be reassessed.
Commissioner Barker agreed that the landscaping did not succeed in adequately
screening the doors. He further stated that it was appropriate to recognize
the attitude and work between City staff and the applicant to reach a solution
to the problem.
Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Stout, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution. The Resolution was modified from one of denial to
approval by the following changes: Section I modified to read "the following
finding can be met"; Strike finding 4 Section to read "Conditional Use
Permit 85- 7 is hereby approved subject to the following conditions. (1)
total membership of health club shall not exceed 3,000 people, ( ) prior to
any f rhter occupancy of building 1-A or 1-8, the developer shall finalize a
lot line adjustment to provide at least 14 parking spaces to the south of the
subject site. That lot
line adjustment shall not disturb the: previously
approved master plan for the subject parcel and parcel to the south that will
allow for the development of plazas between the two parcels."
Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CNITIEA, STOUT, BARKER, MCNIEL, RE PEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5-8 - CROSS & CROWN
e estabTi s meat of a -church wi thin a s oppi ng center
in' a egg or ood Commercial District located at the northeast corner of
19th Sheet and Archibald Avenue _ AN 0 -17- 4.
Dino Pptrino, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report,
I
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.'
Rick Nelson, pastor of Cross and Crown Lutheran Church, concurred with the
findings of the Resolution.
There were no further, comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Planning Commission Minutes -16- November 13, 1985
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel , to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Conditional
Use Permit - . Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, REMPEL, STOUP"
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
N. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT CAL-RANCHO (CALMAR ) - An amendment to the legal
scH '1 on o real --pFbpfr-ty subject to arr agreement between the City of
Rancho Cucamonga and Cal-Rancho, Incorporated, regarding a senior citizen
housing project located west of Archibald, at the terminus of ;Lomita
Court.
Brad Buller, City Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Kevin Payne, representing
ting the applicant
, concurred with the findings of the
Resolution.
Commissioner Rempel stated that cars are to have parking permit stickers under
provisions of the lease agreement for this project. He asked if the applicant
anticipated parking problems.
Mr. Payne :replied that Calmark had conducted extensive studies on parking
ratios and provides .7 parking spaces. Further, that since this was in excess
of the normal requirement, parking was not considered a problem.
James Markman, City Attorney, advised that State law requires the definition
of seniors as SS years or older. However, a survey of senior projects places
the average age at 70 to 7 , which is more realistic.
``here were no further comments, therefore the ;public hearing was closed*
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to recommend adoption of the
amended legal description ;of the Cal-Rancho Development Agreement to the City
Council . Motion carried by the following: vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITEA BARKER, MCNIEE, REMPEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT': COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried.
Planning Commission Minutes -17- November I , 1985
10.-35 p.m. Planning Commission Recessed
1 :45 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present
Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Commission.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL 'MAP 9301 - FORECAST CORPORATION
ivision o acres o an n parses ii a n u rya Park
District (Subarea ) and the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located south
of Arrow Route between Haven Avenue and Utica Avenue - APN 209- 42-1 .
(Related File. DR H - )
P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW H - 6 - FORECAST - The
develop ment o an in ustr par consl ng o uI qs otaling
44,452 square feet on 3.4 acres of land within a proposed 18 acre 'Master
Site Plan in the Industrial Park. District (Subarea 6) and Haven Avenue
Overlay District,; located on the south side of Arrow iHighway between Haven
Avenue and Utica Avenue - AN 209-142-18. (Related File: PM 01
Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the Parcel 'Map staff report.
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the Development Review staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Joe Carmen, 7265 Hellman:, representing pp the applicant, concurred with the
findings of the Resolution.
Jim Barton,
8409 Utica,ca Rancho h o Cucamonga, was concernedthat 30
0 feet might be
too shallowof a distance coming off of Haven Avenue. He additionally_raised
questions regarding the reimbursement, for the completion of Utica Avenue when
he files application of a tentative parcel map>adjacent to this project, since
the curve in Utica places the street more on his property.
Paul Rougeau, City Traffic Engineer, stated that inequities do arise from time
to time throughout the City and that reimbursement or the attempt to make sure
that it is IOO equal in these oases in not normally done since it ;is the luck
of the drawn in properties. Further, if a street had to be master planned to
avoid a bad intersection and it impacts another property slightly more than
another no ;special effort has been made to make things equal .
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Planning Commission Minutes -18- November 1 , 1985
Commissioner Chitiea stated that this project has undergone major changes
i
since design review including two buildings which became one and traffic
reorientation to make this a project that works well now. Further, that
pedestrian areas have been included and that the redesign of the building will
be a Bauch safer plan..
Chairman Stout stated that the applicant came up with something that will work
for the development and work for the City and that he was pleased with the
outcome.
Motion: Moved by Repel , seconded by Chitiea to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map
9301. Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CNITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOAT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS. NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Stout,, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and [Development
Review 86- 6. Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS. REMPEL, STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS; NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
New Business
Q. PRELIMINARY REVIEW 85-66 _ NO00 - A consistency determination between the
bo i err br nteram o icier and a proposed commercial/office
development located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, wrest of
Turner Avenue '
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Don flood, 1000 Foothill Boulevard, stated that an additional 10 feet of
landscaping would be provided on the rear property line. Further, that this
project had been designed with consideration given to the adjacent residential
development. He further advised that the intent was to phase the project and
asked for the Commission's comment.
Planning Commission Minutes -19- November 13, 1985
-------
Chairman Stout advised that phasing would not be an issue discussed at this
point in the process since this meeting would be to discuss whether or not the
project is consistent with the Interim Policies established for Foothill
Boulevard. He further advised that the City began preliminary review by the
Planning Commission in an effort to save applicant's from placing a let of
time and money into a project which may be questionable as to ;whether it would
conform with the standards being established for Foothill Boulevard.
There were no other comments.
Commissioner McNi el stated that this project would perpetuate the problem of
piecemeal development, which the City hoped to eliminate through the adoption
of the Foothill Plan.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed and further stated that this particular piece of
property is located in a group of properties that basically is what the
Foothill Corridor Study is directed towards. Further that the property is
located in the middle of an entire block which needs to be masher planned.
Therefore could not support this project.
Commissioner Barker supported the staff report in that it would set a
precedent toward piecemeal strip commercial which is what the City is ;trying
to a away from .at t time.g , �' Is e. he advised that it 'would not be to the
advantage of the City or the property owner to go forward with the project at
this time.
Commissioner Rem el stated that this project b itself does not lend itself to
p p y
the Elty's concept of the Foothill Corridor,
therefore could not >support the
project.
Motion: Moved by Ehitiea, seconded.. by McNiel' , unanimously carried, to find
Preliminary Review 85-66,; Wood, inconsistent with the Interim Policies for
Foothill Boulevard. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ENITIEA, M NIEL, BARKER, REMPEL, 'STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -curried
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, asked if the Commission's direction was for
the applicant to stop processing on this project until adoption of the
Foothill Plan, or to work with adjacent property owners and staff on the
development of a master plan.
Chairman Stout stated that if the applicant could work with the adjacent land
owners within that half-block area to develop a common pla
n n which
affects al 1 of the businesses - this is
exa
ctly what the Commission is trying n
g
to accomplish.
Planning Commission Minutes -2 - November 13, 1985
It was the consensus of the Commission that they would be willing to look at a
common master plan for the area.
Commissioner Repel advised that the applicant should be made aware that the
property would have the be developed according to the common master plan.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded McN'iel , unanimously carried, to continue
past adjournment time for discussion of the following project.
R. USE DETERMINATION 85-0 - COLE/SHAEEER AMBULANCE--SERVICE
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Pat McAlmo d, representing the applicant,; gave an overview of the request.
Chairman Stout stated that this item is appropriate in the :area should be a
conditional use under public .safety and utility services. He advised that the
reason for requiring a Conditional Use Permit might be the necessity for
certain control with regard to noise nuisance.
Commissioner Barker stated that, the definition of public safety and utility
services requires a conditional use permit and would agree ;that this 'i s the
process that must be followed.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed and further stated that this gives a measure of
control if 'there is a nuisance factor in the future.
Motion; Moved by Barker, seconded` by Stout, that Use Determination 85-0 ,
Cole/Shaefer Ambulance Service, would be a conditionally permitted use under
Public Safety and Utility Services. Therefore, the applicant was directed to
file a 'Conditional Use Perm
it.to ; Motion
t on carried by the following vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, STOUP', CH TIEA MCNI`EL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
Motion. Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried., to
continue past the adjournment time for discussion of the following item:
Planning Commission Minutes - I November 1 , 1985
S. MINOR EXCEPTION 5-18 - MU - Appeal by adjacent neighbor of staff's
approval o - oot b70__CR__W__a_M along the rear property line at 9869
Candlewood Street.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Cary Mumaw, 9869 Candlewood, explained that the wall he was proposing t
construct would be similar to the wall next door. The difference would b
that he would construct a two and ogre-half font retaining wall and on top of
that a combination block/wood fence of 5 and one-half feet.
Chairman Stout asked the reason why he didn't select the same type of material
as the existing fence.
Per. Mumaw replied that the first reason is expense and the second is to break
up the expanse of a solid block wall .
Brad Buller, City Planner, asked if for consistency r. Mumaw would be using
the sae spacing of pilasters and the sane stain material and wood treatment
used on the adjacent fencing.
r. Mumaw replied that he planned to use the sae color block and same stain,
and would be willing to use the same pilaster spacing.
Chairman Stout Mated that he had no problem with the minor exception. He
suggested that Mr. Mumaw make his fence consistent with the one next to 'i t for
the entire run along the appealant's property, just for the sake of being
neighborly.
Commissioner McNiel suggested that one more tier on the block be extended from
the ground to preserve the wood for the fence.
Motion: Moved by Stout,; seconded by McNiel , to deny the appeal of Minor
Exception 5-18. Motion carried by the following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, BARKER, 'CHITIEA, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Planning Commission Minutes - November 13, 1985
Old Business
T. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT' 83- 3 - MOOSE LQCC'E - Status report on compliance
w1 con i ti ons of app—r-o—via—F-f—ortbe Lodge Meeting Hall located at
9375 Archibald Avenue - APN 10-071-48.
Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Putrino
presented a letter from the Foothill Fire District stating that the Lodge was
in conformance with their conditions of approval .
Chairman Stout questioned the reduced membership of the lodge and its affect
on the conditions of approval .
Mr. Putrino explained that representatives of the Moose Ledge had requested
that the Fire District reduce the occupancy load due to a decline in
membership.
Commissioner Chitiea asked how the occupancy load would be monitored.
Mr. Putrino explained that the Fire District requires the posting of the
occupancy load number.
The report was received and filed. Staff was directed to monitor the use and
report back to the Commission if issues arise.
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
U. ORDINANCE TO ADD A SECTION TO THE CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING
INFFOR TRETROCESSING OF VESTING TENTATIVE APT FOR RESIDENTIAL
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Motions Moved by Stout, seconded by McNi el to -recommend adoption of the
Ordinance to the City Council . Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, RE PEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Planning Commission Minutes - 3- November 13, 15
l
ADJOURNMENT
Motion. Moved by Barker, ,seconded by Mc Niel , unanimously carried, to adjourn.
1 : D p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned
Respectfully submitted,
�F
Brad Buller
Deputy Secretary
Am
Planning Commission Minutes -24- November 1 , 1985
i
CITY ,OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
October 23, 1985
Chairman DennisStout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at
Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chaff man Stout theca led 'i n the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Suzanne Chitiea, Larry McNiel (arrived at
7:15 p.m., ), Herman Rempel , Dennis Stout
ABSENT: David Barker
STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner,
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil
Engineer; Barbara Kral'l , Assistant Civil Engineer, Jack
Lam, Community Development Director; Jim Markman, City
Attorney, John Meyer, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds,
Secretary
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, introduced Brad Butler to the
Punning Commission and explained that Mr. Duller would begin the position a
the City Planner on November 4th.
Mr. Lam additionally announced that the November 4th Planning Commission
workshop had been cancelled.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion.. Moved by Rempel , seconded by Chitiea, carried, to approve the Minutes
of August 28, 1985, with an amendment to page S to reflect "dash coat stucco"
Motion. Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel carried, to approve the Minutes
of September 25, 1985 as presented.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1 991 - SHELBOURNB - A total;
re ent7 a ivisfon an es gn review Y5F 4 9 sing am1 y o t s on B.
acres of land in the Lowy Medium Residential District located at south side
of Lemon Avenue, 500± feet east of Archibald Avenue - APN 201-252-21,
. (Continued from October 9th meeting. )
Chairman Shut announced that the Commission was in receipt of a letter from
the applicant requesting continuance of this item to the December 11, 1985
meeting. He then opened the public hearing. There were no public comments.
Motion. Moved by Rempel , seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to
continue Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract to December 11, 1985.
R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - 7 -
CONTINENTAL BARE
The eve o ent o a psyc is ric hospitalace y 'eons Ong o , C
square feet on 6. 1 acres of land in the Industrial Specific Plan (Subarea
District located on the southeast corner of White Oak and Elm Avenue
AN 08- 51-15.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.
Chairman .Stout opened the public hearing.
Fred Jackson, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the type of care
this facility would provide.
Frank Valese, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project
architecture.
The following individuals addressed the Commission in support of the
project: Pat Gearhear , Rancho Cucamonga resident; Jim Barton, Rancho
Cucamonga resident; Jack Corrigan, Newport Beach.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Remel stated that there is no doubt there is a need in the
community for this type of facility. He stated this design is compatible with
the surrounding structures and fits very well . He was concerned that a design
feature be addressed in the project entryway. He felt that the inclusion of
some tape of water element would` be desirable to attenuate street noise.
Commissioner Chi'ti ea ; appreciated how the applicant's representatives had
worked with the Design Review Committee to come up with a much better project.
Planning Commission Minutes - October 23, 1985
Commissioner McNiel stated this was a very nice project and welcomed it to the
community.
Chairman Stout agreed and, stated this facility would be an asset to the
community. He pointed out that the comments made at the second Design Review
had not been incorporated in the Resolution and suggested that this be done.
Motion Moved by Stout, seconded by Rem el , to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Development
Review 8 -27 with modifications to the Resolution to include the Design Review
Committee comments, the inclusion in the Landscape Plan of an outdoor area
with outdoor seating, and the inclusion of a design feature in the entryway.
These conditions are to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review
Committee prior to issuance of building permits. Motion carried by the
following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS STOUT, REMPEL_, CNITIEA, MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: BARKER - -carried
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9481 GOLDEN WEST EQUITY - The
conso i s ion o w acyres o an i n o 2 parcels wT i n a eneral
Industrial Area (Subarea located at the northeast corner of Hellman
Avenue and 7th Street - APN 209-171-7, 20, 56 and 49 through S .
r Kr
all ,Barbara K all Assistant Civil Engineer, presented the staff report.
g p _ p
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Bruce MacDonald representingthe applicant,
ave an overview of the req
uest
9
and concurred with the Resolution and Conditions of Approval .
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map
9481, Golden West. Motion carried by the following vote:'
AYES. COMMISSIONERS REMPEL, CNITIA, MNIEL, STOAT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS. NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL carried
Planning Co mission Minutes - - October 2 , 195
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 8 - _ RAR kI - The
eve o `en -uni spar en s on acres an n e Medium High
Resi donti al District (14® 4 du/ac) located at the north side and end o
Lomita Court - APH 0 -1 1- 4.
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Pete Pi tassi , representing the applicant, asked for discussion relative to
open space and roofing material . He explained that in response to Design
Review Committee comments, the plans now show that the emergency access lane
to the south will be constructed to function as a large open lawn area.
Regarding the cluserting of units :into 12 or 16 pl ex units, Mr. Pi tassi
advised that the architects had worked on various designs and determined that
this design is the best solution for occupants of the units in terms o
interior design and povi dng open space. Mr. Pi tarsi presented slides which
displayed the use of fiberglass shingles used on various protects, and
explained that they achieved the clean lines desired by the applicant.
Chairman Stout asked if a metal seam roof was considered as an alternate.
r. Pi tassi advised that this type of roof would be cost prohibitive for this
type of unit.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner McNiel stated that he thought the original design had a nice
basic layout, which this design destroys*. He thought that a great deal had
been lost and was not pleased. He fel t that more open space; shout d b
achieved, even if it meant 'losing a unit or two.
Commissioner Chi ti ea agreed and stated that the original site plan was more
desirable. She was concerned that there appeared to be no overhang at the
ends of the building :and felt they looked incomplete. She did not care for
the roofing treatment in the proposal .
Commissioner Remel agreed that the open space in the original plan far
exceeds this one and that this complex does not accomplish the open space the
Commission had hoped for. He was concerned with the fiberglass roofing and
stated that they would not be a deterrent if a fire started in the complex.
He added that this kind of roofing material really begins to look bad in 10 to
15 years. He felt that the open space needs improvement.
Chairman Stout stated that he was not willing to compromise on the roofing
issue. He understood the architectural concern, but there is a practical need
for the original roofing material , as pointed out by Commissioner Rempel . He
was initially concerned with the open space, but now that he had looked at it
it seemed to be a reasonable amount of usable space. He preferred to see
more, but the project is under the density range for that area and if it had
Planning Commission Minutes -4- October 23, 198
been maxed out to 24 units the only way you could achieve the open space would
be possibly three story units. He soul n't think of an alternative to provide
open space without reducing density way below what is required.
Chairman Stout advised that the general consensus among the Commissioners
seemed to be that the project needed more work.. He asked if the applicant was
willing to continue consideration in order to work on these concerns.
Mr. Pi tarsi replied that the project had been to design review twice, and that
he was not overjoyed with a continuance, however he would agree.
Chairman Stout reopened the public hearing in order to continue the project.
Motion Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel , unaniousty carried, to continue
discussion of Environmental Assessment and Development Review 85- to the
November 13, 1986 planning Commission meeting.
E. TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Proposed amendments to Chapters
an . o e and o ucamonga Municipal Code pertaining to the
preservation of trees on private property.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Dr. Alden Kelley, Tree Arborist, gave an extensive presentation to the
Planning Commission relative to the to the hazards of preserving the Blue Cum
Eucalyptus. He pointed out that they are very costly to maintain and the
liability to the City for property damage ;and injury to humans is very
great.` He supported replacement of the Blue Cum Eucalyptus with either
Spotted or Red Cum varieties.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated that on the appeal procedure, he would like to have it
spelled out who the decision is appealable too -- either the City Council o
Planning Commission. He felt that merely referring to a Section within the
Code was confusing to the layman. On the tree replacement, he thought that 15
gallon size trees should be used consistently as opposed to requiring 5 gallon
in one instance and 15 gallon 'i n another. He requested more specificity o
the location of historical trees to avoid confusion on just which ones are
designed historical . He additionally stated that the time has come that. they
Ci ty needs to come up with a policy on tree preservation. He liked the Blue
Gums as long as they are not in a residential area,: out felt once urbanization
Planning Commission Minutes - - October 23, 1985
begins they are a hazard. Instead of preserving, he felt they needed to be
replaced and recommended that the preservation language in the ordinance needs
to be eliminated. He stated that if this language conflicts with the Etiwanda Specific Plan, an amendment should be rude to that Plan stating that yes the
City wants windrows, but no it does not want Blue Cum windrows.
Commissioner Rempel agreed and Mated that a lot of people say they love those
windrows, but add as long as they are not on their property. He felt that the
branch and fire hazard far outweighs the "beauty" of the Eucalyptus.
Commissioner Chi ti ea agreed and thanked Dr. Kelley for his contribution to the
City on the development of this ordinance.
Commissioner McNiel agreed with the safety hazard of the trees and stated that
he would like to see all :of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus eliminated and replaced
with a safer tree.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, to recommend adoption of the
Tree Preservation Ordinance to the City Council with the following suggested
amendments: Standard tree replacement size of 15 gallon, inspection of trees
prior to planting, reference in the ordinance with regard to staking
standards, clarification of language relative to which body an appeal i
filed, and removal of the preservation language. Additionally, staff was
directed to proceed with an amendment to the Etiwana Specific Plan with
regard to tree preservation. Motion carried by the following vote,
AYES: COMMISSIONERS STOUT, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: CO 1SSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER -carried
NEW BUSINESS
F. AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR VICTORIA VINEYARDS SOUTH- A conceptual
eve o en pl an f or 755th Vid ors neyar s i age, a 117.4 acre
portion of the Victoria Planned Community, located on the north side of
Base Line Read, between Milliken and. Rochester, south of the Southern.
Pacific Railroad tracks - APN 27-081-6.
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Jim Bailey, representing the applicant, asked clarification of Condition A-
relative to streets and asked that where the requirement is to build more than
half of a street which is also frontage of property not owned by William Lyon
would they be reimbursed
Planning Commission Minutes - - October 23, 1985
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that this applicant would enter
into a Reimbursement Agreement insuring such reimbursement.
Mr. Bailey _ referred to Condition B-1 and advised that the storm drain was
being designed by the Cty's consultant, therefore the City should be
responsible to going to Flood Control for approval.
Mr. Hanson replied that the intent of this condition is that if the William
Lyon Company contacts with a flood control facility, they would deal directly
with the Flood Control District. If they do not, the condition does not
apply.
. Bailey referred to Condition B-3 and asked that the language be clarified
to require conceptal design and explained that the final facility would be
designed at the time of the development plan.
Steven Ford, representing William Lyon Company, explained that the concern was
that they didn't want to complete final designs of an interim measure prior to
bring final plans before the Commission.
Mr. Hanson agreed to the substitution of "conceptual" for "interim".
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconea by Stout, to adopt 'the Resolution
approving the Area Development plan for Victoria Vineyards South, with
amendments to include clarification of language relative to storm drain master
plan, and amendment to Condition B-3 to reflect conceptual drainage
protection* Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES. COMMISSIONERS CHITIEA, STOUT, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER -carried
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
G. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-09 - A-1 SHELL - A request for relief from
an sca a an rriga ion improvements in conjunction with the construction
of a 450 square foot storage room on an existing gas/service station
located on the north side of Foothill , west of Klusman - APN 0 -151-19.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Paul Kiehl , representing the applicant, gave an overview of the request. '
Planning Commission Minutes - - October 23, 1985
Chairman Stout asked if there were long range plans for this facility.
Mr. Kiehl replied that he was really not in a position to say; however, would
speculate that in approximately five ,ears Shell would come before the
Planning Commission with a `request to demolish this facility and reconstruct a
new one
Chairman Stout stated that he could not see why the Shell Company:,would want
to invest this money new, if the station was to be removed and reconstruction
in that short length of time.
Mr. Kiehl advised that the company had budgeted $5,000 to improve the storage
area for this service station. However, when advised by City staff of the
amount of landscaping which would be required, it far outweighed the cost of
the storage area, which is the reason for the appeal;.
Chairman Stout advised that the City is in the process of upgrading Foothill
Boulevard and would be developing considerable changes as to Footh l l ' s image
and landscape requirements. For this reason, until the policies are
established, the City is discouraging people from doing any type of
improvements at this time.
. Kiehl stated that the problem is that he does not have storage for
supplies and was recently cited by the City for storing items outside of the
service station. He further advised; that he has been burgularized many times
and needed a secured area for his storage area; He further stated that the
crosswalk runs into the planter area and felt children would walk all over the
plants.
There were no further, public comments.
Commissioner Rempel stated that unless Shell would give a commitment or bond
that in some period of time they would redo this station to meet the Foothill
standards., he would not be in favor of allowing' the request.
Commissioner McNi el felt sympathy for the station owner; but by same :token,
some extensive planning has gone into Foothill .Boulevard and this is an
opportunity to act upon this.
Commissioner Chi ti ea stated she also felt a great deal of sympathy for the
station owner and the situation he is in. However, she felt that approving
this appeal would be inconsistent with the Commission's past decisions and its
commitment to the Foothill policies
Chairman Stout agreed and felt that there was another consideration which was
that this repair` facility probably should be relocated to a larger area. in
order to be consistent with past decisions, he felt than the Commission could
not approve this request.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- October 23, 1985
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by McNiel , to deny Minor Development Review
85-09. Motion carried by the fallowing vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS REMPEL, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: BARKER -carried
H. i
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84- 7 - BARMAKIAN A review of wall design along
ucamon a Free anh or an approved multi-tenant industrial park
located at the southwest corner of Arow and Vineyard;
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the ;staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Pete Pitassi , representing the applicant, asked for clarification of the gall
design along Cucamonga Creek Channel .
Chairman Stout asked If it would be possible to have a combination of a
retaining wall with pilasters and wrought iron to make the total on the trail
side of b feet
M . Pitassi stated that he would be willing to consider this option.
Chairman Stout felt this could come back as a consent item at Design Review.
He felt this would be a compromise that would not destroy aesthetics for the
property, yet provide a safety element for the trails.
Commissioner Rempel suggested the possibility of a 8 foot retaining wall then
putting concrete rail' 2 or 3 feet above it.
Chairman Stout stated that his thought was that the pilasters would be of the
same block used on the retaining wall .
Mr. Pitassi stated that he would prefer the use of wrought iron. Further, he
would like to explore these two options and bring them before the Design
Review Committee.
Motion. Moved by McNi el , seconded by Chi ti ea, unanimously carried, to refer
this item to Benign Review Committee for review and approval.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- October 23, 1985
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Stout, unanimously carried, to adjourn.
11:30 p.m. - planning Commission Adjourned.
Respectfully s mitte ,
a
Jack Lam
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -10- October 23, 198
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
October 9, 1985
Vice-Chairman David Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at
Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Vice-Chairman Barker then led= in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea, Herman Rempel
ABSENT: Larry Mc Niel, Dennis Stout
STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Nancy Fong, Associate Planner;
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Curt Johnston,
Associate Planner; Jack Lam, Community Development
Director; James Markman, City Attorney; Janice Reynolds,
Secretary
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that the topic of discussion for the
October 14, 1985 Planning Commission workshop would be the Utility
Undergrounding Policies and Victoria Park Lane Reconstruction. This workshop
will be held at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, 9761 Arrow Highway,
Rancho Cucamonga.
Mr. Coleman also announced that an additional workshop was being proposed
following the Design Review Committee meeting on October 17, 1985 to discuss
the Archibald Beautification project. He advised that staff would contact the
Commissioners later in the week to confirm this date.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT" 118 - DALY CONSTRUCTION - A
residential subdivision for condominium purposes, consisting f 72 emits
on .71 acres of land in the Medium Residential District (d 1 a
lo
cated on the north side of 19th Street at Ramona Avenue - APN 11m
42.
B. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 118 UALY CONSTRUCTION - Resign
review to revise the building levations and floor plans r Tentative
Tract 11853 consisting of 72 condominium units on 5.71 acres 'of land in
the Medium Residential District 8-1 du/ad) , located on the north aide of
19th Street at Ramona Avenue APN 0 171 42.
C. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 1 UIDCAL The development of
t anty ecarad aini r Anita en P�1 anre caf land in the Medium Residential
District (d 1 /a.e) located at the northwest cornea of Archibald Avenue
and Monte Vista Street APN CR 1 1= 7, 61, 62.
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - FORECAST - For the
enatrzdtien of
-two
prcaeaaicanal office building consisting of
9,99R care feet can �7 sates land in the Industrial Specific Plan
Sdbare 7) Ran eh Cox a nn a Et ainean Park: the
north off` C vin Censer
Drive and east off Ut ea Avenue (Lot _ APN Od O 9�
E. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT D GENERAL PLAN`
ANla Nl OE PORLSA A reaea t amend tN Onera Play Land Use
Tap fr� a edirr Residential1�1 & e) to Office in cant�rdtican- with
the de elop ent f a nj r ei ti en edn re ate livin and care facility)
cart sores of
land Joe
�n the a trth aide f Foothill Boulevard
west aide of. Cucamonga Creek, west of Vineyard Avenue APN 0 P11- C
1
P. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
AMENDMENT -07 PORLSA A. request to amend the Development Districts
Map frr Meciaa Reientil 81 da ) to Office/Professional {in
conjunction with the development of a senior citizen congregate living and
care facility) can 4.85 acres of land located on the south aide of Foothill
Boulevard, west aide of Cucamonga Creek, west of Vineyard Avenue APN
O. TIME EXTENSION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 0 BA IAN The development
of six ) industrial. buildings totaling 25,032 square feet can 1.7 acres
f land in the General Industrial Category Subarea 1 ), located on the
north aide of 8th Street, seat of Vineyard Avenue - APN 7 P71 ,
55.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chi.tiea, to adopt the Consent
Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote
Planning Commission Minutes October 9 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RR P L, CHITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: TCN EL, STOUT -carried
PUBLIC HEARINGS
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT d C HOT LUMBER
COMPANY - A request to construct an 8,000 square foot warehouse building
addition to an existing home improvement center and the development of a
Master Plan on P acres of lard in the Office Professional District,
located at 7110 Archibald, northwest corner of Archibald and Lomita Court
APN 0 -1 a1® d (Continued from September 11 18 meeting)
Vice-Chairman Barker announced that the applicant had requested that this item
be continued to the November 13, 1985 Planning Commission meeting,. He then
opened the public hearing.
There were no public comments.
Motion: loved by Rempel, seconded by Chi lea,, to continue the public hearing
n
for Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit -20, Hoyt Lumbers
Company, to the November 13, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried
by the following ;vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REIPEL, CH TIEA, BARKER
NONE: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT -carried
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT R -1 - SHAi - A
proposal to locate a caretaker' trailer on a Christmas tree form located
on 12.8 acres on the south aide of Ease Line, east of Rochester, in
utility corridors - APN 7 1 1 . (Continued from September 1 1, 1985
meeting)
Sohn Meyer, ,Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report._
1i ce Cbairman Barker opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1985
Robert ,Shag, applicant, stated objection 'to the improvements which were being
required of hire as a result of the Conditional Use Permit. He was concerned
with the cost associated; with; the ' installation of those improvements and
additionally that he would not be allowed retail sales. Mr. Shaw stated that
his Legal counsel had requested that he seek advise as to whether or not he
might be allowed to operate under a temporary use permit and place the modular
trailers and signs on the site for a oC-day period from November through
December.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that the Development Code allows 30 days
per calendar for temporary uses such as Christmas tree lots. Mr. Coleman
pointed out that this applicant had been operating his business without City
approval. Further, that the conditions required for this application were
consistent with what has been required of other applicants operating in within
the Utility Corridors, such as the Vernaci Nursery, Valley Plant Growers, and
Pulliam Masonry.
. Shaw stated that he had visited the Planning Department to get information
regarding setbacks and that staff had not advised him that he needed to obtain
special permits
Jim Markman, City attorney, advised that it was not up to staff to offer legal
guidance to someone who warts to go into business. He further advised that if
the applicant wished to obtain a temporary` use permit for Christmas free sales
he should withdraw this application for a conditional use permit and not place
the caretaker's quarters on the site
Mrs. Shaw asked if the 30 day time limit meant 30 consecutive days or 30 total
dabs since his customers core in to reserve trees in November.
r. Coleman advised that the time limit would be 30 total days.
Mrs. ;haw asked if he filed for a temporary use permit could he have until.
December 30 to remove what ,needs- to be removed from.. the site, should he decide
to withdraw the CUP application.
Mr. Coleman advised that under the temporary use process, applicant's are
normally allowed_a period of time to restore sites to their original state.
Mr. Shaw asked if he would-be able to refil.e an application .for a conditional
use permit should he so desire at a later date
Mr. Markman advised that it might be in the applicant's best interest to
withdraw this application because if it is denied by the Commission he could
not file the application again for one year.
Mrs. Shaw advised that he would withdraw his application for CUP -13.
Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1985
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -24 - CANYON MEDICAL
proposal to establish a 24-hour emergency ambulance station and
dispatch office in an existing building located at 9921 8th Street it
Subarea 5 in the Industrial Area Specific Plan APN 209-201-1
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Vice-Chairman Barker opened the public hearing.
Curt L ti.poc , representing applicant, addressed noise levels and advised that
personnel had been instructed not to utilize sirens until they actually 'enter
the flow of traffic, thereby directing the actual projection of siren noise
array from the residential area. He further stated that the drivers had been
instructed to care to a complete Atop :and proceed with caution into all
Intersections, and to be particularly aware of the problem intersections such
as 8th Street and Archibald. He further advised that this location allows the
flexibility to use alternate routes and would not have to access Archibald
Avenue for all runs
Commissioner Chitiea asked approximately bow marry calls are received by the
company per day.
Mr. Latipow advised that ; approximately 700 a year are received, which is
roughly -4 calls ,per day on the siren, He advised that not every call i
dispatched with lights and sirens.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel stated that he lives across the street from another
ambulance company and there are times when he is awakened at night but not
many because you get to the point cohere you don't notice. He advised that he
had no problem with this request
Commissioner ioner Barker pointed out that the noise levels will not exceed
performance levels established by the Industrial Specific Plan.
Motion: Moved by Rem el, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a negative Declaration
and adapt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 24. Motion
carried by the following vote;
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BONE
ABSENT: C OMM I SIONER r MC EL, STOUT carried
Planning Commission Minutes - _ October 9, 1985
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-10 - PULLIAM - A
request to install a trailer as a temporary office for a building supplies
sales business on 3 acres of land within the Southern California Edison
Utility Corridor located at 12051 Arrow Highway, west of Devore Freeway
AP N 229-121-27.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Vice airman Barker opened the public hearing.
John Pulliam, applicant, stated concurrence with the findings of the staff
report, Resolution and conditions of approval.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel commended the applicant for his cooperation with staff and
the Design Review Committee in making this project one which will be an asset
to the area.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed and stated that this would be an aesthetic
it to the area.
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel, carried, to issue a Negative
Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 85-10.
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, RE EL, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: IEL, STOUT -carried
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12991 - SHELBOURNE - A total
residential subdivision and design review for 49 single family lots on 8.9
acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District located at south side
of Lemon Avenue, 500t feet east of Archibald Avenue - ;AP N 201-252-21 ,
22.
Vice-Cbairman Barker advised that the applicant for this item had requested a
continuance to the October 23, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. He then
opened the public hearing.
There were no public comments.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, to continue the public hearing
for Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract 12991 to the October 23, 1985
Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following vote;
Planning Commission Minutes -6- October 9, 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CRITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT carried
Vice-Chairman Barker advised that the following items were related and;would
be heard concurrently by the Commission.
M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13131 - OBERTSON NCB S INC.
condominium subdivision and design review for 164 units on 11.71 acres
of land in the Medium Residential District ( -1 du/ao) located at the
northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway APN C - 1 11,,
w Related file: DR -1 .
N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 5 -17 - ROBERTSON HOMES,
INC. - A residential development of 164 condominium units on 11.71 acres
of land in the Medium Residential District ( -1 du/ao) located at the
northeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway PN 0111,
. (Related file: TT" 1 1. 1)
Nancy Fong, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
'ages Markman, City Attorney, advised that Option 3 as presented in the staff
report was not an option for the City's consideration.
Vice-Chairman Barker opened the public hearing.
Lardy St o zer°, representing the applicant, concurred with the staff report
and Resolution with Conditions.
Greg Meyer, 8395 Avenida Casino; Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the project based
on incompatibility with the surrounding area and impacts on traffic and
schools. He was concerned with the project entrance on Bear Gulch Road
because it was the only access; road: to Sear Gulch School. Mr. Meyer also
objected to the 'number of high ;density projects being built in the City and;
was concerned that many of theexisting units are unrented.
Cary Larson, Placer Street, Rancho 'Cucamonga, was concerned with school and
traffic impacts.
Phil Y'enovkian, 5835 Burgundy, Rancho Cucamonga, was, concerned with the number
of high density project being approved in the City.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Planning Commission Minutes -7 October 9, 1985
Commissioner Re pel stated that the Commission continually hears concerns from
residents regarding overcrowding of schools. He advised that the School
Districts are the determining factor* as to whether a project can or cannot be
built because each project must obtain a letter from the School District in
which the project is located stating that they have the capacity to
accommodate the,. additional students. He additionally advised that this
project has received such d letter from the School. District stating that the
students which are generated from this project can be accommodated. Regarding
the driveway on Bear Gulch, he pointed out that this is not the primary access
to this complex-. Further, that this property is not appropriate to build
single family homes on it because on the north and great are medium density
built up areas, and on south is industrial.
Commissioner hitiea stated that the project comes in under the medium zone;
and is appropriate under that designation. She advised that concerns
regarding the density fors, this property would have been more appropriately
addressed during' the General Plan hearings. Further, that it is a well,
designed project and offers a good deal of open space and being located near d
park is appropriate for this type of density. She stated that given ,these
parameters and the fact that the School Board has stated that they are happy
is have this project in their District, she could not find a basis to deny the
project.
Commissioner Barker stated that he understood; the frustrations expressed by
the citizens and also felt that the City has plenty of apartments and doesn't
really need any more; however, the General Plan has designated areas
throughout the City as sites for high density projects. He stated that Rancho
Cucamonga is progressive in that it allows the school districts to decide Thera
and if they have the capacity to accommodate additional students. Furthers
that the City cannot; keep someone from purchasing a piece of property for
rental purposes. He advised that the project itself is well within its zone
and well within legal=boundaries; therefore, could not find a legal reason or
design concern to justify voting against the project. He referred to the
traffic concern expressed with regard the Bear Gulch Place and asked staff to
address this issue
Paul Rougea t, Traffic Engineer, advised that the main concern during st f'f's
review was nor to divert traffic away from Vineyard Avenue. He advised that
Arrow is projected to carry less traffic than Vineyard, therefore the main
project entrance was placed on Arrow and a secondary access on 'Bear Gulch
Place. He additionally stated that the traffic proposed to be generated b
this project was in keeping with the capacity of both of these streets
Vice-Chairman Barker asked for discussion regarding the out parcels and the
options provided by staff :
Planning Commission Minutes October 9, 1985
Commissioner Rempel was concerned with requiring the developer to acquire
additional right-of-way dedication for improvements and stated he would not
like to make that a requirement. e was also concerned with option one since
it required access through single family residential, units without knowing if
the developer will obtain those two parcels in the future.
Nancy Fong,e ssi.stant Planner, advised that the intent of this option is that
if those parcels are redeveloped at some time in the future, the access
problem will have to be solved.
arrye Hansen, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that staff is not advocating that
the existing residents would start taking access off that road, they would
continue to usesame access
Commissioner Rempel stated that what the option actually states is that
eventually there would only be access onto the loop street and out onto Arrow.
Mrs. Manson replied that he understood Commissioner Re rpel#s concern with the
language and it was staffs intuit that if the two parcels are ever
redeveloped the question would code up whether or not they ;are suitable to
face that interior street and that staff would like to leave that option open
if possible
Commissioner Rempel stated that he did not want this developer to be forced to
take traffic through this loop street into this condo project.
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that these conditions are
only with respect to easements :granted for this project e and the decision on
where access will be taken for future development will be based on any
decision made if and when development of the out parcels occurs. Further,
that the Commission mould not be forcing this developer to take that access,
but will provide an option for the future
Commissioner Chi.tiea was concerned that school children walking west from dear
Gulch School along ,grow ;would be forced to wally out in the street under
either option.
Mr. Hanson stated that staff felt that sufficient dedication could be obtained
under option 2 which would allow for the development of a minimal. sidewalk.
He advised that there is a chain link fence out to the curb which might be
dangerous us for children.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that as she was concerned with safety of the
children, she world have to go with option 2
Commissioner Rempel stated that he no problem with option 2, but was ,still
concerned with making access onto the loop street mandatory.
Planning Commission Minutes - October 9, 1985
r. Markman added language stating "pursuant to an agreement approved by the
City Attorney" after Subdivision Map Act under Option 2. He explained
detailed agreement would be necessary if condemnation were 'pursued at the
property owner's expense
Commissioner Re pel asked if it would be possible to add language to option
that if access is necessary it could only be utilized if the development of
the out parcel is compatible with the existing development
r. Markman advised that if that language were added the easement would there
be conditional. He advised that the existing lan au e merely reserves the
right to have that access at no expense to the public in the event that it
turns out as planned; if it turns out that it is planned to be needed, access
would go in under° option P basis.
Mr. Lam pointed out that the Planning Commission roul determine in the future
whether or not the access goes in.
Motion Moved by Chitiea, seconded: by Rempel,, carried, to issue a Negative
Declaration and -adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 13131 and
Design Review -1 . Option 2 requiring the developer to acquire the
additional dedication for ;night-of-way improvements and, to construct street
improvements fronting the out parcels and obtain sufficient street dedications
to construct said improvement. In the event that the developer is unable to
acquire the appropriate street dedication and has requested the ity'
condemnation process for the additional right-of-way, the developer shall pays
for all expense of such condemnation,pursuant to an agreement approved by the
City Attorney per the Subdivision Map Act. Additionally, an access easement
over the interior loop street extending to the out-parcels for future access
to said parcels shall be dedicated upon the final map. Motions carried by the
following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: ONITIR,A, R MPS'L, BARKER
NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: M NI L, STOUT -carried
O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -17 FOR KIDS ONLY.
LTA m - To allow construction of a 9,260 square foot preschool on 1. 18
acres of land in the Low Residential District du/ac) located on the
south side of Baseline, east, of Turner.
Jack Lair, Community Development Director, advised that this project should be
removed from the agenda to allow for rer otific:ation and readvertising. He
explained that the applicant had expanded the size of the project; however,
had not provided staff with the appropriate list of adjacent property owners
to be notified.
Planning Commission Minutes 10 October 9, 1985
The item was removed from the agenda:- to allow for re advertising and
renoti.fioation
8: 1 m. Planning Commission Recessed
8:25 p.m. Planning Commission Reconvened
P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 3 ALTA LOMA
CR RCH OF C RIST - Review and consideration of a time extension an
conditions of approval for ;an existing church located in the Cucamonga
Business Park at 9581 Business Center Drive,, Suite A, E, & C.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Vice-Chairman Parker opened the public heaving.,
Theodore Moe , representing the applicant, advised that the church had been
meeting at this location since 1982 and urged the Commission's approval to
allow then to continue meeting
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel, to adopt the 'Resolution
approving Conditional ;Use Permit 3. Motion carried by the following +vote:
AYES® COMMISSIONERS: CHI" EA, R MPEL, BARKER;
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ASSET; COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT -carried
Q. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE CREDIT FOR TRACT 1 040
. . KING & ASSOCIATES A request for the granting of O open space
credit against park development fees, as provided for under Ordinance 10
C of Section: 16.32.030 of:the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, for the
Me dowo d Village Project (Tract 12040), located on the northeast corner
of Arrow Route and Turner Avenue APN RO - 1-11.
Pick Myer, Park Project Coordinator, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Mayen
advised that the Parks Development ent o i sion recommended approval of a 50%
credit against park development fees, subject to recordation of the CC& s for
the project
Planning Commission Minutes 11 October 9, 1985
Commissioner Chitiea, asked if detailed drawings of the nark plan were
available
Mr. Mayer presented renderings of the park plan
" ice Chairman Barker opened the public hearing.
Dorn King, applicant, have an overview of the request. He advised that he had
worked closely with the staff on the equipment used in the play areas and tot
lots
Commissioner Rempel stated that this project is one of the examples used to
shore ghat is a good open apace and recreational designed area.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Re pel, seconded by Chitiea to approve the request for 50
private open space credit against the park - development fees subject t
recordation of the CC Ra for: the project, as recommended, by the ;Park$
Development Commission. Motion carried by the following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT -carried
R. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT S C
CI 'y OF RANCHO CUCAMO A - An amendment to the Industrial Specific Plaza
text for Subareas 8 and 1 (General Industrial) adding land use
considerations related to performance requirements of the adjoining
Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial category (Subarea 9) and existing
businesses.
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, reviewed the staff report. He
explained that this item was placed on the agenda at the . request of the
Commission as a result of the land use change from Minimum Impact/Heavy
Industrial. to General Industrial for the property located at the southeast
corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue
Vice Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. There were no comments,
therefore the public hearing was; closed.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that this amendment is appropriate and should be
useful .to prospective tenants of the area and hopefully will lighten fears of
heavy industrial users in the area
R
Parrrrih Commission Minutes 1 October 9, 1985
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Industrial
Specific Plan Amendment 85-04. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RE EL, CHITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT carried
OLD BUSINESS
S. MINOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-17 - EQUI - A consistency Determination
between the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies and an exterior remodel to
Equits restaurant, located at 10006 Foothill Boulevard - APN 1077-621-
26. (Continued from September 11 , 1985 meeting. )
Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Vice-Chairman Barker invited public comment.
Tom Davis, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the architectural
redesign. her® Davis advised that some architectural elements used on the
Kantor project had been incorporated into the changes; however, the Kantor
project reflects a Spanish theme which was not desired by this applicant. He
further stated that the applicant has limited funds with which to accomplish
this remodeling project®
There were no further comments.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that the Design Review Committee felt that the
project was moving in the right direction and that minor improvements were
needed; they were not suggesting that the entire project had to be
redesigned. Further, that the consensus seemed to be that with a little more
work, the project might be acceptable.
Mr. Davis advised that the applicant is willing to work with Commission and
staff if additions to this design or modifications are desired; however, due
to a limited budget would not be agreeable to taking out a lot of asphalt and
installing major landscaping.
Commissioner Chitiea asked Mr. Davis if he had received a copy of the Design
Review Committee comments in which it was suggested that some of the
landscaping might be phased over a certain number of years; however, removal
of the driveway would have to be accomplished with the remodeling project.
Planning Commission Minutes -13- October 9, 1985
Commissioner Re pel was concerned with the driveway location and stated that
until the site itself comes up to standards, he .felt it might be a waste of
the applicant's time since just fixing up the front of the building would not
.not be enough to bring the site up to standards®
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she would be 'willing to grant the applicant
are extension to address these comments.
Commissioner Barker stated that he -would have to agree with Commissioner
Pe pel on this issue and that because of site limitiations it might be
impossible to make it consistent with the Foothill Interim Policies at this
time
Motion. Moved by Pe pel, seconded by Barker, to direct staff to deny Minor
Development Review -17. Motion carried by the following voter
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: PE PEE, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: CHI°TIEA
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT -carried
Commissioner ssionerx Chitiea stated that the improvements could have been phased in;
therefore, would have granted the applicant a time extension.
T. ANNUAL REVIEW CE CONDITIONAL USE PER d 1 E one-year review of
the Veterans of Foreign gars meeting hall .thin an existing building with
a lease apace of 5000 square feet on 3.47 acres of land in the Genera
Industrial (Subarea category located at 8751 Industrial Lane - APN 09-
1""
Dino Pu trino, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Chitiea asked how staff had arrived at the -day time line for
compliance of Foothill Eire District requirements.
Mr. Putrkino replied that the Fire District had determined that 90 days would
be a sufficient amount of time.
Vice-Chairman Bankers invited public comment.
Matt Hoag, representing the VFW, advised that the break away door had been
repaired and the smoke alarms were scheduled for installation within the next
few weeks.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she understood that two doors need
adjustment.
Planning Commission Minute -14- October ; , 1985
r. Bong replied that both doors had been repaired.
Jack Lim, Community Development Director, advised that it was not the Eire
District's who dealt with 90 day issue but that it was a courtesy in the :staff
report to allow the applicant time to complete improvements thereby allowing
the use to continue.
Commissioner Barker asked if it were appropriate to place a condition that
would require the CUP to be placed on the:Commission's consent calendar in 9
days»
r. Markman ;advised that staff should be directed to report backs in 90 days on
the status of compliance, and if not in compliance at that time to set
revocation hearing.
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel to grant the applicant 90 days
to complete firer district requirements. Staff directed to prepare status
report in 90 days. Motion carried by the following voter
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL, BARTER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT:": COMMISSIONERS: NIEL, STOUT -carried'
U. ANNUAL RENEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -1 LOYAL ORDER OF MOOSE - A
year review of the Moose Lode meeting hall in an existing 1550 square
foot unit of an industrial complex, in the General Industrial area
(Subarea ) , located at 9375 Archibald Avenue - APN 1 -071 .
I
Dino Putrino, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
i
Commissioner Rem el suggested that staff report backs to the Commission within
30 days on the status of the items not in compliance and seek the Firs
District's input as to whether those items not complied with are serious
enough to warrant+ revocations.
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel to grant ;applicant 30 days t
comply with fire district requirements. Staff directed to, prepare status
report in 30 days, if no effort made to comply, revocations may be considered.
COUNCIL REFERRALS
Planning Commission Minutes -1 - October 9, 1985
V. HUNTERS RIDGE SPECIFIC PLAN - CITY OF FONTANA Planning Commission review
o land use alternatives for the Hunter's Ridge Specific Plan on 580 acres
of land within the City of Fontana, located north of Summit Avenue, east
of San Sevaine Creek, west of the Devore Freeway.
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff~ report
Commissioner Chit ,ea stated that she was concerned with the overall density of
the project, and particularly with transition of density. She stated that
Alternatives 1 and 2 should not even be considered possibly something more
along the lanes of Alternative 3 in terms of circulation and transition o
density. She was also concerned with the, large number of small single family
homes. She suggested that preservation and sensitivity to histarical,
structures should be considered and that fire and wind hazard should also be
addressed, along with the feasibility of requiring fire sprinklers.
Commissioner Hempel stated that he shared these concerns and was also
concerned with access. He advised that the locaton of streets going great
needs to be delineated and was concerned that street connections were not
shown on the map. He was also concerned that this may be the list review the
Planning Commission will be afforded nd was unhappy with not seeing something
in the finer detailed stages.
Mr. Johnston advised that the West Valley Foothills Plan show a majors
east/west corridor north of Summit; however, the idea was that San Sevaine
Creek would be a, logical boundary between the two cities and since a regional
park is planned for that location it was thought that there world not be a
street connection there
Commissioner Parker didntt like the idea of taping all the traffic through
Rancho Cucamonga's streets. He advised that the impact on traffic is goingt
be considerable especially with this increase in density» Further, that the
issues recognized by staff in the report capsulizes the concerns of the
Commission in their review of any rather project with regard to transition of
density, seismic, and, compatibility. He stated that the list given by 'staff
is a starting point along with the criteria used in the Commission's approval
of the projects to the west and adjacent area. He stated that this project
must be compatible and should ref ect the sage kinds of standards, sizes, and
other criteria used by Rancho Cucamonga; to the full extent possible. He
considered all three alternatives unacceptable
Commissioner Chitiea questioned why all three alternatives show open space and
parks in the same location
Ir. Johnston replied that approximately 2/3 of the park land is going to be
Located within utility corridors.
Motion: Toyed by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, that all three alternatives
presented were unacceptable. Staff to prepare comments to the applicant.
Motion carried by the following "rote
Planning Commission Minutes -1 Octobers 9, 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CRIT'IFA, BARKER, REMPEL
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NON
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT -carried
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
W. HIGHLAND AVENUE ALaLS AND LANDSCAPE DESIGN - WILLIAM LYON COMPANY - Oral
Report
Dan Coleman Seniors Planner, reviewed the staff report. He requested that the
Commission direct staff as to whether a test section of the wall should be
constructed or if they felt comfortable enough to allow the applicant to
construct the entire gall.;
Commissioner Rempel stated; that; the proposed design would rake an attractive
wall and would have no problem with constructing the entire wall.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed-.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, to approve the Highland Avenue
walls and Landscape Design as presented. Motion carried by the following
vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RF PRL, CHITIFA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: CNIRLs, STOUT -earried,
X. TERRA VISTA ELEMENTARY- SCHOOL DESIGN - W LFF _ LaANG CHRISTOP ER - Oral;
Report
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. ter. Coleman asked the
Commission to consider the option of continuing this item for review by the
full Commission.
Commissioner Rempel stated that it is not known what the time line is that has
been established by the Schaal District
Vice-Chairman Barker was concerned with the aesthetic appearance of the
structures and that the fact that they would be there for a tremendous amount
of time until the state finds some way of funding school buildings.
Planning Commission Minutes -17- October 9, 1985
Commissioner hiti stated that the design was unattractive ,unimaginative
and unacceptable.
Motion: Loved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to direct staff to prepare
comments to the applicant reflecting the Commission's cone ran with the
proposed design. Motion carried y the following vote:
AYES: IS I N RS: CHITIEA, PARKER
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT -carried
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Commissioner hiti a requested staff to research the implementation on f
requiring fire sprinklersin the foothills area of City. She requested
specific information and also requested that staff take a look at all of the
large housing projects in the City.
Vice-Chairman Barker requested knowledgeable source material which the
Commission could review with regard to this topic.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion:: Moved by ff empel, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to
adjourn.
9:30 P.m. -« Planning Commission Adjourned
Respectfully submitted
Jack Liam, Secretary
Planning o " i ssion Minutes 1 - October 9, 1985
Commissioner C itiea stated that the design was unattractive e ,unimaginative`
and unacceptable.
Motion: Moved by C itiea, seconded by Barker, to direct staff to prepare
comments to the applicant reflecting the Commission's concern with the
proposed design. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: CC It R a CHITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: R Mp L
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCI , STOUT -carried"
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Commissioner C itiea requested staff to research the implementation of
requiring Fire sprinklers in the foothills ,area of City. She requested
specific information and also requested that staff take a look at ;all of the
large housing projects in the City.
Vice-Chairman Barker requested knowledgeable source material which the
Commission could review with regard to this topic.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to
adjourn.
9:30 p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned
step ctfully a r itted,
Jack Lam, Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes 1 October 9, 1985
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMt NGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
September 11 1985
Chairman Dennis Stunt called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7: C p.m. The meeting was held at
Lions Park ; Community Center, 9161 Ease :Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitie , Herman Rempel
(Arrived at 7 1C p.m. ), Dennis Stout
ABSENT; Larry Meiel
STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner;
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; Nancy Fong, Assistant
Planner; Earrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Otto
routil, Senior Planner; Jack Lam, Community Development
Director James Markman, City Attorney; Janice Reynolds,
Secretary; Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 8218 - GOLDEN_WEST_.EQUITY PRG PERTIES INC.
Lt n ,ted on the north side of 7th Street,, east side of Hellman Avenue APN
09-171- 9 through 56.
B. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE 'TRACT 100 ® NICOSIA - A residential,
To division of 82 acres into 131 single family bits in the Very Lew
Residential. District :1 d /ae , located at the northeast corner of
Archibald Avenue and Carrari Street .PN P l-071-14, 37, 45.
Motion Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea to adopt the consent;
calendar. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT : COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, HEMPE;L
PUBLIC HEARING
(Commissioner Rempel arrived: 7; 1 C P.m.)
Chairman Stoat announced that the following items were related and would b
heard concurrently by the Commission.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5 CP - ISHII - The
'd_evelopmant of a one-story hurch of 4,7 -square feet and an associated
small storage building; of 2'1 quare feet, on 3.88 acres of land in the
Very Low Residential District located on the northwest corner of Haven and
Hillside - APN 201 101 0 7 (Continued from August 28, 1985 meeting.
Related 'file: PM9064)
D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 906.4 - CHURCH OF THE LA 'T R DA
SAINTS A division of 4.24 acres of land into 3 parcels in the Very Lowe
Residential. District t (leas than 2 du/ao) located on the northwest corner
of:Maven and Hillside A N 01 101 0 7. (Continued from August 28, 1985
meeting. Related ,file: CUP 85-0 )
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Shut opened = .he public hearing.
Ron Ishii, representing the applicant, stated concurrence with the Resolution
and recommended conditions of approval.
John Torrent, 10475 Vivi_enda, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that this design was an
improvement over the original submittal: but was still concerned with the
overall height of the building.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Chi ie a stated that the redesign was a tremendous improvement
over the original design and that the roof line; had been broken up.
Commissioner Barker stated that he appreciated the changes made by the
applicant and that the redesign was more appropriate. He stated that he
empathise ed with the'property owner to the north, but the roof height as now
proposed would be no higher than what would be allowed ed with construction of a
2-story house. He advised that the applicant had mitigated all the concerns
and that he could think of nothing else to require the applicant to do.
�. s
September 1 1
Planning Co ss can Minutes p
Commissioner Rempel stated that the applicant had prat in a lot; of work on this
project in an attempt to address the concerns of the Commission and adjacent
property owners. He stated that he too sympathized with the Mr. Tarr°edt in
the loss of his view, but the applicant had made every attempt to mitigate
that issue
Chairman Stout agreed that the redesign was are improvement over the original
submittal and that the applicant had come up with an amiable solution.. He was
concerned with the proposed fencing for the equestrian trail, and stated that
it should be consistent with the trails already constructed along Maven and
Hillside.
Motion: Moved by Barber, seconded by Rempel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment andConditional
Use Permit -0 , with the added condition that the equestrian trail fencing
be consistent with th the existing fencing along Maven and Hillside. Motion
carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, dEMRRL,, CHITIEA, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: O I ION R a MCNIEL -carried
Motion: Moved by Chi.tiea, seconded by Rempel, to .issue a Negative Declaration
and adapt, the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and Parcel Map
9064. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, RRMPEL, BARKER, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NE
ABSENT:: COMMISSIONERS: MC EL -carried
E. TENTATIVE TRACT 12642 - A residential subdivision of 470 lots on
11 >5 ages of land, which is part of Caryn Planned Community, Located
between the extension of Banyan Avenue and Highland Avenue on the ;north
and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on
the east and west - A R 141 d, 1 -»1 , 1 The Commission will
review proposed modifications to the previously approved single family
project, including dwelling unit sizes, and elevations. (Continued from
August 28, 1985 meeting.)
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minuted - - September 11 , 1985
Frank Scardina, representing Kaufman and Broad, addressed the issues raised by
,the Planning Commission at their August 28th meeting. Regarding the roofing
material, Mr. Scardina advised that the applicant would be agreeable to the
condition requiring the roofs and was also willing to limit the number of
single family homes proposed to be constructed in the 830 to 900 square foot
series.
Chairman Stout questioned the use of plus or minus with regard to the number
of units to be constructed at the larger square footage.
Mr. Scardina replied that no less than 45 and 32 would be constructed in the
1477 and 1690 square foot series, respectively.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner , Rempel stated that he had no problem with, the distribution as
presented.
Commissioner Barker stated that he was still not overjoyed with this change
and he did not believe that any homes should be constructed at the 834 square
foot size.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed and stated that she did not think that homes under
900 square feet should be built in the City. She felt that under the
circumstances this would be acceptable given that the smaller units were
proposed at 6.8% and the larger units increased to 20.4%.
Chairman Stout suggested that the reference to plus or minus be removed and
replaced with no less than" for the 1477 and 1690 square foot units.
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel, to approve the proposed
modification for Tract 12642, with conditions that 'tile roofing material is
used, that the 1477 and 1690 square foot units to be constructed at no less
than 45 and 32, respectively, and that the 830 and 900 square foot units not
exceed 16 and 31 units, respectively. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL, BARKER, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL -carried
Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- September 11 , 1985
F. AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT 1 - KAUFMAN & BROAD - A request to amend'
the conditions of approval for "Tentative Tract 12642 by modifying the
landscaping standards for shape areas for a residential subdivision of 470`
lots on 115 acres of land;, which is part of a larger master planned
community, located between the extension of Banyan Avenue and Highland
Avenue on the north and south, and between the extension ofRochester and
Milliken Avenues can the east and goat APB 5-1 1-0 , 1 1 , 1
G. AMENDMENT TO TENTATIVE TRACT 1 MARL BOROUGH DEVELOPMENT A request
to amend the conditions of approver for Tentative Tract 12643 byp modifying
the landscaping standards for slope areas for a residential subdivision of
463 single family lots on 104 acres of land in the Caryn Planned Community
(Phase II) , located on the north side of Highland and Avenue, south side of
Banyan Avenue, west side of Rochester Avenue, east of Milliken Avenue -
API 5 1r41 , 1 16, 18, 22, 24, 26, 27, and 5-151 , 7, 11 13.
Bruce Cook, Associate 'Planner, reviewed the staff report...
Chairman Stout asked if landscape standards were a pant of the Development
Agreement for this project.
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, replied that by reference conditions of the mays
were made a part of the Development Agreement.
Chairman Stout asked if the Agreement would have to be modified if this
amendment was approved.
Mr. Krsoutil replied that the Planning Commission can modify the landscaping
standards; however, the City Council would have to amend the actual. Agreement.`
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Paul Byrnes, Marlborough Development, stated that this issue was being
reviewed by the Commission as a quality issue and would ;:not affect the ±terms
of the Development Agreement.
Florian Martinez, landscape architect, stated that the applicant wished to
discuss; the feasibility of tree planting at one per 25 square feet versus one
per 150 square feet. He stated that the desired outcome would be to open up
the views which might be blocked when the trees mature if planted at the
lesser ratio® He stated that many tires trees are planted too den sly and are
removed by the homeowner. He suggested that the trees aright be made available
to property :owners to place in another location on the site. He advised that
the planting would be a mixture of evergreen and deciduous trees.
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the proposed amendment.
Joe Dilorio, property* owner, stated that the condition was that the backyard
slopes would follow city ordinance; therefore, these questions are really
directed towards the ordinance. He suggested a review of the ordinance to see
Planning Commission Minutes 5- September 11', 1985
if changes are necessary. He added that, it was important to point out that
applicant is not trying to save money* since trees would be grade available to
property owners for use in other areas on their property.
Mrs. Byrnes agreed that this issue aright be an ordinance issue In the long run;
however, in order to record tracts the ' timing ,involved in waiting for an
ordinance change might be awkward. Further, if the Commission looked
favorably on the proposed alternatives, this condition aright be approved and
tree ordinance review could follows or possibly allow the tract; to proceed with
bonding for landscaping. He pointed out that the condition quotes to
ordinance, therefore it would have to be changed separately.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated that he could not "picture what was being proposed in
terms of planting ratios and was not prepared to make a decision without more
information.tion fie agreed that if the standards established aren't feasible, the
ordinance should be changed. With respect to this project, he stated that if
the amendment proposed changing a few trees around, it would seem rather minor
as to how accomplish this
Commissioner Chitiea concurred and stated that the standards should ;be adhered
to with the provision for some flexibility until the ordinance is reviewed to
see if changes are necessary.
James Markman, City attorney, stated that the development agreement requires
that changes to the conditions are accomplished through , a development
rent
agreement amendment, which is processed lake a zone change with a 0-1 0 day
time line attached to it. Further, that all parties should be in agreement to
the amendment. He advised that there is plenty of time to amend this
condition if questions are still unresolved in that the changes could be
processed while this project develops since the landscaping is one of the last
things 'that has to be accomplished. Further, that the amendment would; be a
public hearing to amend the development agreement which may also may lead to
the conclusion that the Development Code should be amended since this
agreement parallels the Code$ He additionally advised that all parties to the
development agreement must be it agreement that an amendment is warranted.
Chairman Stoat asked if the changes could be grade to the development agreement
which are in violation of the Development Code, without actually amending the
Code
r« Markman replied that this could be done since the development agreement is
contract zoning and as to this particular property it is the Development Code.
Carr Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that the Resolutions provided to the
Commission did not contain conditions which would normally be required; of a
tract map in that does not require the approval of landscape and irrigation
plans prior' to issuance of building permits. if timing is critical to the
developer, he advised that the Commission might considering directing staff to
Planning Commission on Minutes September 11, 1985
work out a solution on the landscaping and allow permits to be issued and;
construction to commence with the understanding that the, technical details of
how many trees will: be °worked out and brought back to Commission; with
renderings and photographs to show how it would actually look.
Mr. Markman advised that if the amendment is ;not processed by the time the
development gets` to the landscaping stages, the terms of the Development
Agreement will control and whatever is then in the Agreement will have to be
done
Commissioner Barker stated further information was necessary,
Commissioner Rempel referred to the planting along Carnelian and stated that
if the Ordinance requires this type of planting, he would agree that it does
need to be looked' at because that area is over planted.
Chairman Stout stated that there might be some flexibility in the types of
trees planted and with respect to the number of trees necessary. He advised
that the rigid standard was developed to insure quality; if that is not being
accomplished he stated there may be other planting methods which would ,still
insure quality.
r&. Byrnes stated that within a week the landscape architect Could provide
photographs ;and examples of the proposal.
Mr. Markman advised that amendments to the Development ,Agreement cannot be
made unless approved by all parties to the agreement. He advised than
whatever comes before Commissionsshoutd have concerted group behind it.
Mr. Byrnes advised that he may have to start off as conditioned in the
y
Development Agreement as it now stands and proceed with the change during
future phases.
[fir. Markman stated that when the package is agreed upon, it will require a l -
day notification of public bearing before the Planning Commission can consider
suggesting an ordinance which amends :the Development Agreement. Further, that
a 'simil:arly noticed hearing will have to follow before the City Council for an
Ordinance which amends the Development Agreement and, that requires two
meetings and a 0-day waiting period, assuming no referendum. He advised that
the applicant would realistically have a 90 1 O day time line.
The consensus of the Commission was to ,take no action at this time. The
applicant is to provide additional information for the Commission's review and;
staff was directed to provide the Commission with a status report in two
weeks.
. 0 p.m. Planning Commission Recessed
d: 9 p.m. Planing Commission Reconvened
Planning Commission Minutes -7- September 11, 1985
H. ENVIRONMENTAL, ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL NALa USE PERMIT d 1 IAA
proposal to locate a caretaker's trailer on a Christmas tree farm looted
on 12.8 acres on the south side of Base Line east of Rochester in
utility corridor AP227-161-33.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Robert Shaw, 928 Albright, .Upland, California, stated that the Edison Company
had advised him that the conditions being required by the City were
unreasonable since his lease could be revoked at any time. Mr. Shaw stated
that he and his wife operate the Christmas tree farm and; it is only open for
business from November to December.. He objected to the landscaping and
peaking lot requirements.
Chairman Stout asked what ,requirements were being objected to by the Edison
Company.
Mr. Shaw replied that the Edison Company's objections were with regards to the
modular units and landscaping, and that they were also concerned with flood
control.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that the conditions for this applicant
are the same as those which have been approved for other applicants within the
Utility Corridors. Further, that staff had been in contact with the Edison
Company and had not been informed of any objections they had with reed to
conditions for this appl.icati.on
Chairman Stout stated that paved parking is not required of this project as in
other areas of City and that all other projects in the City are being rewired
to install landscaping. He suggested that the item be continued to allow the
applicant to submit a site plan for the Commission's review and for staff to
contact Edison Company.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, to continue the public hearing
for Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit, 85-13 to the October
9 1985 Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, REMPEL, STOUT
NOES; COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCI -carried
Planning Commission Minutes -6- September 11, 198
i
I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE ' TRACT 11928 ALVA'TI A
residential sub-division and Design Review for townhouse units on 5.85
acres of land in the Medium Residential District (8-1 du/a located on
the north side of Highland Avenue, 800 feet east of Archibald Avenue
APN 201-252-32.
Nancy Fong, assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, suggested that the Commission consider d;
condition that the elm trees be preserved or relocated on the site but that
the Eucalptus be replaced with a` more appropriate variety.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Dominic Salvatti, applicant, concurred with the Resolution and recommended
conditions of approval.Chairman Stout asked if the Department of Transportation, Flood Control and
Airports had provided the ;applicant with direction as to what type of wail
design would be acceptable adjacent to the;flood control channel.
r§. Salvatti replied that decorative block wrought iron on the top had been
suggested. He advised that he would be willing to work with the DPA and staff'
to resolve the issue.
Chairman Stout suggested a condition' to bring the wall solution back before
the Design Review Committee.
Joel Phares, Rancho Cucamonga resident, stated that ;he was not opposed to the
project but was concerned with the security gate, and inadequate guest parkin
which Haight result it parking along Highland ;Avenue. He suggested that no
parking be posted' on. Highland Avenue.'
"There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout asked for discussion regarding the security gate,
s. Fong replied that the security gate was proposed by the; residents at
neighborhood meeting. Staff advised that the condition should reflect that if
a security ,gate is installed, it will have to be reviewed and approved by the
City Planners prior to issuance of building permits.
Chairman Stout stated that he felt the long expanse of will along the channel
was aesthetically offensive and suggested a condition that a solution to the
wall be worked out by staff, the Flood Control District and the applicant. He
further advised that the solution should be reviewed by the Design Levier
Committee prior to issuance' of building permits.
Planning Commission Minutes - September 11 , 1985
Commissioner Rempel addressed the ,guest parking and stated that this project
provides more than the required number of guest parking spaces which should
address the concern of parking along Highland.
James Markman, City Attorney advised that preclusion of parking along the
street is net something that the Commission can condition, but is controlled
by the City: Council and Vehicle Code. He advised that the Commission would
address this issue by assuring that adequate on-site -guest panting is provided
for s project.
Chairman Stout asked if s condition had been proposed regarding the alternates
for the retaining wall.
Mr. Markman stated that the conditions did not reflect this and recommended
wording that required the applicant to provide a common gall with the
adjoining westerly property owner.
Motion Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel, to issue an Negative
Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Environmental Assessment and
Tentative Tract 11928, with the following amendments: the Elm treed are to be
relocated and the Pudslptus trees are to be replaced; the wall design is
required to be submitted to the Design Review Committee prior to issuance of
building permits and, the applicant is to work with the adjacent property
owner on s', common wall on the west property line. Motion carried by the
following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, RP PgL, BARKER STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL -carried
Sr. Markman advised that if traffic or parking along Highland become s problem
for the residents in the area, they should brim it to the attention of the
City's Traffic Department. and City Council.
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT d P OYT LUMBER
CCU Y - A request to construct an 8,000 square foot warehouse building
n
addition to an existing hone improvement center and the development of
master plan , on 2 acres of land in the Office Professional District,
located at 7110 Archibald, northwest est corner of Archibald and Lomita Court
1 -33.
Nancy Fong, ;Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Planning Commission Minutes _10- September 11 , 1985
Rick Nelson, representing the applicant, concurred with the Resolution and
recommended Conditions of Approval.
Chairman Stout questioned the need for the roll-up door :located on the;south j
elevation
. Nelson advised that this area would be used as access for deliveries.
Chairman Stout was concerned that the roll-up doors would be difficult to
hide®
Mr. Nelson stated that: trees were going to be placated on the south side of the
doors, Which he felt would buffer the; view from Lomita Court.
Chairman Stout asked if there would e a parking lot located adjacent, to
Lomita Court.
Mrs. nelson replied that the parking lot was not being proposed at this time,
it was merely placed on the master playa.
"There were no furthers comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel commended the applicant in his efforts to improve the
appearance of the building, He felt that the expansion of the business was
appropriate to serve the needs of the City'.
Commissioner Ramer was concerned with "using landscaping to try to hide:
things; he pointed out that this has been tried in the industrial area and
doesn't seem to do the ,fob. He granted more assurance that it was not going to
e blantantlir visible.
Commissioner Chi,ti.ea stated that additional landscaping had been discussed
along the south and north;'elevations with more trees along the front of the
building.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the final landscape plans have to go back
before staff for review, at which : time; this concern 'could be addressed.
Further*, that a motorist driving up Archibald would really have to look to see
the roll-up doors on the south side.
Chairman Stout felt there needed to be a little more work done on the
elevations to further enhance the building. e suggested that the roll-up
doors located on the south elevation are unnecessary and suggested that some
type of side loading dock could be located in the back. Further, that the
elevations should be brought back to the Designs Review Committee.
Commissioner Rempel stated that it would be difficult to eliminate the doors
on the south side of the building because they are necessary to; facilitate
people trying to get materials out of the building,
Planning Commission Minutes _11 ,September 11, 1985
Commissioner Barker agreed that the building needed to be;upgraded further are :
it should be reviewed by the heirs Review Committee. He was also concerned
with the landscaping proposed and suggested that it also be reviewed by the
Design Review Committee.
Commissioner hi iea agreed that there might be a better solution to mitigate
the concerns regarding the roll-up doors and landscaping; therefore, agreed
that the project ;needed further refinement.
Chairman Stout advised that the consensus seemed to be that the building needs
to be further up-graded and the roll-up doors on the south elevation needs
looked at along with the landscaping. He asked if the applicant would be
willing to continue the public hearing to allow further work on the elevations
and review by the Design Review Committe.
Mrs. Nelson replied that he would like to have a continuance in carder to
address these concerns.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barger, to continue the public hearing
for Conditional Use Permit 85-20 to the October 9, 1985 Planning Commission
meeting to allo,w the applicant to further refine the building elevations are
address the issue of the roll, up doors s n the . south elevation and the
landscaping concern. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, HEMPEL, C tI"TI A
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Its -carried
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5m1 U L R The
development opment of three office e uil di ngs totaling n , square feet, and
four industrial buildings totaling 159,704 square feet within an existing
industrial site that has an existing 148,000 square foot manufacturing
building on 18.42 acres of land in the General Industrial. District
(Subarea 3) located at the, northwest corner of 9th Street and Archibald
Avenue APN 9- 1 16, 17, 5.
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Ms Fong suggested
that Planning Division condition 7 be amended to delete "removed" and replace
with "screened" in reference to storage tanks
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. ,
Steve Muller, applicant, concurredpurred wi
th the Resolution an
d recoended.
conditions of approval.
Planning Commission Minutes 1 - September 11, 1985
Buster Eilpi., adjacent property owner, stated that he dial not -oppose the
project but ;was concerned with the drainage problem which, currrently exists on
9th Street and Archibald. He stated that his property is; flooded during heavy
rainfall.
There were no further oomments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
E rrye Hanson, Seniors Civil. Engineer, stated that he was not aware of the
flooding problem on 9th Street. He suggested that this project could be
conditioned to complete a hydrology study prior to the issuance of building
permits
Commissioner Rempel suggested Engineering condition 6 could' be amended to
state that a final hydrology study is to be submitted for review and approval
by the City Engineer.
James Markman, City Attorney, recommended that the location of 9th Street and
Archibald be included in the condition and that it should be based on review
and approval by the City Engineer.
Motion:: Moved by Rem el, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving; Conditional Use Permit 5 -1 , with an
amendment to Planning Division condition 7 that "removed" be replaced with
"screened" with reference to storage tares and Engineering Condition 6 to
require submittal; of a hydrology study on 9th Street and Archibald to the City
Engineer prior to issuance of building permits. Motion carried by the
following ng vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA, BARKER, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ks1CN EL -carried
9:45 p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed
10:05 p.m. ® Planning Commission Reconvened
Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Commission:
L a ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PA 'T
C PANy - A division of 44 acres into 5 parcels in the Industrial- Park
5istriot (Subarea 6) and Hagen Avenue Overlay District, located at the
northeast corner of Haven Avenue and rkth Street PN to-08 1-1 , 2, 3, and
16, (Related File: TAR 56- 1
Planning Commission Minutes 1 - September 11 , 1985
M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW -31 -- RRI R RI R
'the development of a master plan for a 44' acres office/business park and
the first phase consisting of 3 office buildings totaling 88,900 square
feet on 6.5 acres of land in the industrial Park Distract (Subarea o) and
Haven Avenue Overlay District, located at the: northeast corder of 4th
Street and Haven Avenue APN 210-081-1, 2,; 3, 16« (Related File: Parcel
Map 4 )
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the Development Review staff report.
Barr ye Hanson reviewed the Parcel Map staff report. Mr. Hanson raised
concerns with the texturized pavement proposed for the project entrance, and
the median break at 4th and Utica
Chairman Stout opened ;the public hearing.
Tim Beadle, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project. Mr.
Beedle highlighted comments made in a letter distributed to the Commission.
e requested that the final details of the number of trees designated for
preservation and relocation be defined - with the first phase development
plan. Regarding the fencing around the trees, he suggested the specifies for
that condition be determined with the tree location' plan. Mr. Reedl
addressed the concern regarding the traffic access and median design along 4th
Street He requested that no condition be imposed at this time and that the
Cities of Ontario and Rancho Cucamonga meet with the property owners of the
adjacent laird to determine the most effective street cross- section design.
Regarding the total _cash ; contribution for the landscape median on 'Haven
Avenue, he 'requested; that a lien agreement be used as a substitution. Mr.
eedle:presented a brochure and sample of the pavement blocks proposed for the
project entranced and advised that it is a durable product which has been used
extensively by other developments
Chairman Stout asked, if there were a ways that "Rancho Cucamonga" could be
incorporated in the monument sign
r. leedle replied that the applicant would be willing to look at this
possibility.
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the project and commended
the applicant for their work in the community.
Bruce Strickland, representing 'vanguard Development, supported the project;
however, was concerned with the north and south street proposed between Utica
and Haven. He asked for -a modification to eliminate the street connecting
from Trademark in the center of the project to the north or with a provision
that it is not necessarily mandatory or required that this street connect
through the property to the north
Planning Commission Minutes 14- September 11 , 1985
`l
Jim Frost, Etiwanda resident, stated that he agreed with engineering staff's
input regarding the pavement crossings, but they should be put in as proposed
by the developer;anyway.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker stated that he couldn't agree with most of staff'
concerns relative to the pavement crossing; the only concern he would have
would be placing a cross wally in the griddle of an expanse of tr°eet an
suggested that some type ; of alternative for warning devices or placement
should be explored
Commissioner Rernpel agreed and stated crossing problems are going to occur,
but felt that the texturized pavement itself would serve as a signal to
motorist that pedestrians would be crossing at that location.
Commissioner Chi.tiea stated that the pavement was aesthetically pleasing and
an overall upgrade to ;any project.
Chairman Stout stated that the,; te turi. ed pavement is a; good example of the
quality of this development and is very attractive..
Jim Markman, City attorney, asked whether a traffic engineer had opined to the
applicant that this would be a reasonably safe material to use as a pedestrian
paving and the applicant had then proceeded on than basis, and the applicant
would represent that to the Commission.
Mr. Boodle replied that a structural detail had not been done by; a traffic
engineer, but the history had been reviewed which represented "a qualification
of what this particular project does. He advised that at a point prior to
construction a structural engineer would provide detailed designs that would
be referred to City engineering staff for review.
r°. Markman are advised that he would like to have the applicant agree to provide
a traffic enginnering opinion to the effect that this is a reasonable use of
this material.
Mr. leedle replied that he would not have a problem with such a condition;
however, would prefer that traffic engineer be substituted with a structural
engineer or civil engineer who designs road sections.
Mr. Markman clarified that the engineer could be anyone who is willing to take
on the safety factors that were listed by the engineering neeri n staff relative to
pedestrian safety.
Commissioner Rerpel stated that when oil is on pavement it will create
skidding when wet, whereas experience with texturized pavement has shown that
the oil will be absorbed. Further, that a painted stripe on pavement will
also cause skidding. He felt the safety factors will be enhanced by the use
of this product.
Planning Commission Minutes September 11 , 1985
Sri. Markman stated he was not necessary 'as concerned with autos as he was
concerned about the potential slipping of pedestrians.
Chairman Stout asked for dicussion on the median and stated that; he didn't
thinly a decision should be made;at this time on the median on 4th Street, but.
felt it should be decided if and when the median becomes for of s reality.
This was the consensus of the Commission.
Chairman Stout asked for discussion of the north/south ;street between Utica
and Haven. He stated that the street had always been shown conceptually and
could see no reason to delete it at this time. Further, that at some point in
time a waster plan should be developed b ; the landowners in that area so that
the Commission could make a decision on ghat happens to that street farther
north, based on some type of intelligent information.
Commissioner Barker stated that the street is not .going to be an immediate
impact on this project; if it becomes- and issue it could be addressed
separately.
It was the consensus of the Commission to retain the north south street
connection.
Mr. Beedle asked for discussion regarding the lien agreement in lieu of the
cash deposit and the chainlink fences' proposed for around trees.
Dan Coleman, Sensor Planner, concurred with the applicant regarding the tree
fanning and advised that this could be handled as a part of the relocations
plan which would address the dare and maintenance of trees while they are
waiting to be transplanted.
Commissioner Barker stated that the fences are intended to remind people not
to knock deem over; therefore, the concern was with regard to saving the
trees
Chairman Stout stated that an agreeable solution could be worked out with
staff'
Chairman Stout asked for discussion of the Herz agreement
Barr ye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that the preferrence is d cash
deposit; however, a lien agreement is acceptable. He advised that the normal
case would be for the applicant to construct the median, then as property is
developed across the street the applicant would be reimbursed.
Commissioner Rem el supported the proposal for a .Herr agreement and stated
'
that the feet that t agreement cars be called in gives adequate
protection
Further, that the median really (reeds to be constructed at one time;
therefore, its necessary to know what the final; design will be.
Planning Commission Minutes -1 Septembers 11 , 1985
I
Mrs. Marksman suggest that condition on 7 and Ci f of the Resolution be modified to
read that the applicant will submit an engineering opinon to the satisfaction
of the City Attorney as to the-safety of use of to turi ed pavement prior to
its usage as a pedestrian walkway.
Albert Erur ,swei, er, representing the applicant was concerned with this
requirement if the intent was to have an engineer assume all responsibility
for any future accidents that could occur.
fir$ Markman stated that the City engineering staff has specified ghat they
perceive are safety problems with this pavements He advised that the City is
entitled to design immunity when it accepts any material ;pertaining to public
streets so long as the design is accepted based on a reasonable engineering,
opinion; however, the only opinion available is one in which City engineering
staff states that the material is unsafe.
Motion: Moved by Re pel, seconded by Barker, to issue a;Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 9498,. with the City Attorneys
amending language to condition 7 and C-1 pertaining to the required
engineering report, a lien agreement permitted in liens of a cash deposit for
the median on Raven; the median in 4th Street and Utica removed from the
conditions. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REM EL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL -carried
Motion: Loved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review - 1, with amendments
to the Resolution reflecting the language proposed by the City Attorney
relative to the engineering study and modification consistent with :the median;
requirements.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CRITIEA,, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT
T
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT Ck . ISICNERS® SCNEL -carried
N . MINOR R DEVELOPMENT REVIEW -17 - E UI A consistency determination between
the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies and, an e teribr remodel to Equir
restaurant, located at 1000 Foothill Boulevard - APN 10 1 .
Darr Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff" report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Planning Commission on Minutes _1 - September 11, 1985
Bob Cgri, applicant, addressed the Commission advising that he wished to
upgrade and improve the exterior of his business.
Chairman Stout advised that the City was currently in the process of studying
Foothill Boulevard in an effort to improve the area. Further, that the staff
had been directed to submit projects to the Planning Commission for
determination as to whether they are consistent with the Interim Policies for
Foothill Boulevard. He pointed out that the Commission requires this review
in an effort to sage the applicant from investing a lot of money into a
project that may not be consistent with the Interim Policies.
t architect, stated that he would refer t continue
�rDavis, project p
discussion of this project to the Commission's next meeting to allow for the
presentation of appropriate renderings.
Chairman Stout suggested that if more time is necessary, the applicant might
compare this proposal with the Interim Policies to see if modifications can be
made or explain why they cannot be made.
Commissioner Rev el suggested that the access should be reviewed by the
Engineering staf .
Commissioner Chitiea stated that enough information was not available, and
would agree that it was necessary in carder to crake a decision
Motion:: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chi.tiea, unanimously carried, to
continue discussion of Minor Development Review; -17, Equi, to the October 9,
1985 Planning Commission meeting.
OLD BUSINESS
0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 1 - ASSURED 1INI-
R C - Construction of a mini-storage development,-with office totaling
45,000 square feet on '1.17 ,acres of land in the Industrial Rack (Subarea
District ;Located on the north side of 4th Street and east of Turner
n
Avenue - APN 210-371-03.
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner*, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Charles Weary, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the revisions to
the project.
Allan Tibbetts, adjacent property owner, opposed the project and was concerned
with height ,and length of the proposed buildings.. He also opposed the project
based on its incompatibility with the adjacent Haven Avenue Overlay District.
Planning Commission Minutes _18- September 11 , 1985
'I
There were no further comments.
Commissioner Barker stated his major concern with this project has arrays; been
the height of the gall and the length of the building. Further, that even
though attempts have been made to mitigate those concerns;, they did not quite
work
Commissioner Remp l stated that a mini-storage in this location is not the
appropriate use.
Commissioner Chi.tiea reiterated her previous statement that she did not think
this was appropriate unless she could absolutely be convinced that a= mini,
storage' could be so beautifully designed that it would' work in that
location. She further stated that she realized that more work has been put
into the design of the project, but the height and length of the building
concerns had not adequately been;mitigated.
Jim Markman,an,' City Attorney,' advised that the Resolution provided by staff" was
one of approval, and suggested that the Resolution could be amended to change
"approving" to "denying", Section 1 amended to read that the following cannot'
be met, Strike conditions 1 and 4, and removal of the conditions relative to
the project
motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel., to deny Development Review 85-
1 >. Motion carried by the following gate:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, REMPEL, CHITI 'A, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MC IRh
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
P. 'TREE ORDINANCE REVISIONS
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report® He advised that the
purpose tonight would be an introduction of the Ordinance to allow Planning
Commission input prior to the public hearing which would he scheduled in
October.
Commissioner Barker suggested that he would like to have the ;testimony which
was made by Alden Kelly at a recent City Council available for the
Commission's information during review of this ordinance. Further, that
replacement should be a specific directive agreed upon for consistency
purposes.
Planning Commission Minutes _1 September 11, 1985
Via Cherbak, Rancho Cucamonga resident, stated support of; the tree replacement
policy.
Jim Frost, Rancho Cucamonga resident, supported the ordinance and ;asked that
if a decision regarding the tree removal or replacement is altered
approval, it should be communicated back to the community. Further, that
reference should be made that historic landmark alterations would have to b
referred to the. City Council for approval. He suggested that the reference to
the Fife Department of Rancho Cucamonga should be changed.
Chairman Stout suggested that the 00 violation penalty be increased t
1 00. Further, that the ordinance be referred to the Historic Preservation
and Citizens Advisory Commissions for their input prior to the public hearing.
Q. DESIGN REVIEW DUAL COMMITTEES
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Rempel, carried, to appoint the
following Commissioners to the dual Design Review Committees.
First Rotation (Present to January 1, 1986)
CommissionersStout and Chitiea ® Commercial/Office Professional l Design Review
Committee.
Commissioners Rempel and Barker - Residential Design Review Committee
Commissioner McNiel is to serve as the alternate for both committees.
Second Rotation (January 1, 19 June 30, 19 )
Commissioners hiti.ea and Rempel - Commercial/Office Professional Design
Review Committee.
Commissioners cNi.el and arkrer - Residential Review o itte .
Chairman Stout will serve as alternate for both Committees.
Motion carried by the following stagy
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, R M FLd, CHITIEA, STOUT
HORS: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL -carried
I,
Planning Commission Minutes - September 11 , 1985
-1
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to adjourn.
12:20 a.m. - Planning Commission adjourned.
eape fully ub t d,
, rota
Planning is in Minutes September 11 , 1985
i
i
CITY DE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
September 25, IDS
Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at D p.m. The meeting was held at
Lions Pare Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea Larry McNiel,
Herman Rompel (arrived :10 p.m.), Dennis `
Stout
ABSENT: NONE
i
STAFF PRESENT: Andy Arc ynsky, Assistant City Attorney; Dan Coleman,
Senior Planner; Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Nancy Fong,
Assistant Planner; Barre Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer;
Barbara Krall, Assistant Civil Engineer; Otto kroutil ,
Senior Planner Jack Lair, Community Development Director;
Dino Purino, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds,
Secretary; Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer, Joe Sto a,
Associate Civil Engineer; Lisa Wininger, Assistant Planner
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that a status report on the
slope planting for the Caryn project would he added to this agenda.
r. Lam also requested that the Commission select an alternative date for the
October workshop, due to a conflict with some of the Commissioner's
schedules. October 1 , 198 was selected as the alternative date, at C:DD
p.m., Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center. He advised that the topic For
this workshop would he announced at; the Planning Commission's October> gth
meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairman Stout requested an amendment to page 10 of the duly 10, 198 Planning
Commission meeting to reflect that the school districts prefer to have
screening which does not lend itself to grafitti
Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Stout, carried, to approve the July 10,
1985 Planning Commission Minutes as amended. Commissioners Darker and Chitiea
abstained from voting because they were not in attendance at that meeting.
Commissioner Chitiea requested the following additions to the August 14, 1985
Minutes:' page 7, 7th paragraph to include the statement "Commissioner Chitiea
considered the feasibility of substituting a landscape barrier in lieu of a
block wall ; and to page 14, 3rd ' paragraph, to include the statement
"Commissioner Chitiea asked Mr. Carnella of Central School District if an
architectural: firm had been selected and whether the design would be similar
to any other school in the district".
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel , carried, to approve the August
14, 1985 Planning Commission Minutes as amended.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW' 4- - FORE: - Review of outdoor indoor employee
crncheon area
R. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT ;11997 - LAND - A custom lot
subdivision of 9 lots on 9.75 acres of land in the Very Low Residential
District located on the southeast corner of Hillside Road and Beryl Street
m AE1061-621-01.
C. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 11 - EdL - A proposed custom lot
su ivsion o 4 acres o an in t e Loy Residential District
du/ c into ten 10 lots located on the north side of Finch Avenue, crest
of Haven Avenue and south of Highland Avenue - APN 202-191-15.
Chairman Stout requested the removal of item "NB" for discussion.
Motions Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Barker, to adopt items A and C of the
Consent'Calendar. Motion carried by the following votes
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: C ITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT„ COMMISSIONERS: RE PEL -carried
i
Planning Commission Minutes - - September 25, 1985
1
5. Time Extension for Tentative Tract 11997 - Lando
Chairman Stout stated he voted against this project in the beginning because
the lots fronting on Beryl create an unsafe situation; therefore, would not be
in favor of an extensions
Commissioner Barker agreed and further stated that across the street is a park
which added to his concern with the design of this project.
Commissioner McNiel agreed that there_ is a traffic problem, but was concerned
that a tremendous amount of wall is being constructed along Beryl and was, more
opposed to walling-in the street than having the lots front on Beryl.
Commissioner Chitlea stated that the lot sizes were smaller than the standard
and felt a redesign of the project would be appropriate.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, to deny the time extension for
Tentative Tract 11997. Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RE E -carried
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Commissioner 'Rempel arrived : 0 p.m.
Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Commission
D. -ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP"9409 - OAN CORPORATION single
parcel of 2,99 acres of land submitted for condominium purposes in the
Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) located on Arrow Route between Utica
Avenue and Red Oak Street - AN 08-62 -05
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 5- 7 - DAON CORPORATION -
Rase II development of ;light in a trial condominiums located on the north
side of Arrow Route between Utica and Red Oak on 2.99 acres in an
Industrial Park (Subarea 7 .
Joe Stofa, Associate Civil Engineer, reviewed the Parcel Map, staff report.
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the Development Review staff report.
Chairman Stoat opened the public hearing
Planning Commission Minutes - - September 25, 1985
Jack Corrigan, applicant, concurred with the staff report, Resolution and
Conditions of Approval
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion. Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel , to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 9409 by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, RE PEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitiea, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review S- T. Motion carried
by the following vote-
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MC IEL, CHITIEA, BARKER, RE PEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE'
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
E. VARIANCE S-O - SLA AC - A reduction to the sideyard setback for the
placement of a relocated single family dwelling (move on) on 7500 square
feet of land located on the north side of Humboldt Avenue between Turner
and Center Avenues (I0212 Humboldt Avenue) - APN 209-11-27.
Dino Putrino Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
r Slaback concurred with the staff report, Resolution and Conditions of
Approval.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed
Motion: Moved by Rd pel seconded by McNiel, to adopt the Resolution
approving Variance S-C d Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES® COMMISSIONERS: RE PEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NO E carried
Planning Commission Minutes -4- September 25 198
G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 931.8 - MARTIN MARIET A CORP. -
division acres and 5nto parcels in the In ustria ark Area
(Subarea located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and 7th Street
APN209-251-12.
Barbara Kral , Assistant Civil Engineer, reviewed the staff report.
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that because this project is
located on Haven Avenue, staff thought it appropriate to offer an additional
condition for the Commission's consideration which would require Special
Boulevard landscaping in conjunction with the Haven Avenue sidewalk
construction.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Gary Sanderson, representing the applicant, was concerned with the condition
which required sidewalks on the north side of 7th Street. He advised that in
a meeting with the City Engineer, it had been determined than the sidewalks
would not be necessary. He advised that the.. problem with sidewalk
construction is that the existing fence would have to be removed. He asked
for clarification of staff's proposed additional landscaping condition.
Chairman Stout explained that the concern was that the existing landscaping
would be damaged with the construction of the sidewalk on Haven Avenue. He
added that what would be required is ' additional' treatment such as grass and '
trees to the 'right-of-ray area to make it consistent with what is on the other
side of the street. He asked for taf'f's comments with regard to the
applicant's concern regarding the sidewalk on 7th Street.
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that the Industrial' Specific
Plan requires sidewalks on one side of the street and that currently no
sidewalk exists on the south side of 7th Street.
r. Sanderson advised that Mr. Hubbs` sent him a letter which outlined this
discussion. He indicated that he did not have the letter with him at this
time
r. Hanson asked Mr. Sanderson to provide 'him with a copy of the letters for
the record.
Bill Kirkland, adjacent property owner', was concerned with the center~ line and
alignment of Acacia with respect to his property. He objected that he was
being required to dedicate more 'property towards the construction of Acacia
Street than the applicant for this project.
Barrye Hansom, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that at this point, before the
median island is constructed, it is not known where the centerline for Acacia
will be located. He additionally advised that a M g easement also exists on
Mr. irkland's property.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- September 25, 1985
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel stated that there are some streets in :the industrial area
which really do not need sidewalks and, did not think the sidewalk was
necessary on 7th Street at this time
Commissioner Barker stated that he did not have enough information on this
issue to make a decision to require the sidewalk. He suggested that staff
develop a means to flag this property to rake sure that it is taken care of
when a specific project is submitted
Commissioner Chit ea stated that if there are no existing sidewalks on the
south side of the street, they should be required for the north side
Chairman Stout stated that eventually the property would be valuable enough
that they would want to redevelop
the Master Builders site at which time
these improvements could be installed
Commissioner Chit `ea agreed that; there should be some sort of, assurance that
the sidewalks are installed in the future, when they become necessary.
Chairman Stout advised' that the "meandering sidewalk and required landscaping
on Havers should be done. further, that the sidewalk on 7th should be .
indicated on the master plan. Then if it was later determined that the
sidewalk on 7th Street was not necessary, the master plan could be modified.
Commissioner Rempel addressed the issue of Acacia Street and stated it needs
to be realized that the City does not know whether or not this street is -
He further stated that some
ar until the overpass is constructed.
neoess p
consistency needs to be established for street dedications, and did not feel
it was fair to require two-thirds dedication from one property owner and one-
third from another. He suggested that until such time as it is determine
that the street is really needed, a lien agreement or offer of dedication from
right-
of-way.
' ` should e taken for one-half of the _street
r uddersproperty..the . .rite.
a
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, asked Mr. Hanson if the condition
was deferred until further building or if it was the basis of an irrevocable
offer of dedication
Mr. Hanson replied that the condition was based on three -circumstances;
further building, further subdivision; and the third one would be construction
of the property immediately to the north. If that property were developed,
staff thought the street would have to go in at that point to provide
access. Therefore, staff could see the street being constructed sooner than
completion of the overpass.
Planning Commission Minutes - - September 25, 1985
Mr. Lam advised that the Commission would; not be foreclosing the option if,
they asked the property owner on the south to provide an irrevocable offer of
dedication for half of the street. Further, that if and when the property to
the, north is developed the opportunity would still be there to` take 'a look at
what dedication issue might be necessary for that property.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 8318, with amendments to require
landscaping and meandering sidewalk on Haven Avenue consistent with the east
side of Haven Avenue, an irrevocable offer of dedication for one-half of
Acacia Street, and sidewalk construction on 7th Street deferred until time of
development. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS- REMP L, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
DES® COMMISSIONERS: NONE"
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Chairman Stout announced that the following items and item 'IQ" were related.
Therefore, item "Q11 would be heard out of regular order, concurrently with the
following amendment request:
Ho 'ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 1-111 - PORLSA - A
request to amend the General an and Use Map from Medium Residential 4-
4 duac to Office (in conjunction with the development of a senior
citizen congregate living and; care facility) on 4.85 acres of land located'
on the south side of Foothill Blvd, west side of Cucamonga Creek, west of
Vineyard Avenue - APN 20 -211 20 & 21.
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 85-07 - PURLS
request to amend the Oeve opmerit Districts Map from Medium Residential
(8-1.4 du/ac) to Office/Professional in conjunction with the development
of a senior citizen congregate living and care facility) on 4.85 acres of
land, located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, ; west side of
Cucamonga Creek, vest of Vineyard Avenue - APN 208-211 20, 21.
Q PRELIMINARY REVIEW FOR CUP 85-25 PORLSA - A consistency determination
eteen the Foothill Corri or^ nterrm Po icies and the proposed 112 unit
senior congregate ,living; facility together with a 50 bed care facility, and
other services provided such as meals, transportation and housekeeping,
located at the south side of Foothill Boulevard,, crest of Cucamonga Creek
and west of Vineyard Avenue APN 207-211-20 and 2 . Related File; G A
85-04B; D A 85-07.
CurtJohnston,
u s Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report relative to the
General Plan and Development District Amendment.
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report` relative to
p.reliminary review for CUP 85-25
Planning Commission Minutes -7- September 25, 1985
Commissioner McNiel asked staff if information was available from Caltrans
regarding a signal at Baker and Foothill
Paul Pou,geau, Traffic Engineer, replied that at this time a signal has not
been scheduled for installation at this location; however, if a project was
approved for 'Baker and Foothill it would be necessary for Caltrans` to place
that signal on its priority list.
Commissioner Rempel asked if staff had information from Caltrans regarding the
median island on Foothill,
r. Pou eau replied that the concept of a median has been approved b
Caltrans, but that further study is underway to determine where the median
breaks should be located
Chairman Stow opened the public hearing.
Rick Andrews, representing the applicantgave an overview of the project.
Kenneth Grimes gave an overview of the architecture.
Chairman Stout advised ' that the Planning Commission had recently completed a
study of Foothill Boulevard and forwarded Interim Policies to the City Council
for its approval . He asked the applicant if they had reviewed these policies
with respect to architecture
r. Crimes replied that he had obtained a copy of the Interim Policies;
however,' the criteria had not been utilized' as the project design was
completed -5 months ago.
Chairman Stout referred to the Interim Policies section which requires
applicants to make a statement of how a proposed pr ject's architecture can
conform with the desired there for Foothill Boulevard, He asked if this would
be realistic for this type of project
9r . Grimes replied that he would like to have more specific information on the
goals of this requirement and hoped that this would be possible during review
of the CUP.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
h primary considerations for senior
d that one of e
Commissioner Barker state .y Co p
citizen projects- is the proximity to services that senior citizens need;
however, there are no services within safe walking distance to this project.
Commissioner McNiel disagreed and stated that van service is not an uncommon
method of transportation for senior project. He felt it was not a bad
locution because it is buffered by surrounding development.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- September 25, 1985
Commissioner Chitiea was concerned that the senior citizens would not be able
to walk to support services and parks, but 'would have to drive or rely on van
service. She stated that it is not to say that it may not be appropriate in
the future, but the project at this time is premature.
Chairman Surat stated that eventually the support services may be provided
within walking distance of this project and agreed that the location is
premature for this type of use at this time. Further, that it later may be
possible to resolve the technical Tissues and advised that : an egress in
addition to Foothill Boulevard was necessary.
Commissioner Rempel was concerned with the driveway location on Foothill, and
stated that another driveway should not be located on Foothill until the
elan island is constructed. He further stated that other issues associate
with the project could be mitigated, but the traffic issue far outweighs all
others.
Chairman Stout stated that based on these comments, it seemed the consensus of
the Commission would be to deny this request. He asked the City Attorney to
clarify the appropriate action
Andrew Arc yhsky, Assistant City Attorney, advised that since a Resolution of
Denial had not been submitted for Commission consideration, the appropriate
action would be to direct staff to prepare a Resolution recommending denial
and place it on the consent calendar of the next agenda. Further, that it
would then be at the applicant's discretion If he wanted to withdraw his
Conditional Use Permit application.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, to direct staff to prepare a
Resolution recommending denial of Environmental Assessment and General Plan
Amendment 5 C4R, 'Porlsa. Motion carried by the following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MC IEL, REMPEL, STOUT
DES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by Rempel to direct staff to prepare a
Resolution recommending denial of Environmental Assessment and Development '
District Amendment 5-07, Porlsa. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, REMPEL, BARKER, ' C IEL, STOUT
ES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ONE carried
Planning Commission Minutes -9- September 25, 1985
Planning Commission Recessed
- Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 85 04C - MEL MACK d A _
re udst to amend the Land use Map of the general Plan from Medium Density°
Residential 4`-14 du/a to Medium High; Density Residential 1 - 4 du/ac)
for 18 acres of land located at the southwest cornier of Foothill Blvd. and
Turner Avenue - APN 20 - 1- 4.
Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report
Chairman Shut opened the public hearing
Paul Edwards, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project.
r. Edwards stated that a mobile hoe park had been approved for this site in
199
Chairman Stoat asked if an approval in 1969 would stall be effective.
Andrew Arcy ,nsky, Assistant City Attorney, advised that logic would dictate
that the approval is no longer in effect, however without seeing the actual
approvals from County he could.; only guess that any approval would have
expired
r. Magill , Rancho Cucamonga 'resident, ;was concerned with the project's impact
on traffic and drainage. He also stated that a flooding problem exists on
Turner, and was concerned that more water would be generated as a result of
this project.
Russell day, representing the applicant, advised that this applicant is a
long-term investor and maintains and operates a high quality project.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Chitiea was concerned with the transition of density. She
pointed out that in the past the City has always been consistent that the
transition of density between single fancily love density and high density
projects. Further, that increasing the density on this site does not provide
that transition; therefore, would' not be in favor of this request.
Commissioner McNiel stated that the density was too high and could agree that
this request should be denied based on the inconsistency with past decisions
to provide for density transition
Commissioner Barker stated that he didn't see a deed for an increase in
density on this site. He was concerned with traffic impacts generated by
increasing the density by 90 additional units, and compatibility with the
surrounding area
Planning Commission Minutes 10- September 25, 1985
Commissioner Rempel stated that he was not concerned with the density, and was
sorry the applicant decided not to develop a mobilehome park. He advised that
one thing that is needed in the City is more mobile home parks to provide
competition for the few which 'currently exist, Further, the amount of
transition is there to allow the higher density.
Chairman Stout stated in the last few months there has been a lot of
discussion about multiple family housing in the City and that the General Plan
has been religously been defended in; its attempt to rake a balanced type of
housing available throughout the City. He advised that he could see no reason
to ' increase the density if that balance established by the General Plan is
correct. Further, that if a piece of ground could be found which was properly
zoned for it this project would be an asset to the City. He additionally
stated that because of sensitivity of transition areas to south this project
could be structured to provide high density to the north and lower density to
the south, which would be very close to the density range which 'exists on that
property now and have the same or similar type of project.
Commissioner Rernpel stated that this amendment would not increase the overall
density :of the City. Further, that the General Plan advises that high density
projects should be placed along major 'thoroughfares; 'however, the density has
been considerably reduced north of Rase Line.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded' by McNiel, to adopt the Resolution
recommending denial to the City Council of Environmental Assessment and
General Plan Amendment 8 - 4 C, Mel Mack Motion carried by the following
votes
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL
ABSENT: ' COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carded
Commissioner `Rempel stated that he thought the amendment request would` not
increase the overall density for the area
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 8 -04D - HAWKI S
request to amrnn the Lan Ose a of t e genera an from Lora Density
Residential ( -4 du/ac) to Medium Density Residential (4-14 dg ac) for
<SS acres of laird located on the south side of Feron` Blvd. between
Archibald and Turner - APN 209-055-02, 14.
Lisa Wininger, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Tracy Tibbals, Covington and Crowe Attorneys, representing the applicant,
gave an overview of the request
Planning Commission Minutes I1- September 25, 1985
Nacho Gracia 10364 Humboldt;, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the amendment. He,
stated that when the amendment was previously requested for this site, the
residents were in favor of a density> change to low-medium density from 4-
dwelling- units to the acre, but with development at the low end of the range.
Ramon Rodriquez, U 1 gth Street, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the amendment.
He was concerned that the increased ;population as a result of the project
would increase the crime rate.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker stated that his concerns were the sae as before; there is
no place else in the City where placing 14 dwellings units to the acre in the
middle of a low density designation would be allowed. Further, that it was
the general consensus that the current density for this site is inappropriate;
however, this proposal is too high and is not compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood. He stated that the community advised that a more appropriate
range would be in the 4-8 dwelling unit per acre, but they were still talking
about single family detached housing
Commissioner Re tpel stated that he had the sate concerns with this proposal
that he had with the original proposal a couple of months ago. Further, that
this puce of property needs a development agreement and should not be
developed with a single use, but needs, some type of mixed uses.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that there is no new information to support the
need for an increase to this high of a density on this. site. She advised that
she would have considered an amendment ; in the to medium range with a
development agreement
Commissioner McNiel stated that the residents of the North Town have
contributed greatly to improving that area. He was concerned that the project
would be a detriment to the community. He stated that an increase in density
to this level across the street from a school site is inappropriate
Commissioner Stout stated that the -4 density range currently on this site is
probably not viable and that a density of 4-8 wouldbe more appropriate with
the development of single family detached homes. Further, that the location
of this property in the middle of single family residential does not provide
for a density transition.
Motion: Moved by Rempel seconded by Mc Niel, to adopt the Resolution
recommending denial of Environmental Assessment and General Platy Amendment g -
4U' , Hawkins, to the City Council . Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES® COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NON -carried
Planning Commission Minutes -1 - September 25, 198
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 6 C4F DALY
CC S'TRUCTI - A request to >amend the Land Use Map of the General Flan
from Lowy Medium Density Residential 45 du/ac to Medium Density
Residential (4-14 du/ac) for 5.3 acres of 'land located on the north side
of Base Line Road west of Topaz - APN 202-0 6-1, 4, 7, 8, 12, 13 14.
Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Dave Vaughn, ;representing the applicant, gave an overviews of the project.
Dan Richards, representing the applicant, concurred with the findings of the
staff report .and urged adoption of the Resolution.
Myron Lay, 7191 Jasper, Rancho Cucamonga, opposed the amendment; and was
concerned that the surrounding area was being developed with too 'many high
density projects
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Mc Niel stated that he had no problem with the density due to the
isolation of this 'piece of property, but was concerned with traffic impacts.
Commissioner Chiti a stated that due to the isolation of this property and its
location adjacent to the project in Upland which has 12 units per acre, she
felt the proposed amendment would be acceptable if traffic issues could be
mitigated along with density transition on the site at the time of project
submittal.
Commissioner Re pel concurred that this request would be appropriate and felt
that the development of this project would eliminate some of the drainage
problems.
Commission Barker stated that it wasn't very often he could be convinced to
increase density in the City; however, this site is unique in that it i
isolated as far as Rancho Cucamonga is concerned and is buffered from single
family housing to the, south and east. Further, that this amendment would be
an advantage to the community because the 600 feet of frontage cold provide a
landscape entry which the developer and homeowners will pay for and
maintain. He stated that if the developer was willing to take on 600 feet of
landscape frontage and be conditioned to restrict density at 12 units to the
acre, he would vote in favor.
Chairman Stout concurred and stated that this proposal fits the criteria in
that transition of density is no problem, the adjacent property in Upland is
similarly zoned, there are a number of protective areas around it such as the
flood control area, and the lower density to the south fasces south away ,from
Base Line, Further, that he was not in favor of increasing the density, but
this makes good land use sense especially sense the adjacent project in Upland
is developed with 12 units to the acre.
Planning Commission Minutes -13- September 25, 1985
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by ;cNiel , to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and General Plan Amendment
5- 4E, Daly Construction to the City Council . Motion carried by the
following vote-
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MC IEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
g:SC p.m. Planning Commission Recessed
10: . - Planning Commission Reconvened
Chairman Stout announced that the following 'items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Commission.
M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT ', 5-04F - ROCHESTER
WV-E-N-U--E--KSTO-CI-A7ES-----A—request) to amend the enera Plan Land Use Map 'from
Heavy Industrial to General Industrial on 32.17 acres of land located at
the southeast- corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue. - APN 229-I 1-
19, 23, 24, 25, & 26.
N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS E T AND INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT RS-C
OCHE ER NO C I - nest to rnend I e Industrial Spedific
Plan from inirnum Impact Heavy' Industrial (Subarea g) to General
Industrial (Subarea 1 on 47 acres of land, located at the southeast
corner of Arrow Highway and Rochester Avenue - APN 229-1211, 14, 19 21-
28 and APN 229-271-44
Cunt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Larry Nelson, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the proposed
amendment and site plan
Jeff Schlosser, Schlosser Forge Company, objected to the change based on its
affect on his property;. He stated that during the general Plan hearings, it
was a concern that existing heavy industrial businesses be protected. He
advised that his company is a heavy' industrial user which generates noise,
vibration and emits humidity, which he thought night be objectionable to a
general industrial users
Planning Commission Minutes : -14- September 25, 1985
Gary Mitchell , 13 Spring, Claremont, advised that he was a member of the
Chamber of Commerce Economic'; evelopment Committee and that the concern of the
Committee was not with the type of uses but with the view of motorist on
evore Freeway. Further, that the concern was with the upgrading in terns of
aesthetics and design characteristics of both existing and, new projects.
rNelson stated that the impacts caused by Schlosser Forge would be the same
as impacts on heavy industrial uses. Further, general industrial would be a
more appropriate category for this location due to its proximity to the
freeway; because it is much easier to landscape that type of use as opposed to ;
heavy industrials
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker stated that he understood the concern that Mr. Schlosser
had regarding the incompatibility of the two uses; however, if a heavy
industrial user was located on this site, it would be very difficult to
adequately screen it from the freeway.
Commissioner Rempel stated that if the Commission decides to rake this land
use change, it should be noted that this type of use is adjacent to it and
commitment needs to be made to insure Schlosser Forge the full use an
expansion of its site
Chairman Stout stated that no natter chat is developed on that site;it has to
consistent with the existing development across the street. He advised that
the City commited to the forge many years ago, but that there was no question
that the City has made another commitment towards quality and upgrading its
image wherever possible. Further, that the corridor along the freeway is one
of the business community's most ;important assets and this general industrial
use could provide an aesthetic barrier to the heavy industrial uses on the
other side of Rochester.
Commissioner McNiel stated that he understood Mr. Schlosser's concern and
agreed that some sort of commitment should be rude to insure that heavy
industrial uses are allowed to continue operation..
Commissioner Chitiea stated that this design is what the City is looking for
to upgrade this area which is a window to the City. Further, she agreed that
a commitment should be made to protect existing heavy manufacturing, uses and
with this protection she did not think that the forge should be concerned with
being forced out of the area,.
Chairman Stout asked how the Industrial Specific Plan could be amended to
avoid future conflicts which may 'arise between existing heavy industrial uses
and firms locating in the surrounding area designated for General Industrial
development
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, replied that a section could be added under
Special Considerations in Subareas 8 and 13 of the Industrial Specific Plan.
Planning Commission Minutes _15 September 25, 1985
Motion.* Moved by Stout, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution
recommending 'approval to the City Council of Environmental Assessment and
General Plan Amendment 5-0 , Rochester Avenue Associates. Motion carried by
the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA, BARER, MCN EL, REP L
ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval to the City Council of Environmental Assessment and
Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 85 C3, Rochester Avenue Associates. Motion
carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Additionally, staff was directed to prepare an amendment to the Industrial
Specific Plan Subareas 8 and 13 for the Commission's consideration at the
second meeting in October.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL AS ESS ENT AND GENERAL PLAN EN M T -C C' - RCLH` - A
request to arndn e Cdnera n an Use a frog ffice to Medium
Residential 4-1 du/ac on 5.57 acres of land located on the northwest
corner of 1 th Street and Archibald Avenue $ Portion of AP I 1 1 .
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff" report
Chairman Stout opened the public is 'hearing.
Cary Mitchell, 133 Spring, Claremont, gave an overview of the project.
Joy Hanna, 6715 Jadeite, Rancho Cucamonga, supported the change from office to
residential . He advised that the area residents would like to work with the
applicant, similar to what was done with the Lincoln Properties project.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed
Commissioner Mc Niel stated that he assumed the same position on this amendment
that he had on other office amendments in the past in that he was concerned
that the time would come when office sites ;would be needed and they will have
all been amended to residential . He additionally supported keeping the entire
site designated for office
Planning Commission Minutes -16- September 25, 1985
Commissioner Chiti a agreed in the long tern office sites will be needed above
19th Street, therefore felt the designation of office needed to be retained on
this site for future use.. Further, that the entire site should i be
consolidated into one land use
Commissioner Barker agreed that the entire site should be combined into one
use and that he could not see an advantage to the community in changing the
density and felt that an office designation night be more appropriate in the
long term.
Chairman Stout stated that he did not have an objection to 'residential at this
location and was of the opinion that the office designation was originally
misplaced. Further, that at attempt has been made to keep the northern area
of the city residential , and by putting offices at that location basically
detracts from the character. He agreed that the site should be combined into "
one land use;.
Commissioner Rempel agreed that the site should be residential and combined
into one land used
Motion: Moved by MNiel, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution
recommending denial to the City Council of Environmental Assessment ' and
General Plan Amendment 5-04 , Gerold, Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, CNITIEA, BARKER
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPL, SOU
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NC carried
Commissioners Rempl and Stout felt the amendment request was appropriate.
P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 5-01 - 'CITY
E RAN C C C CN A An amendment to modify the Etiwanda Specific Plan,
Figure -"Community 'rails", by extending the equestrian trail along
Eti° anda `Avenue southerly to 'Highland Avenue, and the establishment of an
equestrian trail connection to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way :
sough of Victoria Avenue, along the east perimeter of the Victoria Planned
Community.
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Cook advised
that Figure -19 should also be amended and presented exhibits to the
Commission
Chairman Stout advised that a letter had been received from Mr. Clark
indicating that he is the landowner ner who owns land affected by the amendment
and that he objected to the amendment.
Chairman Stout opened the public hear ng. There were no comments, therefore
the public hearing was closed.
Planning Commission Minutes -1 _ September 25, 1985
Commissioner Chit ea stated that the trail connection to the south i
important and that the amendment was appropriate.
Chairman Stout stated that Victoria does not have many equestrian areas at all
and that Ctiwanda has a rather extensive equestrian overlay district north of
Highland. Further, that this trail would be a direct link between that area
on the western edge down to railroad tracks
Motion: Moved by Chitiea seconded by Barker, to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval to the City Council of Environmental Assessment and
Etiaanda Specific Plan Amendment 5-01Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHIT EA, BARKER, C EL, RE PEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS- NONE
ABSEN
T: COMMISSIONERS: NUNS
carried
Motion: Moved by McNiel , seconded by Chitiea, carried unanimously, to
continue past' the adjournment time for discussion of the following item.
NEW BUSINESS
R. PRELIMINARY REVIEW 5_ 5 - MAL UIST - A consistency determination between
the Foothill Corridor Interim Policies and a proposed 4-emit apartment
addition to an existing apartment complex located at the southeast corner
of Hellman Avenue and San Bernardino Road - APN 8 14 - 1.
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report#
Chairman
n Stout invited public comment.
Leonard Malmquist, 424 10th Street, Claremont,' California, stated that the
intent was to upgrade the existing apartment units in conjunction with the
construction of four additional units
Chairman Stout advised that the City is in the process of studying the entire
Foothill corridor and hopefully will develop a plan which will make a major
impact on that area. He asked ghat the applicant proposed as the timing of
this project
Mr Malmquist advised that he wanted to move as rapidly as possible primarily
because of financial considerations.
Commissioner Rempel stated that San Bernardino Road is one of the areas to be
addressed in the Foothill Corridor Stodgy; therefore, would be concerned with
allowing this project to proceed prior to completion of the Piano
Planning Commission Minutes -I - September 25, 1985
i
Commissioner Barker agreed and _further stated that the City needs solid
guidelines and piecemeal work should not be done in the interim.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed , and added that it was nice to hear an applicant
wants to upgrade older buildings and landscaping, however, felt a decision
should be reserved until completion of the plan.
Chairman Stout stated that the block from Hellman to Archibald on the north
side of Foothill is one of the areas with the most sign iciant problems that
need to be worked out; therefore, would be in favor of deferring a decision on
this project until those problems are solved
Motion. Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiol, that this project be continued
until completion of the establishment of the final policies for Foothill
Boulevard. Motion carried by the following; vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NCNB
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
Motion: Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to
continue past adjournment time for consideration of the following item:
S. PRELIMINARY REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - 7 BARMAKIAN A
consistency determination eteen the Foothil Cdrr�dor Ir7teritr� Policies
and a proposed 88 unit apartment complex, located at the south side of San
Bernardino Road, 700-t feet east of Hellman Avenue - APN 208-141-35, 38.
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Pete Pitassi representing the applicant, gave an overviews of the project and
advised that, the applicant had been working with surrounding property owners
to resolve issues of concern
Nelda Lovgren, adjacent property owner, addressed the Commission in support of the project.
Caroline Tucker, 79Amethyst,; Rancho Cucamonga, urged the Commission to
defer the decision on this project until the completion of the Foothill
Plan. She was concerned with the transition of density and did not feel the
project was compatible :with the existing area.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that architecture is one of the many; problems
associated with the project and would not feel comfortable in making a
decision prior to completion of the Study.
Planning Commission Minutes -19-- September 25, 1985
Commissioner McNiel stated that access is another major problem associated
with the; project and advised that placing the gain access on Po Street right
be considered;. He agreed that no decision could be made on this project until
the study is completed.
Commissioner Barker stated that there were so many problems, it was difficult
to know where to begin. Fur°°ther, he questioned if a decision could be made
before the issue of the consolidation of the smaller lots along Foothill could
be resolved
Chairman Stout stated that this area is probably the biggest problem block of
the built up area on Foothill . Further, that it doesn't make sense to allow
that density to be oriented towards :San Bernardino Road. He advised that
there is a solution to make the traffic circulation work, but the City is
going to have to get involved in order to get it to work. He further stated
that he felt very strongly that the problems on Foothill were going to have to
be solved before making a decision on this project*
Commissioner 'Rempel stated that the issue of small parcels along Foothill is
the crux of the situation, primarily in the area from Hellman to Turner. He
agreed that if the City wants to be proud of Foothill Boulevard, it has to
look at the total area and not on a piecemeal basis.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, to continue the project until
completion of the 'Foothill Plan. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RE , C ITIFA, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ASSENT, COMMISSIONERS: C E -carried ,
Motion* Moved by Rempel , seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to continue
past the adjournment time for discussion of the following item:
COUNCIL REFERRALS_
T. STATUS REPORT ON SLOPE PLANTING - CARYN PROJECT
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, advised that Florian Martinez, Landscape
Architect for the Caryn Company, had not provided staff with photographs of
proposed landscape material to be used on the slopes with the Caryn project,
as required by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Minutes - C- September 25, 1985
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Commissioner Rempel stated that the Rarmakian Company has the required notice
sigh for its project on San Bernardino Road, however, the sin states that
apartments are corning, not that they are proposed, and additionally, that the
sign is oversized. He asked staff to check to see if this sign Greets the
requirements of the Sign Ordinance.
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that staff would look into
the situations.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to adjourn.
1 : U a.m. - Planning Commission adjourned.
Respe tfully gritted,
1
Jai a , eoretary
Planning Commission Minutes - _ September 25, 1985
CITY OF RANCHO CUCA iNGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
August 28, 185
Chaii,man Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was hold at
Lies Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the ;pledge of allegiance.
POLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS;: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chiti a, Larry McNiel,
Herman Romp l (arrived :25 p.m.), Dennis
Stout
ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT: rucd Cook, Associate Planner; Nancy Fong, Assistant
Planner; Barry Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Curt
Johnston, Associate Planner; Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner;
Jim Markman, City Attorney; John Meyer, Assistant Planner;
Jack Lam, Community Development Director; Janice Reynolds,
Secretary,- Paul Rougeau, Traffic Engineer
A NCU CEM9TS
Jack Lai, Community Development Director, announced that the September Dth
Planning Commission workshop ;;had been cancelled.
APPROVAL OF MINUTE
Commissioner Chiti a requested an amendment to page G, next to the last line,
of the June 12, 1985 minutes to change development make to development made.
Motion: Moved by ;Barker, seconded by McNidl, carried to approve the minutes
of the June 1 , 1985 meeting.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CON ITIONAL USE PERMIT 5-0 - IS'II - The
development of a one-story c urc square feet an an associated'
small storage building of 216 square -feet, ,on 3.88 acres of land in the
Very Lour Residential District located on the northwest corner of Haven
and Hillside APN 01 1O1-0 7. (Continued from July 24, 1985 meeting.
Related file: PM 064
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP DO - CHURCH OF THE LATTER DAY
SAINTS - A diisiorr of does' o lend ibto parcels in the Very Lora
Residential District (less than 2 du/a located on the northwest corner
of Haven' and Hillside APN 01- 01-0 7. (Continued' from July' 4, 1985
meeting. Related file: CUP 'E5-O
Chairman Stout advised that the applicant for the above items had requested a
continuance to the September 11, 1985 Planning Commission agenda. He then
opened the public hearing. There were no comments.
Motion- Moved by Barker, seconded by cNi 1, to continue the public hearing
for Conditional Use Permit 85-0 and Parcel Map 9054 to the September 11, 195
Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, STOUT
DES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL carried
C. VARIANCE 5-04 - MARIETTA - A request to reduce the sideyard setback of
Td—f—e—e—F-t—o-TOfeet and a setback of 42 feet from the curb along Arrow
Route - APN - 11-5D.'
Chairman Stout advised that the applicant for this item requested that it be
withdrawn from consideration,
0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85 06 - LI DOE The
development o apartment units on 27.6 net acres of land in the " W
District 1 - 4 duac looted on the north side of Arrow Route, 350
feet west of Haven Avenue - APN 208-341-16 & 17.;
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report
Commissioner Darker stated that a concern 'during design review was the wind
tunnel affect which could be created by prevailing winds through the
buildings. He asked if this issue had been addressed
r Cook stated that the applicant might be able to respond to that concern.
Planning Commission Minutes - August 28,
. 1985
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
`led Siebert, project architect, stated that an attempt had been made to
mitigate this concern by opening up the corridors between the buildings and
that all buildings had been reoriented around activity areas.
Commissioner Harker asked Mr. Siebert to address the noise mitigation issue.
Mr. Siebert replied that patios and balconies had been reoriented away from
Arrow Route to mitigate the noise problem associated with traffic. A mode of
the project was displayed for the Commission's review.
Chairman Stout referred to the stucco finish proposed for use on the building
exterior and asked how this finish related to high tech architecture.`
r. Seibert explained that the stucco would be machine applied, which would
give a smooth finish and a high tech appearance. He also provided an example
of machine applied stucco
7:25 p.m. - Commissioner Rempel arrived
Chairman Stout asked the applicant to address the compatibility issue between
the office and residential portions of the master plan.
Mr. Seibert presented a rendering of the site plan and explained that
compatibility would be addressed through landscaping and berming.
Chairman Stout suggested that when the landscaping cores back for review at
the time of building permits, view corridors should :be provided through the
office site into the apartment complex. He explained that the intent would be
to open up the views of the office parcel to give it the appearance' of being
deeper.
Commissioner McNiel asked for discussion regarding the connecting road between
the commercial site and the apartments.
The: applicant's traffic engineer stated that from his point of view the
connecting road would work very effectively for traffic east bound, but not
for traffic west bound. He advised that the traffic report prepared for the
project recommended that the connector road not be constructed in the
beginning, but deferred until a problem actua,lly arises.
Chairman Stout asked if there wouldn't be a lot of damage to landscaping if
the street were retrofitted at a later date.
The applicant's traffic engineer responded that it would be landscaped as a
part of the project and then the Commission could bring the project back for
review if later determined that the street would be needed.
Paul Rougeau stated that he concurred with the recommendation of the traffic
report because conflicts could exist between the entering and exiting
traffic. Further, if the Commission wished to retain the easement for the
street, he would recommend that the grading be done with minimal landscaping
Planning Commission Minutes -3- August 28, 1985
installed, as suggested by Chairman Stout. However, he envision that in the
future the apartment residents would come in and complain about the street,
but if it were put in the beginning it would be accepted. Further, that the
conflicts that would occur at the entrance would be more of a problem under '
full traffic conditions than in the interim because once the office project is
complete; people exiting the offices would block, entrance for those apartment ,
dwellers coaxing horse at night. He advised that the southerly connection
between the two projects is not needed because of the median in Haven. He
restated' that his recommendation would be to construct the driveway in the
beginning.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the easement should be there, but the driveway
installed when the commercial complex is constructed. He advised ,that the
street should be placed on the plans so that apartment residents would know
that eventually the street would be installed
Commissioner Chitiea asked what the solution to the traffic situation would be
with regard to that piece of property if a site plan other than an office use
were submitted.
r. Rougeau replied that the connection to back parcel would be necessary
regardless of any other use.
Commissioner Chitiea stated' that using reflective glass might enhance the
project because of the distraction of different window treatments which might
be installed by the residents. She additionally; was concerned with the
overall architecture of the project
r. Siebert stated that since ; these units are apartments, the window
treatments would be provided for the individual units." He additionally
displayedthe project model t the podium and discussed the architectural
_
aspects of the project with the Commissioners. Mr. Seibert referred to Design ;
Reviews condition 4 regarding the canvas screens required for shading of trash
enclosures and requested that the use of a tefl'on-coated nylon over a metal
frame be allowed. He additionally referred to Engineering Condition H
regarding access easement at the southwest corner of the residential parcel .
r} Seibert advised that he did not think it desirable to share access since
the property was being developed as a trucking operation. He also requested
that an opaque material be used as a substitution on the second story balcony
enclosures.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout asked for discussion regarding the access easement and stated
that Center ;Street is halfway between Haven and Turner and the logical
location' for traffic signal. Further, Haven was going to be a -lane street
with a number of high denist,y residential projects; therefore, left turns need
to be done at' a traffic signal when possible.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the access could be offset at that point.Further, Center street would be a ' eadend going south, therefore could not see
point of it being given this, much ;value.
Planning Commission Minutes -4- August 28,' 1985
Mr Rougeau stated that the access could be offset. He advised that the
purpose of the shared access was to provide an additional access for this
project so that drivers would not have to make a left turn onto Arrow from the
vain driveway.
Commissioner Mc Niel stated that `given the number of residents who have been
before the Commission in opposition to a street going in after a project is
built, he would have to agree that it would make more sense to require the
access rap front as opposed to an easement
Commissioners Barker stated that they did not feel the easement was necessary.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she Mould be in favor of leaving the
requirement in the conditions to alloy the option of constructing the access
in the future
The consensus of the; Commission (Chitiea, McNiel , Stout) was to retain
condition 8 requiring a shared access easement
Chairman Stout stated that with regard to Design Review condition 3, he would
recommend that the exterior finish be approved by the City Planner. ' Further,'
that some language should be added to the Resolution to clarify the intent
that the stucco finish address the high tech appearance, and that the City
Planner should be aware that Spainish lace stucco was unacceptable.
Commissioner Barker advised that a 40 sheet in fins ed form would have to be
provided to the City Planner.
Commissioner Renpel suggested that "machine" be omitted from the condition
because it is only a method of applying, and that "dash coat stucco" be
substituted.
The Chairman asked for dis
cussion ussion of 't
he trash enclosureb substitution. It was
the consensus to allow teflon coated nylon over metal frame for use on trash
enclosures
Chairman Stout stated that the landscape plan should include special treatment
to address and accent the view corridors between the office and residential
sites. Further, that a landscaping easement should be obtained on the office
portion with the full 1.5-foot area to be landscaped
Commissioner Re pel stated that the Engineering conditions deferred the
installation of sidewalks; however, one criteria the Commission has developed
is regarding pedestrian access. Therefore the sidewalks should be required;
as part of the street improvements.
Chairman Stout asked for discussion of the connecting road. He advised that
it should be installed now to insure the street going in and everyone knowing
about it.
Commissioner Mc Niel disagreed and stated that the City has no idea when the
strip along Haven will develop. He stated that it should be landscaped now
and set aside as an easement-
Planning Commission Minutes -5- August 28, 1985
Commissioner Rempel stated that if it is installed now, it is going to be used
during construction of the office project. Therefore, would be in favor of
requiring an easement.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed that an easement be required.
Paul Pougeau advised that condition 11 should be reworded to reguire an
easement
Chairman Stout suggested that language be submitted by City attorney.
Barre Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer eked if tbe requirement for installation
of the sidewalk along Civic Center Drive to Haven also applied to the sidewalk
on Arrow.
Commissioner Rempel replied that it also applied to the sidewalk on Arrow.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel , to modify condition 3 to read
"dash coat stucco finish on building be submitted and approved by City
Planner"', condition 11 reworded to indicate easement shall be required in
accordance with submimtted master plan to provide mutual access to this
property and the adjacent office professional parcel, the landscaping plan
shall include special treatment to address and accent the view corridors
between the office and residential sites and a landscaping easement; is to be
obtained on the office site with the full -foot area; to be landscaped;
condition 4 modified to allow the use of toflon coated nylon metal in
accordance with submittal by applicant, and Engineering condition 1 modified
to delete the last sentence regarding sidewalks. Motion carried by the
following vote:
P CN IEE , BARKER STOUT
E E_E
AYES , COMMISSIONERS:
DES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE , -carried
Commissioner Chitiea objected to the architecture and stated that although the
.
revised site plan provided all the amenties, it lost some of the creative-
aspects` of original submittal , and thought more variation should have been
provided
: C p.m. - Planning Commission Recessed
d: S p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present
Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes -C August 28, 1985
i3
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13062 - LIN OLN A total
res i dent i al development of 120 units on 8.6 acres of land in the Medium
Residential District (8-1 du/ac) located on the north side of lgth
Street, between Archibald Avenue and Amethyst Street - APN 2 2-tD ®22.
(Related File. DR 85-2
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-2 - - LINCOLN - A total
residential development of 120 units on 8.6 acres of land in the Medium
Residential District (8-1 du/ac) located on the north side of Igth
Street, between Archibald Avenue and 'Amethyst Street - APN 202- D -22.
(Related File; TT 8062)
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Barker asked staff to go over the northern sound barrier abutting
the right of way. He asked if staff was recommending it in lieu of or in
addition to a sound attenuation Fall and additional trees.
Ms. Fong stated that the sound barrier was recommended in addition to the
sound attenuation wall and additional trees. She explained that the noise
study indicated that a noise barrier should he provided assuming that the
freeway is going to be built. Further, that the developer is requesting_;
approval to install an open Fence to preserve open views and, existing
windrows. She advised that Caltrans° position is that it is the City's
responsibility to require a sound barrier. Furthermore, one advantage in
requiring the sound barrier now is that the trees will be natured when freeway
is built.
Chairman Stout asked if the trees were looted in an area which would require
removal when the freeway goes in.
that substantial portion of the tree
Otto routil Senior fanner, stateda u s
would be within the right-of-quay. Further, that the ultimate- solution
developed should be developed at this time as opposed to some point in the
p
P p
future because it will then be the City's responsibility.
Jim Markman, City Attorney, advised that he has yet to see Caltrans provide
any type of sound 'attenuation barrier unless at someone elses expense.
Commissioner, Rempel stated that the freeway may not be at ground break; ;
therefore, at this point it would be more worthwhile to save the trees.
Commissioner McNiel asked what Caltrans' grade projection for the freeway is
at this location
Paul Roggeau, Traffic Engineer, advised that local district designers: are
looking; at a depressed grade line for the freeway and it would most likely be
below grade. Further, that a very low sound attenuation wall would probably
be adequate.
Chairman Stout opened the public: hearing
Richard Dickason, applicant, gave overview of project.
Planning Commission Minutes ' -7- August 28 1985
r. Foreman, Wolff/Lang/Christopher gave overview of project architecture.
Commissioner issioner 'Chitiea asked the applicant for clarification of the location of
the second floor balconies
r. Foreman advised that balconies only exist on the 1600 series units.
Commissioner Chit ea asked if a -foot wall would be necessary if Caltrans
lowers freeway.
r. Rougeau replied that a study" would be necessary to determine how high the
wall would have to be to attenuate the sound. He advised that even if the
freeway were lowered, the noise line would have a direct impact since the two
story models are very close to the top of slope
Liz Quell, Rancho Cucamonga 'resident, addressed the Commission in favor of the
project.
There were no further comments, therefore the hearing as closed.
Commissioner Barker stated that he liked the proposal given by the ;developer .
and preferred to find alternatives to preserve trees now than to crake a,
decision to remove them and later have Caltrans change its mind.
Commissioner~ Rempel agreed ;and stated that conditions to share the cost of ,
landscaping could be placed at the time the freeway is constructed, similar to
what was done in Upland.
Commissioner McNiel stated that he would be inclined to require installation
of the wall and remove and replace trees if the City's communications with
Caltrans are valid
r Roueau stated that the feeling is getting stronger that freeway will be
below grade. He suggested that a trust fund for future construction could be
established based on a reasonably projected estimate.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that the City is working to preserve its character ,
,
and heritage` and would like to see the windrows preserved as much as possible;
therefore would prefer° to save the trees now.
Chairman Stout stated than he is not a fan of the Rluegum Eucalyptus tree
because' they are a hazard.- Further, that if the trees are saved the City
would be allowing a dangerous ' situation to exist near a relatively high
density area. Further that he preferred to see a replacement with Spotted Cum
eucalyptus which would grow into a windrow, but a safer one for the
community.
Commissioner Ramer asked for clarification of the trust fond
Planning Commission Minutes August 28, 1985
Jack tam, Community Development Director, advised that when it comes time for
negotiations, Caltrans' position will be that the City passed up the
opportunity to require a developer to install proper sound attenuation.
Therefore, an interest bearing trust fund could be considered ;for the future
construction of a sound wall, to help defray the cost.
Jim Markman, City Attorney, stated that the trust fund would be the deposit of
sure of money required to erect a wall when the freeway is constructed,; He
advised that this sum would have to be agreeable to both the City and the
developer, and also contain a time line for return of the suet in the event
that the wall does not have to be constructed. He suggested that condition 3 "
be amended to state that an agreement would be entered° into to require
deposit of funds adequate to presently erect sound barrier to satisfaction of
engineering and legal staff. He advised that this agreement should be made
prior to the issuance of building permits. He additionally; suggested that
condition 6 regarding the sound wall be deleted.
Cormissioner :Rempel stated that he agreed especially since the City's doesn't
knows hoer the freeway will be constructed at this point.
Chairman Stout referred to the proposal by developer to use opaque material
on second floor balconies on north side. He suggested that the condition
requiring the solid wall be deleted and replaced with language which would
require a sound attenuation wall on the second floor balconies on the north
side
Motion: Moved by Darker, seconded by;Rempel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Design Review 8 -21 and Tentative Tract
13062. With amendments to Design Review condition 3 to require a sum of money'
to be deposited in a trust fund for possible future construction of a wall
along the northern property boundary adjacent to the freeway, condition 4 to
reflect the balconies on the second floor buildings on the north to have
foot high sound attenuation walls; and deletion of condition S. Motion
carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS. BARKER, RE PEL., CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS, NONE -carried
G. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY: INTERIM POLICIES Commission review
o nterl o ili to e app ie to eve opment projects along Foothill
Boulevard prior to adoption of the Foothill Boulevard Plan. (Continued'
from August 1 , 1985 meeting.)
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff` report.
Commissioner Rempel asked for clarification of curvilinear gables on D.1,-
Architecture,
r. Kroutil replied that curvilinear gables relate to parapet galls.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- August 28, 1985
Commissioner pemp l stated that curvilenar parapets would be more appropriate
languages
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
James Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, addressed the time limits
established for extensions and suggested that 18 months be considered versus
the 12 monthsproposed. He further stated that should the Cite contract with
a consultant to study Foothill Boulevard, the Chamber of Commerce Committee
would be willing to work with them. He advised that the consultant should
look at master planning the boulevard and should also address the
consolidation or condemnation of smaller parcels along Foothill'.
Gary Mitchell, 133 Spring, Claremont, California, stated that the existing
parceliation on the north and south sides of Foothill needs to be looked at
and concurred with the master plan approach
There were no further comments, therefore the pu
blic hearing was closed..
Chairman Stout asked for discussion of the: Chamber's suggestion to change the
time limits for extensions to 18 months
It was the consensus of the Commission to modify the section to reflect an C- .
month time limit for extensions
Chairman Stout stated that the other suggestions by Chamber are good ones, but
deal more with direction when the find process begins. Further, that a sign
amortization program for all billboards also needs to be addressed in the ,
final process
Commissioner ernpe l stated that this study is not new to the Commission and
has been a topic of discussion since incorporation.' Further, that, the sizes
and depths of parcels have been concern all along.
The following amendments were proposed to the use Regulations Table:
General Commercial Uses
Exterior kennels, pens, or runs in conjunction with animal care facilities not
permitted.
Repairs as anciliary use conditionally permitted in conjunction with sales
under automotive services. Repairs (major engine work, snuffler shops,
painting, body work and upholstery) not permitted.
Carpenter shop or cabinet shops, conditionally permitted
Contractor ,bards (screening of outdoor storage ruined) not permitted.
Equipment recital lards not permitted
Ice machines (outdoor) not permitted,
Planning Commission Minutes -1 - August 28, 1985
Reference to cemetaries in conjunction with mortuaries deleted
Recreational <vehicle storage yard, not permitted
Second-hand stores and pawn shops, conditionally permitted..
Spiritualistic readings or astrology forecasting, conditionally permitted.
Taxidermists, conditionally permitted in neighborhood commercial .
Tire sales and services, not permitted.
True and trailer rental , sales and services, not permitted.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Barker, carried to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval of the Foothill Boulevard Corridor Study Interim
Policies to the City Council. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RE PE , BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS- NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carded
H. TENTATIVE TRACT 1 - K & B - A residential subdivision of 470 lots on
acres of and, wrhich is part of Carn Planned Community, located
between the extension of Banyan Avenue and Highland Avenue on the north
and south, and between the extension of Rochester and Milliken Avenues on
the east and crest - A N - l®C , 1. -19, . The Commission 'will
review proposed modifications to the previously approved single family
project`, including dwelling unit sizes, and elevations.
Otto Krrutil , Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Clyde Lane, representing Kaufman and Broad, stated concurrence with' te staff
report.
Commissioner Barker asked how many 900 square foot dwellings were being
proposed for construction.
Mr. Lane replied approximately 35 homes
Otto Kroutil; Senior Planner, advised that the mix is approximatey"equal for
all models with the exception of the smallest which is to be limited to no
more than 28, and the remaining averages between 32-34 homes per model .
Commissioner Chit ea asked what type of roofing was proposed for the smallest
units.
Mr. Mane replied that composition shingle would be used on all models.
Planning Commission Minutes _ll- August 28, 1985
Chairman Stout asked how many or the original proposal were to have had the
roofs
r. Lane replied that all units under the original proposal were to be
constructed with tale roofs,
Chairman Stout asked the reason for downgrading the roofing material .
r Lane replied that composition shingles was not consider a down grade and
were proposed to control the cost of units
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker stated that he was not overjoyed with this: request to go
from the to composition roofing and to decrease the dwelling sizes in a
community which has repeatedly said that it is not interested in small units.
Commissioner Chitiea was concerned now as before that very small homes come
off as looking very cheap. Further, that ,if the applicant desired to reduce
the size of the smaller home, they needed to upgrade the units not downgrade
there Additionally, that throughout the City front yard landscaping is being
required on the small lots.
Commissioner McNiel stated that when this project first cage before the City
it was presented as an element with a lot of amenties and would be a project
of which the City could be proud. He stated that he was upset and angry
because these are major changes and changes which are a downgrading of the
product
Ch
airman Stout stated :that the elevations are unacceptable table ih comp
ositions i o ns
he would consider talking
' � �f the tale roofs were laced back on them_ g
shingles; p
g
houses.about
adequate distribution in the number6er of ou e s Further. he was
extremely disappointed and considered the roofing change to be a significant
downgrading of the product and considered it unfair to other developers in
City who are putting tile roofs on their projects because of the quality that
the City demands.
roofing material . It was the
asked for a consensus on the o0
Chairman Stout as g
. .
with tile
that the units be constructed
consensus o the Planning Commission a
roofs
Chairman Stout asked for discussion regarding the housing distribution.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she was disappointed that the applicant
initially stated they had no intention of developing on, the low end of the
range, they merely wanted flexibility for future, and is now before the
Commission asking for 63 units reduced in size and a declining product. She
stated that more needs to be done than simply putting the roofs back on i
the sizes of; the smaller units are reduced. She advised that she would prefer
to see the number of smaller units reduced from to 20 and not market quite
as manyy.
Commissioner Barker asked for clarification of the options mailable to the
Commission
Planning Commission Minutes -12- August 28, 1985
i
Otto kroutil advised that the development agreement, to an extent, controls
the Commission's action. He stated that the text does permit small units,
however, there are controls the Commission can exercise regarding product mix
and the quality of the planned community as a package, but these are also
dependent on the willingness of the developer. He advised that the request
could not be denied based on the square footages alone, but the square
footages could be used for comparison purposes to determine if this project is
substantially in compliance with ghat was submitted in January.
Commissioner Barker stated that this project was not in 'compliance with the
previous submittal.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the original proposal was rude cognizant of
the fact that the Citay's Development Code requires 900 square foot dwellings,
even though the Development Agreement allows 70 square feet. Further, that
the applicant rude the original proposal and should stay with it.
Jim Markman, City Attorney, stated that the Commission reviewed a project with
proposed elevations and site of housing, but it was not clear if distribution
was determined at than time. He advised that the Commission could adhere to
its original approval of roof or any other significant change to elevations.
He additionally advised that even though there are some reduced sizes and some
larger sizes, distribution was not originally agreed to; therefore, the
applicant could theoretically cone in and build one house at each of the
higher sizes and the rest at 74 square feet unless the spread had been
conditioned
Commissioner Barker stated that it should be noted that this project is
located on a piece of property which was originally outside the City Limits
and the Commission was not given much control in its development.
r Markman agreed that the Development Agreement states that Rancho Cucamonga
could net add conditions that were covered in the original agreement which
were more onerous` than ghat was approved by the County. He advised. that the
City can control the elevations through the design review process; therefore,
the Commission could retain the requirement for the roofs. He suggested a
revision establishing an agreed upon spread which would lock in more specific
conditions on the buildout of the project
Chairman Stout proposed a distribution of smaller sues be limited to 10
percent- or 24 houses each, with the remainder distributed among the tap S
sizes
Frank Scardina, Kaufman and Broad, requested the Commission grant a two week
continuance in order for them to respond to these concerns.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , :seconded by Chit ea., to continue the revisions to
Tentative Tract 12642, R, to the September 11, 1985 Planning Commission
meeting. Lotion carried by the following vote:
Planning Commission Minutes -13- August 28, 1985
AYES- COMMISSIONERS: RE PEL, CHITIEA BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES- COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT- ' COMMISSIONERS: NO E < -carried
1025 pry. - Planning Commission 'Recessed
10 40 p.m. - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present
OLD BUSINESS
1. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84- 2 - ' COL ELL - Alternative design for the east
elevation of" Oer einersc nitzel located at the southeast corner of
Foothill and Helms
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Eva Sloan, representing the applicant, referred to condition 2 requiring;;that
the exterior materials< be reviewed and approved. She advised that approval
had been obtained and and no changes were being proposed. Additionally, with
respect to condition 3 requiring a landscape plan, she advised that the same
plant material was being used
Mr. Fields stated that staff wanted to insure that the materials used were
those which had been approved, and also that there would be coordination
between the applicant and the landscaping architect if a stamped approved
landscape plan were provided with revisions
Chairman Stout suggested that condition 2 could be modified to state existing
materials as approved: by the City Planner prior to issuance of building'
permits
Chairman Stout asked what effort was grade to obtain easement from adjacent
property owner.
Ms Sloan advised that the applicant- was unable to locate the owner of the
adjacent property,
Chairman Stout stated that the Commission turned down a use ;once before on
this parcel because it was too small and it is also too small= for this use.
However, the Commission decided: that because of the parking lot on adjacent
use, there was no harm in approving the project. Further, that a good faith
effort had been made by the applicant this far-, but; if the request had come
before the Commission now he would not have approved it because the; parcel is
too small and the amenities which are normally required ; cannot be installed
because them is not enough room.
Planning Commission Minutes -14- August. 28, 1985
Motion; Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution
approving the revised elevations for Development Review 84-5 , with an
amendment to condition 2 that all materials are to be as approved by the City
Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Motion carried by; the
following vote;
AYES: COMMISSIONERS:: REMPEL, DHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
J. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-47 - P'ID EN - A request to raise the building pad
feet in 'elevation ` from the approved grading plan for a commercial
building of 8,040 square feet located on the south side of Foothill
Boulevard, east of Vineyard - APN' 08- 41- D
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Bennie Lavowit , representing applicant, concurred with the staff report.
Chairman Stout stated that the original conditions required special
landscaping treatment to the back. He asked for the applicant's
interpretation of dense lan 'capipg.
Mr. Lavowitz, stated that the Moos would be staggered in such a manner to
block off the building
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by R mpel, to adopt; the Resolution approving
the grading change for Development Review 84-47, Pi ke . Motion carried by
the following vote.-
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, RE PEL, BARKER, UHITIEA, MU IE
NOES: COMMISSIONERS* NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ; carried
K. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 84-46 - FLA ERTY A request to modify the conditions
of-approval for a proposed restaurant in the Commercial District (Subarea
)` and the Haven Avenue Ovelay District of the Industrial Specific Plan
located` at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Highway - AP
D - - 8.
Nancy Fong, Assistant 'Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
Planning Commission Minutes _15- August 28, 198E
Dave Flaherty, applicant, presented a rendering depicting the requested;
modification. He advised that he desired a; separate identity >from the
adjacent art project and felt the brick would enhance the exterior of the
proposed restaurant. He was concerned that the restaurant could blend into
the k art project with use of split face block.
Tom Davis, project architect, stated that he was under the impression that the
approved roof color was greens
Chairman Stout stated that the original roof approval was bronze. ; However,
the applicant requested a change to the green or brown h/bur andyp ;color and
the brown tone was approved
Commissioner Chitiea asked what was now being proposed
Mr. Davis replied that the use of the brownish/red brick and green roof was
the requested change
Commissioner Dhitiea stated that the art project does not necessarily
respresent the highest Duality of building for Haven Avenue, although it may
reflect the highest quality of art. Further, that the applicant had a
valid point that the use of split face block might blend the restaurant in
with the background.
Commissioner McNiel stated that there might be; buildings that blend in with
surrounding projects and are unsuccessful; hotever, some provide excellent
service have good businesses. He stated that the building should remain as
now designed with bronze roof and the split face block e advised that other
alternatives could be used for visual attraction such as lighting and signage.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the brick veneer would not detract from the
building, but felt that it would enhance it. Further, that he would agree
that. the -mart project was not something he gold like to see copied.
Chairman Stout stated the original submittal for this project was entirely
unacceptable and the applicant submitted a second project which was highly
acceptable, but then withdrew that submittal. A third project was submitted
which was accepted as a compromise as something which could be lived with and
now the applicant is requesting a compromise again. He further stated that he
would not recommend any changes to the previous approval.
Do missner Barker stated that a lot of time had been spent by the Design
Review 'Committee and Commission on this project and would agree that the
original approval should remain
The consensus of the Commission was that the original approval of the
reddish/brown or bronze roof color should remain.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, that the original approval of
split-face block and reddish/brown or bronze roof be upheld. Motion carried Amok
by the following vote
Planning Commission Minutes -1 - August 28, 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, CHITIEA
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS.* NONE -carried
Commissioners Chitiea and Rempel stated that the use of red brick veneer could`
enhance the project.
L. MODIFICATION TO ARCHITECTURE FOR TRACT 12319 - LEWIS - A request for new
elevation floor plans Include 2-car--garage plus bonus room and 3-car
garage for both the SOOO & 6000 series homes within an existing
residential tract subdivision of"'274 single family homes on 51 acres of
land within the Terra Vista Planned Community (Medium Residential
category, 4-14 du ac) located at the southwest corner of Base Lind and
Spruce APN 1077-091-0 .
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Stan Bell, representing Lewis Homes, concurred with the staff recommendations.
Chairman Stout suggested that a condition be added to reflect that all roofing
material is to be concrete tiles
Motion: Moved by Rempel seconded by McNiel , to approve architectural
modifications to Tract 12319, with condition that all roofing material is to
be concrete tile. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPE , MCNIEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
NEW BUSINESS
M. INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN REVISIONS/SCOPE OF WORK
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Otto Kroutil Senior Planner advised that the intent of this report was to
alert the Commission that the revisions will be coring before them in the
future and that no action would be necessary at this time.
Chairman Stout stated that the Commission has been going through industrial
area putting, together architectural policies and suggested that architectural ;
concepts be included in the revisions. Additionally, the issue of metal
buildings should be looked at because there are some areas where they still
permitted. He advised that he Mould like some discussion when the plan comes
back as to if they should be completely banned.
Planning Commission Minutes - August 28, 1985
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica;, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the impact of the 15
freeway leading to the regional ' mall, is something that should be looked at
along with the property in that area
Chairman Stout stated that signs and architectural treatment to buildings
facing the freeway should also be addressed.
N. REVIEW OF THE E ISE LANDSCAPE TREATMENT FOR THE PARKWAYS AND MEDIANS C
UH AF AyEHE TERRA VISTA PA Ay
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report
Commissioner Barker asked if it would be necessary to include the agreement
that the sidewalks wouldgently meander, or of it is Just understood
Mr. Cook replied that the ;letter from Lewis Homes ;indicates that the walk
would meander with 600 foot radii®
Stan Bell, Lewis Homes, stated that the grades are not as steep as those,
originally proposed in that then are no :1 slopes, which would allow the
sidewalks to gently meander.
Commissioner Rempl stated that he would not like to see uniform breaks and
that variations in offsets should be provided.
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that C -foot radii does not
give much curve to the sidewalk.
Commissioner Barker stated that the intent is to have the sidewalk flower but
not jar; however,, specificilly how many feet had not been established.
Mr. Bell explained that the applicant would like to have the opportunity to
use both of the proposals submitted; since the proposal with the sidewalk'
adjacent to the wall cannot be used where there is a high grade difference.
t was the consensus of the Commission that both proposals could be utilized
by the applicant as long a ,'variation 'was provided
Commissioner Rempel suggested that the Commission be provided with photographs
of what median designs are currently being used in the City and what is being
used in other areas. He preferred to delay the decision on the Haven median
until further study is done.
Commissioner McNiel agreed and stated that he would like more information
before making a decision on the medians.
° med
ian
4 k t the Ease Line
Flo_
Chairman Stout state that the Commission ghoul p
to see if that approach is acceptable for use in other areas. He suggested
that any median proposals be deferred until further information is provided.
The consensus of the Commission was to defer decision on the Haven Avenue
median until the completion of further study.
Planning Commission Minutes -1 - August 28, 15
C. PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENTS -
Planning Commission preliminary reviews of sip General Plan Land Use
Amendments and related District Amendments to determine the completeness
of the environmental assessments, or requirements for additional
environmental information concerning each of the following` applications:
PA 85-0 UUA 85- 7 - Porl a - south side of Foothill;, between
Vineyard and Baker;
OPA 5- 4C - Mel Mack southwest corner of Foothill and Turner;
OPA 85- 4D - Hawkins - south side of F ron between Archibald and Turner
OPA 85-0E Adams - south side of Base Lino, west of Topaz
PA 85- 4F & ` ISPA 85-03 - Rochester Avenue Associates - southeast corner
of Arrow and Rochester
OPA 5- 4 C Gerold - 'Northwest corner of lgth and Archibald
Otto Kroutil Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report, and advised that the:
purpose of these items being placed on the Commission's agenda at this time is
to get. the Commission's concurrence on environmental issues as to whether
additional information is necessary or if the information provided is
adequate
General Plan Amendment `85-O B - drls ® Development District Amendment 85-07 -
Por Tsa
Chairman Stout was concerned that the traffic study would be conducted with a ,
certain' typo of project in mind and then if something happened to that
project, the City may be left with a General Plan amendment and Development
District change with` a traffic study which won't support a different type of
proect
r. Kroutil stated that a development agreement in conjunction with approval
of the project was discussed with the applicant. He explained that the
traffic: study should look at the 'issue of access relative to traffic
generation ratios allowed under the office/professional district, which is
higher than medium density. Further that it should address the gorse case '
scenario.
Chairman Stout stated that it should look at both because if it turns out
under worse case scenario it won't work, but it night work under the housing
use, the City could fall back on-a development agreement.
Commissioner McNiel was concerned with senior citizen : motorists entering
traffic on Foothill Boulevard.
Mike Simpson, representing the applicant, agreed to to supply a traffic study
on both` use .
Planning Commission Minutes , -19- August 28, 198
The Commission's consensus was to accept staffs recommendation that a brief
traffic analysis be completed to determine the potential impacts which may
result from an office; project,: versus senior ormulti-family residential
development on the site. The fault study and noise analysis is to be
accomplished at the project review level, prior to finalizing the CUP and
design review process
General Plan Amendment 5 0 C - MelMack
Chairman Stout asked if the issue of single family residential compatibility,
would be addressed in the environmental study.
r. Kroutil stated that if other environmental impacts exist, the Commission
aright rent to include compatibility in the environmental a sesstment however,
compatibility would probably not be addressed on its own
Chairman Stout asked if alternative uses could be addressed.
r routil replied that a section on alternative uses would be a valid tool
to use.
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that the Commission is
discussing that additional information is necessary prior to public hearing
and should not be taken as opposition to or support of a project.
t was the consensus of Commission to require additional environmental
analysis in the areas of land use, hydrology, and transportation.
General Plan Amendment 5-0C - Hawkins:
The consensus by the Commission was that the Final Environmental Impact Report
prepared for General Plan Amendment 84-03 A is adequate in evaluating the
impacts for this application.
General' Plan Amendment 50 al Constroctioh:
Chairman Stout requested that staff look at the city limit line on east side
of the channel which is in the city of Upland.
r routil advised that staff could provide a brief analysis at the time the
project cores before the Commission as a public hearing.
The consensus by the Commission was to require additional information relative
to traffic impacts.
General Plan Amendment 85' UAP Industrial' ecific Plan Amend ent 5- C
Rochester sociatesr
The consensus . by the Commission was that no additional environmental
information is necessary.
Planning Commission Minutes -20- August 28, 1985
General Plan Amendment 5-04 Gerold:
The consensus by the Commission was that no additional environmental
information is necessary.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
P. VICTORIA PARKLA E E uESTR AR TRAIL
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout stated that he liked the alternative trail alignment because it
made a lot more sense than having it on the parkway. Further, the grade at ;
that point is a lot shallower and it lines up well with the northern
connection
Commissioner Chitiea concurred and stated that the ultimate alignment was much
preferred and much safer.
i
It was the consensus of the 'Commission to approve the alternate trail design.
Chairman Stout stated that if the Lyon Company is obligated to plat in the
trail connection from the park down to the bridge, they should be able to
provide an equivalent amount of money to provide the alternate connection
Further, that if that amount was just enough to put in the improvements, some
sort of funding mechanism would be necessary until dedication is obtained.
Commissioner 'Chitiea seated ;that the trail connection should either be tied to
the railroad access or when the property to the east develops, whichever comes
first.
Jack Lard, Community Development Director, reiterated the Commission's comments
that the alignment was much superiors to the previous one and William 'Lyon
Company is responsible for equivalent of what they would have put in the other
trail . Additionally, that some method would be developed so that when the
property develops at some future date the trail could be put in
William Bailey, William Lyon Company, was concerned with this concept. He
stated that he had researched and in all hearings and reports it is clearly
evident that there was a concerted effort to eliminate that trail. Further,
that none of the approval documents indicate that the Lyon Company is
responsible for cost of the trail at that point. He advised that he would be
willing; to pay for this alternate trail, but wanted to be relieved of
responsibility of the southern connecting trail.
Chairman Stout stated that Mr. Bailey had a paint with regard to economics.
Further, that Lyon Company did agree to install' the additional connection up
to Etwanda, which was not required, and if they were going to install the leg
from Victoria Parkway to that corner, this would definitely benefit the
community. He additionally stated that the alternate trail' alignment should be
designated on plan.
Planning Commission Minutes - - August 28, 1985
Commissioner Rempel agreed and stated that the trail connection at Daycreek is
more than adequate to the railroad tracks
Commissioner Banker stated that the alternate trail connection should be
designated on the Etiwanda Plan. Further, that with the installation of the
alternate trail by the Lyon Company, it would be fair to accept Mr. Bailey's
proposal.
Commissioner -Chitiea agreed and further stated that when the alternate trail
connection was discussed by the Trails Committee, they were unaware that the
Lyon Company was also installing :the southern trail connection. '
Chairman stout advised; that the. Etiwanda Specific Plan should be amend
ed to
not only include this trail connection, but also the one north of Highland,
Commissioner Ehitiea asked if the Lyon Company intended to develop the 'lots
adjacent to the trail on Etiwanda as horse property.
Mr. Bailey replied that those lots werehalf-acre lots and proud be developed
as horse property.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Barker, to accept the northern trail
connection in lieu of the connection to the southern trail. Additionally,'
staff was directed to prepare an amendment to the Etiwanda Specific Plan which
would depict the alternate trail connection'.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by perp 1 , seconded by Barber, unanimously carried, to adjourn.
1 a.m. - Planning omission adjourned.
Res ectfull Witted,
Jae am, ecretay
Planning Commission Minutes - - August 28, 1985
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
August 14, 1985
Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The 'meeting was held at
Liens Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road,_ Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CAE
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chitiea Larry McNiel ,
Herman Rempel, Dennis Stout
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT} Bruce Cook, Associate Planner; Dan Coleman, Senior Planner;'
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner; Nancy Fong, Assistant.
Planner; Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer; Curt
Johnston, Associate Planner; Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner;
James Markman, City Attorney; doe Stofa, Associate Civil
Engineer, Janice Reynolds, Secretary, Lauren Wasserman, '
City Manager
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, announced that consideration of a time extension
request for Tentative Tract 10076 had been added to the Planning Commission
consent calendar. He additionally announced that the applicant for item on
this agenda, Variance S-OG, had requested that the item be withdrawn.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, unanimously carried, to elect`
Dennis Stout as Planning Commission Chairman.
Motion: Moved by Chitiea,; seconded by Stout, unanimously carried, to elect
David Barker as Planning Commission 'Dice-Chairman.
Motion: Moved by; Stout, seconded by Barker, unanimously carried, to appoint
Suzanne Chitiea to serve on the Trails Committee for the upcoming year.
Commissioner Barker requested that staff report to the Commission at the first
meeting ; in September on the feasibility of dividing the Design Review
Committee into commercial/office and residential/institutional review
committees
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved by_ McNil , seconded by Barker, carried, to approve the Minutes
of the duly 24, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Rempel
abstained from vote as he did not attend that meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-08 - AdA - The construction of
six 1- and 2-story garden office buildings on 8.5 acres located at the
southeast corner of Aspen Avenue and Laurel Street in the Industrial Park
District (Subarea 7) - APN 28-351-024
A- . TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 1.0076 - LIGHT ER - A residential
subdivision of 19 lots on 6»9 acres of land in the Lowy Residential_
District„ located southof Banyan Street, east of Archibald Avenue - APN
201-251-63 & 64.
Motion- Moved by Chitiea, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to adopt
the consent calendar.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-19 - LEDERMAN -
Construction of a 5,557 square foot general retail center on acres;
of land in the General Commercial District located at the southwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Ramona Avenue - APN 208-301-15 through`
17 (Continued from July 24, 1985 meeting.)
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Fields
indicated that staff was concerned with the lack of landscaping proposed for
the front of the buildings; therefore, suggested that trees planted a minimum
of 30-feet on center be required for the front elevation of the building.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Ken Lederman ;stated that the developer was concerned with the liability of the
fountain/seating in the plaza area, at the southwest corner of the project, as
required by the Conditions of Approval * Mr. Ledermann' suggested that the
applicant be given the flexibility to develop an alternative design for this
area. He additionally was concerned with the type of trees being required on
the front elevation.
i
Planning Commission Minutes - - August 14, 1985
Chairman Stout advised that the types of trees could be addressed at the time
of landscape plan submittal, prior to the issuance of building permits.
Chairman Stout asked if the applicant would be agreeable to a condition which'
would Heave the fountain/seating requirement in the Resolution, with the
addition of language which would allow the substitution of an alternative
design feature to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee.
r. Lederman replied such a condition would be acceptable..
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated that the landscaping treatment along Foothill Boulevard'
should be reviewed by the 'Design Review Committee for consistency with the
Foothill Boulevard Interim Policies.
Commissioner Rempel advised that the applicant should be aware that trees'
planted 30 feet on center did not mean one tree placed at3O feet of building
space, it could be a cluster of one or two trees.
Motion: Moved by McNil, seconded by Barker, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 5-19, with an
amendment to Planning Condition' 3 to add language that an alternate design
feature could be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review'
Committee as an alternative to the fountain/seating requirement in the plaza<
area, and that the landscape plan is to be reviewed by the Design Review'
Committee for consistency with the Foothill Boulevard Interim Policies.
Motion carried by the following vote -
AYES: COMMISSIONERS; MCNIEL, BARKER, 'CHITI,EA, REMPEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT:' COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
C. TIME EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USEPERMIT 83-08 - LEWIS
The development of a 77,555 square foot shopping center irnclu ing a
drive-through restaurant on ;D.G7 acres of land in the General Commercial
District located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and
Hellman Avenue - APN 208-261-25, 26. (Continued from duly 24, '1985
meeting.)
BruceCook
Associate Planner,, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Gerry Bryan, representing Lewis Homes, concurred with the -Resolution and
conditions.
Planning Commission Minutes -3 August 14, 1985
Cynthia Reynolds, 8215 Kirkwood, Rancho Cucamonga, stated concern with the
drainage from this project and architectural compatibility.
John Reynolds, 8215 Kirkwood, Rancho Cucamonga, stated concern with loss of
privacy once the shopping center is completed.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that there was 'a condition on
this project that an extensive flood control study be completed prior to
building permits.
Chairman Stout advised that architecture is not being considered at this stage
of review and that each building within this project gust come before the
Planning Commission for review and approval . Further, that this procedure
allows further input by residents of the community so that issues directly
related to architecture can be addressed. He requested that the Resolution
include the statement that the landscape plan is to be reviewed and approved
by the Design Review Committee for consistency with the Foothill Boulevard
Interim Policies. He also requested that language be added to state" that
approval of the previous master plan has been withdrawn.
Commissioner Barker proposed the following language with regard to the master
plan approval . This master plan and conceptual architecture, supercedes and
replaces the originally approved master plan and architecture. Approval of
the original master plan is withdrawn.
Commissioner Rempel suggested that the applicant conduct -a neighborhood
meeting to address the issues of screening and landscaping. He stated that
this project will do a lot to eliminate flooding problems.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that this was an improvement over the previous
submittal .
Motion: Moved by Rdmpel, seconded by Barker, to adopt the Resolution-
approving the modification and time extension for Conditional Use Permit -OB
with additional conditions added' to reflect the withdrawal of approval of the
original roaster plan as proposed by Commissioner Barker, and that the
landscape plans are to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee
for consistency with the Foothill Boulevard Interim Policies. Motion carried
by the following note:
AYE'S: COMMISSIONERS: MPEL, BARKER, CHITIA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS; NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE carried
Planning Commission Minutes - August 14, 1985
D VARIANCE 65-05 - DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER CITY 4F LCS ANGELES - A'
request to remove the minimum lot depth and rear yard setback of a lot
created by the merger of the front portion of th'
ree lots on the north
side of La Colina (83 C block) in the Very Low District - APN 1051-091-
11, 1051-201-29, 30. (Continued from duly 24, 1985 meeting. )
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
June Iwamoto, representing the City of Los Angeles Department of dater and
Power, stated concurrence with the Resolution and conditions.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Barker asked for an explanation for the previous condition which
required the house to be restricted to the western portion of the site.
Mr. Coleman explained that ;this condition was in response to the concerns of
adjacent residents
Commissioner Barker was concerned that this condition might preclude the
submittal of a creative house design
Commissioner Rempel suggested that the structure and location of the residence=
be required to be submitted to the ;Design Review Committee for review and
approval `
Motion. Moved by Stout, seconded by Rempel-, to adopt the Resolution approving
Variance 65- 15 with an added condition to require the residential structure to
be submitted to the
Design Review Committee for review of location and
architectural compatibility. Motion carried by the following vote: -
AYES: COMMISSIONERS. STOUT, REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL
NOES; COMMISSIONERS.: NONE
ABSENT; COMMISSIONERS NONE -carried
E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT' 84- 5 - OANNA - 'Review of outstanding issues
regarding conditions of approva recreational vehicle storage yard '
on ` 2.4 acres of land in the Low Residential District, generally located
on the south side of Base Line, east of Hermosa Avenue - ARN 10 7-051-4O.
Ban Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- August 14, 1985
Leona Danna stated that she intends to comply with the condition of approval ;
however, requested that she be allowed to wait until the winter months to
transplant shrubs to insure their survival .
Larry Danna stated that the reason the conditions ,have not been completed as
,yet is due to the City's Base Line reconstruction project. He suggested that
the completion of the landscaping requirements should be deferred until
completion of this project.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
James Markman, City Attorney, suggested the following condition be added to
Resolution 8 -4 : Landscaping and irrigation improvements shall be completed
within the first continuous sixty (BD) day winter period following completion
of the Base Line widening project,
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel, to require the completion of the
landscaping and irrigation improvements within the first continuous sixty ( )
day winter period' following completion of the Base Line widening project.
Motion carried by the following vote
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, CHITIEA, REMPEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: - COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
* ** * * i
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 84-28 - HUMPHREY
ROCS N - A request to operate a trucking firm, outdoor storage and
retail of building materials such as rock, sand and decorative rock, and
a caretaker quarters in an existing g buildin on 8 ages of land in the
General Industrial District (Subarea 8) located at 8604 Pecan Avenue,
south of Arrow Highway - APN 9-141-8, 9-151- 4 and 26..
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report. ,
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Gary Sanderson, representing the; applicant, addressed Engineering Condition 1
which required a' ,lot line adjustment to combine the B existing parcels into
one parcel. He advised that the applicant would prefer to combine the two
parcels, and, leave the southerly parcel separate.
Bar°r.ye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that staff had imposed this
condition because ,this request is a total use of all three parcels; therefore,
felt the parcels should be combined into one. He further stated that the
parcels have stock bins which cross the parcel lines and that cross-lot
drainage exists
Planning Commission Minutes - w August 14, 198
Mr Sanderson stated that the applicant world be willing to delete the stock
bunkers which cross the parcels if that would he necessary in order to keep
the southerly parcel separate. He advised that the bunkers could then be
placed along the property line to the north.
Commissioner Barker stated that he did not like to move things around in a
public meeting
Commissioner P,empel stated that drainage and access easements could be
required, therefore did not see a problem in this request.
Mr. Hanson stated that staff would not have a problem with this specific
request by the applicant and would advise that drainage easements be obtained.
Chairman Stout asked what would happen if the buyer of parcel three doesn't
put in the block wall„ since this Conditional Use Permit would only then apply
to parcels one and two.
Commissioner Pempel stated that if the buyer of parcel three changes its' use,
the block wall may not be necessary. Further, that the Commission would have
to look{ at that requirement when parcel three is submitted for review.
Commissioner Chitiea considered the feasibility of substituting a landscape
barrier in lieu of a block wall
Commissioner Barker was concerned with the -year time frame for compliance.
e advised that he would prefer to require completion by a date specific, or
at least changed to less time.
Mr. Sanderson stated that the property owner has a small business operation
and that completing those improvements now would put him out of business.'
Commissioner Pempel suggested that the condition could require that the within
two years the block wall either goes in on that property line or the property
line between the two lots.
Cyr. Markman advised that the Commission could revoke' or not extend the
Conditional Use Permit. He suggested that language could be added to the
conditions to state that the CUP would automatically terminate if not complied
with
Commissioner Pempel suggested that a condition 8 could be added stating that
the CUP will terminate if all conditions which contain time lines are not met.
Commissioner Barker stated, that he would be satisfied with this type of
condition.
Planning Commission Minutes - August 14, 1985
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica,; Rancho Cucamonga, stated that developers are not given
two years in which to complete landscaping and screening r°equirements. ,
Further, that this was an expense of doing business and a business person
should be required to complete improvements upon approval of heir use by the
City.
`here were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Parker stated his concern that two-years was too long a time
period in which to complete improvements. He stated that the City must be
careful in making long-term adjustments and teen having the applicant come
back time and again asking for extensions because business is bad and they
can't put in improvements. He advised that soon the whole area would be built
up around these sites and the problem would be increased.
Commissioner Rempel stated that the small business person sometimes needs
assistance in getting a business started, and felt the City had an obligation
to give assistance where possible.
Commissioner McNiel agreed _with Commissioner Rempel and stated that most of
the problems the City has experienced with applicant's requesting extensions
is with larger corporations, not with the small business person.
Chairman Stout stated that the applicant should be aware of the Commission's
ission's ,
concern regarding the completion of improvements. He advised that if the
applicant experiences problems in comp=leting these requirements, he should not
wait until he is called before the Commission for review,; but should approach
the Commission on his own. _
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 4- , with an
amendment to Engineering Condition I to combine the two northerly parcels into
one parcel , and the addition of a general condition to state' that the
Conditional Use Permit will terminate if 'conditions with time lines are not
met ration carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: F PFC, MCNIFt, C ITICA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ®carried
Commissioner Barker stated that two years was too long a time line' and
philosophically had trouble in granting two years in this instance and
demanding certain modifications to be grade by other business persons at the
time of approval
Planning Commission Minutes - August 14, 1985
G. VARIANCE 85-06 - PLAZA BUILDER - A request to reduce the required 22,500
sgrare foot minimum average lot size to 20,000 square foot for a proposed
51 lot single family subdivision in the Very Low Residential District (1-
duac), located at the west side of Sapphire, south of Jennet Street
APN 11 -1 1- , S -161-1, 10 D11-9. (Referred by City Council - .
Related `ile::, Tentative Tract 10: g
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that this item had been withdrawn by the
applicant.
. D - Planning Commission Recessed
. D - Planning Commission Reconvened with all members present
H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT D -D - BRETHREN IN CHRI T CHURCH - Modification
to approved Master Plan to allow two temporary talles for classrooms
during construction of permanent education facility.
Dad Coleman, Senior Planner; reviewed the staff report.
Ken Carlson, representing the applicant, concurred with the Resolution and
conditions
Commissioner Barker asked what the time line for the new construction would
be
Mr. Carlson replied that the plans are now in plan check and the church '
intends to start construction as soon as the plan check process is completed.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated that the Resolution should contain a termination date
for the trailers.
Commissioner Barker agreed and further stated that he would prefer to see the
removal within a certain number of days or� within 30 days of final occupancy
whichever comes first,
Commissioner Rempe1 state
d th
at since th
e ra
iny
ny season is approaching, 180
days might be a reasonable time frame.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Rmpel, to adopt the Resolution approving
the modification to Conditional' Use Permit 8 -09 to allow two temporary
classroom trailers, with the removal of the trailers to be within 10 dais of
the approval , or 30 days of final occupancy whichever is sooner. Motion
carried by the following vote:
Planning Commission Minutes -9- August 14, 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, REMPEL, RARER, CHITIEA MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS; NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
I. MODIFICATION TO TENTATIVE TRACT 1154 - LEIS - A request to modify
conditions of approval for Tentative Tract 11549 to delete the
requirement for Development/Design Review approval prior to recordation
of the final crap, for a residential tract subdivision of 52 acres into Ot
lots in the Very Lour Residential District 1- du/ac , within the Eti +anda
Specific Plan located on the east side of Etiwanda Avenue, south of
Summit - APN 5-131-0 , 04, OC, O , OD, U ' C and 43.
Chairman Stout stated that it was not clear from the description of this
request that Development/Design Review approval would be necessary prior to
issuance of building permits.
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stoat asked that since the original approval of this tract was in May
of 1. did it still comply with current regulations.
S Dan Coleman, enter Planner, compared replied that staff had tired the tract with
p p
reqirements of the Etianda Specific Plan and found it to be in compliance.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Gerry Bryan, representing Lewis Homes, concurred with the Resolution and
Conditions.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution
ending the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract 11549 to require
future plans' for tract development be submitted to Development/Design Review
prior to issuance of building permits. Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS.' REMPEL, CHTIEA DARKER, MCNIEL STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
Planning Commission Minutes _ - August' 14, 1985
J. CONDITIONAL USE.. PERMIT 85-1.1 SHEPHERD OF THE HILLS CHURCH
Construction of a 1, 58 square foot, church addition to the existing
church on 2.1 acres of land in the Low Residential District ( -4 du/ac)
located at the northwest corner of Haven Avenue and Banyan Avenue APN
201-821-050.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. Coleman suggested
an additional condition to require that the existing landscaping be properly
weeded and trimmed and dead plantmaterial replaced prior to occupancy.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Becky Stevens, representing the applicant,, concurred with the Resolution and
Conditions.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Barker to adopt the Resolution approving
Conditional Use Permit 85-r1.1 with an additional condition requiring that the
existing landscaping be properly weeded and trimmed and dead plant material
replaced prior to occupancy. Motion carried by the following vote;
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS; NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE carried
K. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY: INTERIM POLICIES - Commission review
of interim policies to e applied to development projects along Foothill
Boulevard prior to adoption of the Foothill Boulevard Plan.
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, Rancho Cucamonga, representing the Economic
Development Committee of the Chamber of Commerce, stated that during their
review ofthe Corridor, they recommended that the City concentrate on the 'area"
east of Devore, west of Deer Creek, since the area from Deer Creek to 1- 5 is
covered by vaster plans. He advised that the Chamber Committee would be
discussing the Corridor in future meetings and would be willing to work with
staff and provide input.
Chairman Stout asked Mr. Barton if at the time the Chamber discusses this area
indicated if they would also discuss issues that the entire street of Foothill
has in common, such as Median design and landscaping, as there are some areas
where the Commission would like to see some consistency.
Planning Commission Minutes _11.- August+ 14, 1985
Mr. Barton replied that the Chamber Committee agreed that consistency is an
important factor and all property owners along Foothill Boulevard should
provide input into the process. ,
Bob Nastassi, 337 Vineyard, Ontario, California, stated he would like to see
some flexibility for reviews of projects submitted within the one year time
period proposed for completion of the study.
Linda Ward, 7990 Amethyst, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the apartment project
proposed for Foothill and Hellman fit in with the plan for Foothill Boulevard.
The following amendments were made to the draft policies.
Goal Statement -- Replacement of "boil down" with synthesize, with regard t
complex set of issues. It was further suggested that the goal statement begin
with the word "To"
Time Limits/Extension - The Commission suggested that this section be
consistent with state law provisions pertaining to the Map Act. Additionally,
projects are to be reviewed for consistency with the most current policies.
_Mauer planned Development - The Commission suggested that language pertaining
To City Benefit be modified to stage that: "Master Plan requirements on
larger planning areas in conjunction with development proposals are intended
to benefit the overall City by coordinating . . ." It was additionally
recommended that the intent of site utilization gaps for preliminary review be
specified.
Architecture - Reference to "pastel colors" removed. - Further the architecture
of new construction should be sensitive to the heritage of Rancho Cucamonga.
Additionally, the Architecture section should include language that
application for new development within the study; area are to include a written
statement of architecture intent indicating how the project is sensitive the
the heritage of Rancho Cucamonga
treetscape Design - Street furniture, alluvial roc scape and monument signs
may be required where appropriate.
The Commission also reviewed the Use Regulation chart for Commercial/Office
Districts and expressed concern with the following uses: Animal 'care
facilities with exterior kennels, Carpenter or Cabinet Shops, Contractor's
Yards, Vehicular Storage Yards and lowing Services, andMini-Storage. Staff
was directed; to provide alternatives for the Commission's review.
Motion: Staff was directed to prepare the amendments to the Interim policies
for the Commission's review. Moved by Stout, seconded by McNi 1, to continue
the public hearing for the Foothill Boulevard Interim Policies to the August:
, 198 Planning Commission meeting,: Motion carried by the following vote:
Planning Commission Minutes -12- August '1.4, 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, BARKER, CNITIEA,- REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS:: NONE -carried
NEW BUSINESS'
L. BASE LINE PARKWAY/MEDIAN DESIGN TERRA VISTA
Brace Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Barker asked for an explanation of the concern regarding the at-
grade crossing of the Geer Creek Regional Trail across Base Line.
Mir. Conk explained that the safety concern was with a trail crossing close to
a high speed intersection
Commissioner Rempl stated that this same condition occurs at Haven and at
Foothill; therefore, it should be considered whether or not the trail should
even continue down in that area. Further,, that research should be done to
eliminate equestrian trails south of the railroad crossing.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that this might be a subject which the
Trails Committee should research.
Chairman Stout agreed that a recommendation should be made by the Trails
Committee and suggested that the issue be looked at separately from a
pedestrian and equestrian point of vier.
Jim Barton, stated that there are several areas in the City where this same'
situation occurs, therefore, some basic criteria should be established City-
wide.
Motion. Moved by Rempel , seconded by Stout, to approve the revised landscape
treatment for the Base Line Parkway and Median. The Trails Committee is to
review and rake a recommendation to the Commission regarding the at-grade`
crossing of the peer Creek Regional Trail across Base Line. Motion carried by
the following vote.
AYES; COMMISSIONERS:i REMPEL;, STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA,; MCNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS NONE -carried
Planning Commission Minutes -13- August 14, 1985
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
M. CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE WITHIN TERRA VISTA Property acquisition
for an elementa , school site of; approimatel.y ten ( 0) acres located in
Terra Vista Planned Community in the Central School District..
Recommendations from the Planning Commission on the proposed site are
requested.
Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report, He additionally
asked for a consensus by the Commission that this kind of review could be
handled on the Planning Commission's consent calendar in the future.
Commissioner Chitlea asked Mr. Oarnella of Central School District if an
architectural' firm had been selected and whether the design would be similar
to any other school in the district
Mr.. Oarnella, Central School District, stated that the architectural firm of
Wolff, Lang, Christopher had been selected by the School District. He advised
that the firm had won awards for its design of Hear Gulch School in the
Central School District.
The Commissioners commended the school district on the design of Bear Gulch
School.
Chairman Stout stated that the City has been working on the theory to require
developers to work with the school district on the concept of combination
schools/parks. He asked Mr. Oarnella's opinion of that concept.
Mr. Garnella replied that he supported this concept and was grad to see that
the City of Rancho Cucamonga had begun this policy.
Staff was directed to forward convents to the Central School District. It was
further- recommended that the City be given the opportunity to review and
comment on the site plans, >architectural design and off-site improvements to
assure compatibility with surrounding development. Additionally, it was
consensus of the Commission that this type of request could be handled on the
Planning Commission's consent calendar.
N. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION CONCERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE OLD ` CUC IONGA
RAILROAD DEPgT
Dart Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
A representative of the applicant concurred with the staff's recommendation to
include this property in the Industrial Area Specific Plan, .
Planning Commission Minutes -14- August 14, 1985
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Barker, to direct staff the prepare a
amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to include this site in Subarea
4* Motion carried by the following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, PEMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS. MINE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Jim Barton, 8409 Utica, stated concern with the use of a composition roof on
the Virginia Dare Center. He suggested that the might be applied on the
parapet walls. He also expressed concern with the use of metal buildings in
the City and asked that the Commission monitor the use of these types of
structures in certain areas* He also advised that he had not received
-
comment from the City regarding the Chamber of Commerce recommendations on
the Design Review Process.
Lauren Wasserman, City Manager, stated that staff would prepare a letter for
Mr. Barton outlining the City's response to the Chamber's recommendations.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel , unanimously tarried, to adourn.
1045 p.m. - Planning Commission Adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Lauren M. Wasserman, Acting Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes - 8- August 14, 1985
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION INCITES
Regular Meeting
July 24, 1985
Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held at
Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led In the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL GALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Suzanne Ch tiea, Larry Mc Niel ,
Dennis Stout
ABSENT: Herman Rempel
STAFF PRESENT: Dan Coleman, Senior Planner; Howard Fields, Assistant
Planner, Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner; Barrye Hanson,
Senior Civil Engineer; Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner; Jac ;
Lash, Community Development Director; James ` Markman, City
Attorney; John Meyer, Assistant Planner; Janice Reynolds,
Secretary
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, announced that the Planning
Commission on could be adjourning this evening's meeting to a workshop to he held
on Monday, August 5, 1985. He advised that the workshop would begin at 5: C
p.m. at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center, located at 9791 Arrow
Highway, Rancho Cucamonga and that the topic of discussion would be the Reiter
Gateway project on 4th and Haven and the Foothill Corridor Study.
Chairman Stout presented a Resolution of Commendation to Rick Gomez for his.
,years of service to the Planning Commission and the City as City Planner}
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Chit ea requested that "wholesaler" he replaced with "wholesale
operation" in paragraph one of page 1.0 and the addition of "adequate for other
areas of the City" to paragraph 5 on page 13 of the May 22, 1985 Minutes.
Motion. Moved her Barker, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to approve
the Minutes of the May 22, 1985 Planning Commission meeting, as amended.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NS- FORECAST A
proposal to construct a trio-story,; sq. - office bui ding on .614
acres of land located at the oast side of Utica, north of Civic Center
Drive in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) _ APN 208-062-07.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-19
LFF LA H T H A propose to construct a sqe t two-
stork office
uildng orgy acres located on the east side of Utica,
north of Civic Center Drive, within Subarea 7 of the Industrial Specific
Plan - AP - 9
C. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 153 ARC IALD ASSOCIATES
Roaplication for osig Rev' b a ding one now olvaton for the
singly ftio lots waithin this tract in the Low-Medium Residential
9istrict 4- du/act, lodatod `at onto vista =Street, between Archibald and
Ramona Avenue AP _1N1®CS, CS ; S, 1 .
C. RESOLUTION MODIFYING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 7 -
ARS MEAN Locatdd in t Nigh orhoo Cornrorcal Cstriot at the
nor twrst corner
of 19th
Street and Carnelian Apra
A - 1159.
(Continued from Julia 10, '19 meeting.)
E. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT J - LEWIS The development
o a I square not s opping center inc a ing a drive-through
restaurant, on 8.67 acres of land in the General Commercial District,
located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman - APN
0 - 1- , 26. (Continued from July 10 195 nesting.)
Motion: Moved by Chit`i a, seconded by McNiol,; unanimously carried to adopt
the consent calendar, ; with the removal of Item . E, Time -'Extension for
Conditional Use Permit J-C , Lewis, as requested by the applicant. This item
{ is o be roadortiod for a future mooting
PUBLIC HEARINGS
F. VARIANCE ; S-CS - DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER CITY OF L S ANGELES - A
roosa to roe portion ots on t o nor t i o o the 0c of La
Colina. These lots will not meet the minimum lot size nor the setback
requirement of the Very Low District - APN 1 1-1 1-1C, 11 AND 1 C1 01-
P , ';JC. (Continued from July 10, 195 noting.
Nan Coleman, Senior Planner, advised that the applicant for this item would be
submitting a revised site plan as a result of the neighborhood meeting which
was recently hold
Planning Commission Minutes - - July 24, 195
3
Upon the City Attorneys recommendation Variance 85-05 was removed from this
agenda, per the applicant's request, to be` renoticed and readvertised for the
August 14, 1985 agenda
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-19 ® LE ERMAN
Construction of a f --gener`51 retail center on 3M acres of
land in the General Commercial District, located at the southwest corner
of Foothill Boulevard and Ramona Avenue - APN 208-301-15 through 17.
Chairman Stout advised that the applicant for Conditional Use Permit 85-19 had
requested a continuance to the August 14, 1985 Planning Commission meeting.
The Chairman opened the public hearing for those who would be unable: to attend-
the August 14 meeting,
There were no public comments.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to continue ;
the public hearing for Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 85-
19 Lederman to the PlanningCommission meeting A e o August
u _ 1985.
9 9_
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 85-09 - KNITTER
ASSOCIA E request to deve o a square foot child daycare center
within the Terra Vista Planned Community on 0.91 acres of land in; the
[tedium Density Residential District 4 14 du/ac) located on the northeast;
corner of Haven and Valencia ® APN 01- 1 11 (Continued from duly 10,
1985 meeting.)'
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout asked, based on the figures provided, if the parking space
requirement would be 15 spaced provided for teachers and 80 for other use.
Per. Coleman replied that this is correct*
Commissioner Barker referred to the Design Review Committee's requirement that
the design of the Haven Avenue parkway be coordinated with the Terra Vista
landscape supplement and asked how this would be enforced.
Per. Coleman replied that Lewis Homes had provided the City with a landscape
supplement for Terra. Vista and that this would be monitored through the plan
check process.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
The applicant concurred with the staff report, Resolution and conditions of
approval
Planning Commission Minutes - - duly 24, 1985
John Melcher, Lewis Hoaxes, ;advised that Lewis Hones was theco-applicant on
this proposal and also concurred with the Resolution and conditions of
approval'
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Chitida, to adopt the Resolution
approving Conditional Use Permit S-Cg and the issuance of a Negative
Declaration. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MC I L, CHITIEA, BARKER, STOUT
DIES: COMMISSIONERS: NON ;
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL -carried
I. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT -18 - HIGHLAND COMMUNITY CHURCH - The
est b i hment of a church in t o Rancho Plaza `S op ing Center at 6642
Carnelian, generally located at the northwest corner of 19th Street and
Carnelian Avenue - APN 01- 11- III
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
William nns, pastor of Highland Community Church, advised that the church was
seeking this Conditional Use Permit to allow time to build the permanent
church facility at Highland and Carnelian. He additionally advised' that the
front door to the building is free-swinging and always unlocked during
business operation; however, panic hardware had been installed on the rear
door to the building.
Chairman Stout asked what the church projected as a time frame for the new
building.
Pastor Enns replied that 18-month is the church's target date.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Darker, seconded by McNiel to adopt the Resolution approving
Conditional Use Permit ; 5-1 . Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: VARIER, MCNIEL, C ITICA, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RC L -carried
Planning Commission Minutes -4- July 24, 198
J. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5-11 - DATA DESIGN Review and consideration of a
time extension and con itions of approval for two temporary office:
trailers located at 7915 Center Avenue.`
Du Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff 'report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Dom Salvati , representing Data Design, stated that it had always ;been Data
Design's intent to install the street improvements and they had begun
soliciting bids this week and hoped to have the improvements on Center Avenue
and the interior street completed within sixty days. Further, regarding the
permanent building, Mr. Salvati stated that Siltron had been moved from:
Gardenia two years ago to try to improve their position. He sated that Data
Design had invested a lot of time and money in Siltron on developing new
products and had recently poet in a new management team, which Data Design felt
would place Siltron in a turn-around_; position. He advised that Data Design
did not feel that the economic condition of Siltron warranted the construction
of a permanent building at this time, `but hoped to be in a better position in
two year's. Mr. Salvati stated that Data Design had been in the community for
17 gears and felt that they were a good corporate citizen. He additionally
stated that there had been a misunderstanding between Data Design and the City
because Data Design was not aware that the street improvements had to be
installed within the two year period from the original subdivision date, but
thought that the next time a building was constructed, Center Avenue and the,
interior street would be required to e constructed. He advised that this
extension is needed in order for Data Design to continue to operate.
Commissioner Bar er asked if new bonds were posted.
Mr. Salvati replied that they were.
Jack Lary, Community Development 'Director, stated that as he understood new
buds were not posted He advised that when the City Council granted the two
year period for the trailers, the applicant also requested an extension on the
street improvements. The City Council approved that request on the condition
that new street improvement agreements be upended and required the posting of
new bonds. However, staff has no records of new bonds being posted.
Mr. Salvati stated that after Council 's approval new documents had been signed
and Data Design had continued paying for bonds -
Darrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, Mated that the City has a record of the
old bonds, however, does not have record of the posting of new ones. He
advised that the applicant might he paying premiums on the previous bonds.
Mr Salati stated' that he could meet with City staff to resolve this issue.
Planning Commission Minutes - July 24, 1985
Chairman Stout asked if the two year completion date for the new building was
based on some type of financial projection.
r. Salvati replied that due to the introduction of new products and change in
management, Data Design felt that Silton was on its way to economic recovery
and that in a two year period a permanent building would be warranted.
Chairman Stout asked what guarantee the City would have that the permanent
building would be constructed within the next two years, given that it hadn't
been constructed within the past two years per terms of the conditions of
approval
r$ Salati replied that either Siltron would have improved economically
within that time eriod, or a decision 'would have to be grade to close
Siltron.` He advised that Data Design's home office, engineering' service group
and Sierra Provisions are also housed at this site and if their economic
conditions continue to improve, they could be horsed in the permanent
building
Commissioner McNiel asked Mr. Slvati if he received a copy of the City
Council minutes of September 7, 19
r. Savati replied that he had received the 'minutes.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner McNiel stated that the City has been very liberal in this
situation and would agree with staff that if a time extension is granted, the
improvements have to be done and plans` submitte within 90 days.
Commissioner Barker stated that it is frustrating when very small businesses
come into the City and make a sincere effort to comply with the rules of the
Commission ission or City Council and they make an attempt to function in the best
interest of the community even though compliance increases their overhead.
Additionally, that Data Design wants to maintain as lore overhead as possible
to enable a company that has operated at a loss for two ,yews make a profit in
another two years. He advised that as far as he was concerned, there was not
a lot of question on the issue because the minutes of the City Council meeting
clearly 'stated the Council 's intent that in two rears' the street improvements
would have to be put in and the trailers removed. Additionally, the minutes
reflected the City Council ' requirement that new bonds had to be posted and
the Improvement Agreement conditioned that if any development occurred within
the two year period, the bonds could be called. He advised that he would' not
be inclined to vote in 'favor of this extension and if the other Commissioners
were not o inclined, would strongly suggest a limit of 60 days.
Planning Commission Minutes - July 24, 1985
i
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she could appreciate a business having
trouble getting started, but if this business is not operating at a profit
now, she would have a difficult time understanding how they are going to
construct a building in two years. She advised that the street improvements
should have been completed before this time extension request came before the
Commission.
Chairman Stout stated that the improvements were to have been done in 1981;
however, the agreement was `so poorly drafted the City was unable to enforce
it He advised that Data Design came ;back to the City in 1983 indicating the,
didn't known they had to put the street improvements in and it was grade quite
char at that time they had to do so. Additionally, when Data Design came
before the Commission in 1983, he was against an extension, but the Commission
grated them a 6 month extension with the idea in grind that if the street'
improvements were installed within 6 months, the applicant could then request`
an appropriate extension on the temporary trailers. This decision' was
appealed by the applicant to the City Council , and the time licit was changed
to two years; He further stated that to ratify this situation is slapping the
face of every applicant who has had conditions placed on their project and
faithfully complied with them. He stated that be would not be in favor of an
applicant who doesn't keep his word after having been told several times,
therefore, would be in favor of denying the request thus allowing the CUP to
expire
Commissioner McNiel stated that he agreed with most of the Chairman's
comments; horever, would be inclined to grant an extension but on a very;
restrictive basis
Commissioner Barker stated that in any other situation, he right be inclined
to agree, but in this particular case the City had been down this path before.
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that the street issue could
become independent of the trailer issue because the street improvements are a
condition of the parcel map. He stated that the City Council extended the
time period for the street improvements subject to the submitting of new bonds
and the signing of a new improvement agreement. He further advised that the
abate of posting new bonds was the issue of whether Data Design's 1981
improvement plans must be brought into compliance with 19 standards.
Further, that if the improvement agreement has expired and new bonds have not
been posted, Data Design must submit improvement plans that are subject to
1985 standards. Additionally, the trailers were a separate issue and brought`
before the City in 198 .
Chairman Stout pointed out that Data Design had approached the City in 193
because they had already moved the trailers on the property, without ;
permission from the City, and urgently needed a CUP because people were
scheduled to begin work the following Monday.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- July 24,, 1985
Commissioner Chitiea stated that if the parent company had been operating at a
profit, it seemed that they could have made good on their word* Further, that
she didn't see how the Commission could allowthis situation to continue,
therefore, would be in favor of denial '
James Markman, City Attorney, suggested modifications to the Resolution to
reflect denial
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by Chitiea, to modify the Resolution by
changing the title from approving to denying'; Section 1 modified to state that _
the following findings cannot be rude; Section 2 modified to state that the
extension of Conditional Use Permit 83-11 is denied; and the striking, of
Section 3. Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RE L -carried
Chairman Stout announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently.
K. ENVIRONMENTAL' ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DS-O - S II The
eye'lopreht of a ohe�stdry c urc an associate sera store e uildngs
totaling , 40 s ft do ages in the very Lour Rsidedtial District
(less than du/act looted do the north e t co
r f Hagen A enue and
Hillside - APN 201-101-027.
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 90 - CHURCH OF THE LATTER; DAY
A Nrsoh o acres of an uto parce s ih the ery Lots ,
Residential District (less than R du ac) located on the northwest corner
of Hillside Road and Haven Avenue - AN `R01-1'01-P .
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Ron Ishii stated that he had orked with the Design Review Committee, City
staff and the church on the roof design and advised that the Church felt that
the elevation with the additional roof treatment didn't add to the particular
design concept or solve the concern of the massive roof. He advised that a
spanish concrete the had been added, the slope of the roof increased and
simplified from a hip to a gable design.
Planning Commission Minutes -8- July 24, 1985
Commissioner ; Mc Niel stated that the design with the cap_ was atrocious. He
pointed out that the length of the building is about 7 times the height of the
roof, and asked if there were any other designs Mr. Ishii could propose that
would be acceptable to both the applicant and the Commission.
Mr. Ishii replied that he did look at different designs but always came back
to original concept. He advised that the building had been turned so that
there would not be a straight view of the chapel and that landscaping could be
a factor to break-up long horizontal lines of building.
Commissioner Harker stated that there are other design alternatives for that
concept, but if a selection was to be made from only the two ,proposals
submitted, Exhibit "D" would be preferred. He questioned if the placement on
the pad would sufficiently :mitigate the massive length of the building if a
person were traveling down either Hillside or Haven.
r. Ishii replied that this placement appeared to be the best compromise to
minimize retaining wall to north and grades; to the front of the building.
Commissioner Barker asked if it were necessary that the building be one long
building even though property is angled.
r. Ishii replied that it was necessary because the plan has a large chapel
with a cultural hall , which has to be at sane level..
Commissioner Chitiea stated thatthe only relationship to mission design she
could see on this building was the red tile roof; the design seemed to be more
contemporary. Further, that the design of this church resembles the church on
Sapphire with its massive roof, the scale of which she found offensive. She
additionally stated that the landscaping is never going to hide the roof, and
would not like to 'see another one like it in the City.
John Parent, 10475 yiviend , Rancho Cucamonga, opposed - the height of the
building and advised that his home was directly above the church and Mould
lose his views of the valley with construction of this church as presently
designed. He stated concern with the traffic on Haven and that the City was
concerned that Haven Avenue was being instutionalized with the construction of
so many churches.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Mc Niel stated that the alternate proposed is out of the
question. Additionally, the design could be very easily altered to give some
relief to the massiveness of the building. Further, he would not be in favor
of allowing this project to go through.
Commissioner Chitiea concurred and stated that the major element is roof and
its design. She agreed that there rust be alternatives to reduce the roof
height which would make both the adjacent neighbors and the Commission =
happy. Further, she could not support the project as proposed,
Planning Commission Minutes -9- July 24, 1985
Commissioner Barker concurred
Chairman Stout concurred and stated that the Design Review Committee had
requested the applicant to prepare alternatives and of the alternatives
proposed, the ones presented to the full Commission were the ones most
acceptable
r. Lam advised that the Commission has option of deferring back to ether; the
Design Review Committee or the Planning Commission and request the applicant
to prepare alternative designs based on input received this even
Chairman Stout stated that he didn't see the necessity of going back to Design
Review, since the applicant had received direction from the full Commission it ,
should be relatively simple to come up with some alternative designs.
Commissioner Barker disagreed and stated that he would prefer to have the
designs presented to the Design Review Committee where people can talk in a
less formal atmosphere and not take the tremendous amount of time it takes at
a public hearing
Commissioner Chitiea agreed because of the massive changes requested by the
Commission.
Chairman Stout asked if there was time limit on the associated parcel map.
Jim' Markman, City Attorney, replied that the Commission should ask the
applicant to waive the SC day time limit on the map or a decision would have
to he grade at this meeting, which from all indications might be denial.
Ron Ishii, applicant., waived the time limit on the parcel map to allow a
continuance.
Motion: Moved by C itiea, seconded by McNiel , to continue the public hearing
for Environmental Assessment and Conditional Use Permit 5 and Parcel Map
6094, Church of the latter Day Saints, to the August` 28, ID S" Planning
Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following vote.
AYES. COMMISSIONERS: CHITIPA, 'CNI L, BARKER, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NCNB
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RL P L -carried
Chairman Stoat announced that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Commissions
Planning Commission Minutes -10- July 24, 1985
M, EN IRONMENI`AL ASSESSMENT All INDUSTRIAL 11111111 PLAN AMENDMENT SS-O -
ending Section E., Parking & Loading Requirem-e-nt—s--Tp-a—g-e--l-l-l---F6Fto
include defined interior building areas that can be deducted from the
overall parking requirements Section E.3, Parking Spaces Required (page
III- 9) to include a parking ratio for research & development uses; and
Table III- , Land Use Definitions for research & development uses` and
identification of the applicable subareas (Table III-1; .
N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT BS-OP - Amending
Section D concrnin off-site parkiing lots to include additional'
language, to clarify public safety issues.
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore
the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout advised that these amendments had been discussed by the
Commission at several meetings prior to this hearing and that they had been
continually fine tuned to arrive at this point.
Motion: Moved by Barker, seconded by McNiel to adopt the Resolution
l ti on
recommending approval of Environmental; Assessment and Industrial Specific Plan
Amendment 85-02 to the City Council. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES; COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, MCNIEL, STOUT, C` ITIEA
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RE PEL carried
Motion: Moved by Chiiea, seconded by McNiel , to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval of Environmental Assessment and Development Code
Amendment BB-DP to the City Council. Motion carried by the following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCN E , BARKER, STOUT
NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL -carried
NEW BUSINESS
O. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-22m EDWARDS CINEMA - Development of a 6-plex movie
theater df , BO square feet on acres of land located at the northwest
comer of Foothill and Haven (Virginia Dare Center) in the General
Commercial (GC) District - APN 107 -104-01 and OB": Related File: CUP BJ-
O ,
Planning Commission Minutes -11- July 24, 1985
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
James Markman, City Attorney, proposed an amendment to Planning Division
condition 3 of the Resolution explaining that an overlap conjunctive parking _
use of almost 1 C would exist assuming that all proposed office pas are
developed. Because of that and because of the differing hours of operation,
he advised that it is unwise at this point to deny a trade off of the theater
use for any or all of the office pad uses, but, also unwise to preclude the
other uses a' second look at what happens' when the theater operates. He
additionally recommended that an agreement be recorded to assure that any
prospective purchasers would have notice that there is an approved site plan,
but the office structures which could operate at the sage time as the movie
theater, at least in the summer and on vacations, are not assured unless it is
demonstrated that the parking needs are met. Mr. Markman then read the
following amendment to Planning Division condition 3 into the record:
3. Under the current shared parking concept, the construction of each office
structure adjacent to the theater shall be deferred until specifically
approved by a modification to the CUP for the site. At the time any such
office structure is proposed to be developed, the applicant shall submit a
detailed parking analysis to determine if there is adequate parking for
all then operating and proposed uses. This study 'shall be reviewed by the
Planning Commission. If a conflict exists between the theater and other
uses, then the Planning Commission shall consider a modification to the
applicable Conditional Use Permit to reduce the square footage of the
unbuilt remaining office buildings in an amount commensurate with the
parking overlap, limit the hours of operation of the cinema, or other
appropriate means of assuring adequate parking. This condition shall be
incorporated in a document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded to
provide Notice of Condition to prospective purchasers of the subject
property prior' to the issuance of a building permit for the cinema.
Chairman Stout invited public comment.
F
Master Plan
n Christeson Company, stated .that the Virginia are
Christeson,n Ch y�o p
as approved in December after many hours of deliberation over parking with
City staff, parking specialists, and representatives from Edwards Cinema. He
advised that financing had been obtained and building pads were =being sold and
site plan. Further,
constructed based on the approved p , that he objected to
coming back to the drawing board at this late date with second thoughts after `
the master plan had been carefully planned. He advised what the City Attorney
was proposing Mould be financial disaster to the project. Mr. Christeson
suggested that the theater be allowed to go into operation to see if there is
a problem and if a problem does surface, deal with it when the last building
is submitted. He stated that if a parking problem does exist, the size of the
last building could be cut back eliminate the known problem. Further, that
the Christeson Company has been cooperative in the 2 1 years it had taken to
process the project through 'the City.
Planning Commission Minutes -1 duly 24, 1985
Chairman Stout explained that the reason it had taken 2 1/2years to process
the project is due to the fact that the Christeson Company had made two or
three major revisions to the original plan. He advised that the Planning
Commission is very careful ;in considering these types of projects, therefore
it was not as if it had taken 2 1/2years to process this proposal .
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, stated that the City is in concurrence with what
Mr. Christeson has stated in regards to allowing the theater to proceed, which
is the reason the City Attorney was requested to draft the amendment. He
advised that the only difference seemed to be that Mr. Christeson is referring
to; one pad, while the City Attorneys recommendation includes the two pads
adjacent to the theater. Further, that the reason, one office pad was not
considered, is because the parking does not equate to the over lap.
r. Markman stated that the proposal would only apply to each office pad
adjacent to the theater and that no one is suggesting pulling all building
pads off the market
r$ Christeson stated that he did not understand why this project was before`;
the Commission when approval was granted in December.
Chairman Stout replied that the approval in December was for the entire site
and that each time a building goes into the center it will be subject to the
Development Review Process, dust like any other building in the City.
Jack Darn, Community Development Director, stated that all the condition`
proposed by the City Attorney is intended to do is formalize what Mr.
Christeson previously stated. Mr. Lam advised that Mr. Michaels of the
Christeson Company had contacted staff and stated that the Christeson Company
could not accept any of the options outlined in the staff report. ' Further,
that a ;discussion ensued as to ghat conditions would be acceptable to the
developer and to the City, and based upon that discussion with Mr. Michaels
the City Attorney was requested to draft a condition. Mr. Markman` was
requested to draft a condition which accomplished the objectives of both
developer and the City which would give the City some amount of control; ,yet
still give the developer the latitude to propose a building at any time.
Additionally, all the condition does is put into writing that if there is a
problem, the City has the opportunity to discuss with the applicant the
adequacy of parking and does not limit the matinees or put a time limit on
when the developer can construct another building.
Chairman Stout explained that all the City is saying; is that based on
representation made in December when the master plan was approved, it in good
faith believes that the applicant's parking concept is probably right, but if
it is not right the City wants some protection. Further that the City
Attorneys proposal is the minimum amount of protection that the City can have
to 'provide another altenative to revoking the Conditional Use Permit.
Planning Commission Minutes -13- July 24, 1985,
r. `Christesoh stated that his concern is that he had approval in December and
now the issue is being reopened. Further, that the City had an opportunity to
put conditions on the theater at that time.
Commissioner Barker stated that a number of years had been spent on this
project. Further, that the theater was not part of the original plan, but
came in rather rapidly and almost at the last minute and the Commission raised
several concerns. He advised that no one was trying to destroy° or delay this
project, the Commission is simply trying to do its job to assure that dorm the
line people aren't parking and walking across the street from the Lewis
project or the project to the north. He further stated that the City is
attempting to act responsibly in trying to take care of a 'problem now before
it occurs and to assure that people who are buying the office pads know that
there may be a parking problem. Commissioner Barker requested discussion
regarding the proposed lights around the theater and stated that he, disliked
there*
Chairman Stout disagreed with Commissioner Barker's comment regarding the
lights.
Commissioner Chitiea stated that she did not feel the lights would add to the
overall project and stated that there might be other forms of lighting that
night be ore subtle and attractive. She additionally referred to condition Ea
of the Resolution regarding adequate lighting, and suggested that decorative
lighting be extended to, the back of the building.
Chairman Stout requested that the marquee design be submitted to the Design
Review Committee.
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, suggested that the Commission defer
discussion on this item to _later in the agenda to allow staff an opportunity
to Beet with the developer to reach a conse
nsus on the amended condition.
By consensus, the Commission deferred discussion of Development Review -22
to later' in the agenda
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS'
P. NOTICE ALT LO SCHOOL DISTRICT'S PLANS TO C WIRE PROPERTY FOR
SEC; NI R HIGH CH SITE - to Lora School istriot plans to
aoqure the pion one property located at the northeast corner of ;
Highland and Her os as site for a second junior° high school ¢
Otto Kroutil , .Senior planner, reviewed the staff report and requested that
staff be directed to prepare a letter outlining the Commission's direction.
Planning Commission Minutes 1 - duly 2 , 1985
Floyd Stork, Alta Loma School, District, gave an overview of the acquisition
procedure. He advised that availability of the buildings would be a minimum
of 3 years
Commissioner Barker asked how many students would be housed at this junior
high school.
1
r Stork replied that the District estimated a maximum 850 students.
Commissioner Chitiea requested that the school not be made a fortress.
Commissioner Darker stated that architects sometimes deal with sound
attenuation by putting in no windows and agreed with Commissioner Chitiea's
comment.
The Commission directed staff to prepare a cover letter outlining the concerns
regarding the realignment of Highland Avenue and the City's request to review
and comment on the school 's design and off-site improvements, as discussed in
the staff report, and to also include a ; statement regarding architectural
compatibility with the surrounding area
I
PUBLIC COMMENTS u
Commissioner Barker requested that staff reconsider
er having two design review
co' itts one for residential other office/commercial, to provide review
consistency and reduce the Design Review Committee load.
Chairman Stout agreed and advised that with the new budget it was proposed
that staff be divided into those categories, therefore this concept might be
possible
The Commission requested that this concept be discussed by the full Commission
at a future meeting,
D. ' DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 5-22 - EDWARDS CINEMA (continued discussion)
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that staff and the developer<
had agreed upon wording for condition 3m He explained that the developer has
a proposal for one of the office pads; therefore, a consensus had been ruched
to reword the condition to reflect that when either site develops, it doesnot
exceed a requirement for 35 ;parking spaces
James Markman, City Attorney, read the following amendment' to Condition 3
Planning Commission Minutes _ 5- July 2 , 1985
3. Under the current shared parking concept, the construction of each office
structure adjacent to the theater, insofar as the same require more than
85 spaces, shall be deferred until specifically approved by a modification
to the CUP for the site. At the time any such office structure is
proposed to be developed, the applicant shad submit 'a detailed parking
analysis to determine if there is adequate parking for all then operating
and proposed uses. This study shall be reviewed' by the , Planning
Commission. 1f a conflict exists between the theater and other rases, then
the Planning Commission shall consider a modification to the applicable
Conditional Use Permit to reduce the square footage of the unbuilt
remaining office buildings in an: amount commensurate with the parking
overlap, limit the hours of operation of the cinema, or other appropriate
means of assuring adequate parking. This condition shall be incorporated
in a document approved by the City Attorney to be recorded to provide
Notice of Condition to prospective purchasers ofc the subject, property
prior to the issuance of a building`' permit for the cinema.
Chairman Stout asked for discussion regarding the proposed lights on the
theater.
Glen Gellatly, Bissel Architects, stated that the applicant felt rather
strongly about the lights, which occur only on the front of the building. He
advised that the lights conjpr up the very nature of the theater and reinforce
the accent color band. Further, that they were important because of where the
theater sits on the property. He further stated` that the lights are -inches
in diameter and do not flash or move
Commissioner Barker stated that this project started out with a specifcic
there and had maintained that theme throughout; however, considered the lights
a blight to that design.
Commissioner McNiel stated that if they were tastefully done, he could
consider the idea but did not feel that they were necessarily appropriate for
this project.
Commissioner Chitiea agreed that there is an element of excitement to having
the lights around a theater, but was not thoroughly convinced that they are
the best answer. Further, that she was not strongly for or against the idea.
Otto Kroutil , enior Planner, asked what the intensity of the lights would be.
r$ Cel a ly replied that they would` be lore intensity, 40 watt bulbs which
could be clear.
Chairman Stout stated that he liked the lights and felt they were and
interesting and subtle -idea
The Commission determined that the lighting concept would be acceptable under
those conditions
Planning Commission Minutes -1, _ July 24, 1985
Chairman Stoat asked for discussion regarding the decorative lighting to the
rear of the building as proposed by Commissioner Chitiea.
Mr. Gellatly replied that the rear of the building would be a very important
pedestrian circulation area and assured the Commission that the lighting would
be done nicely.
Chairman Stout explained that.. the Commission wanted lighting which is adequate `
and architecturally compatible.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded ; by Chitiea, to adopt the Resolution
approving Development Review 85-22, with the second amendment proposed by the
City Attorney to Planning Division condition 3, and the marquee 'design be
reviewed by ;,the 'Design Review Committee. Motion carried by the following
vote
AYES; COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, CHITIEA, BARKER, MCNIEL
NOS: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL -carried
ADJOURNMENT
Motion. Moved by Barker;, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to
adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned to the August 5, 1985 workshop, to
be held at the Rancho Cucamonga Neighborhood Center,, beginning at S: C p.m.
Repe tulle+ a gritted,
re ar
Planning Commission Minutes -1 _ July 24, 1985
CITE' OF RANCHO CUCAMC GA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting-
July 10, 195
Chairman Dennis Stout called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga Planning Commission to order* at »CC p.m. The meeting was held a
Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. Chairman Stout then led in the pledge of >allegiance.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS* PRESENT: Larry McNiel , Herman Rempel, Dennis Shut
ABSENT: David Barker, Suzanne Chi:tiea
STAFF PRESENT. Can Coleman, Senior Planner; Bruce Conk, Associate Planner;
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner ; Nancy Fong, Assistant
Planner; Rick Gomez, City Planner;, Barrye Hanson, Senior
Civil Engineer; Curt Johnston, Associate ;Planner; Otto
rnutil, Senior Planner;` Jim Markman, City Attorney; Janice
Reynolds, Secretary
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, carried, to continue the
election of offices to the August 1 ,,, 1985 Planning Commission greeting.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, announced that the William Lynn Lakes tour had
been tentatively~ scheduled for August 10, 1985 at g: C a.m. He advised that
staff would contact the Council and Commission to confirm this schedule.
Chairman' Stout announced that Rick Gomez had resigned as City Planner and this
would be his last meeting in that capacity. The Chairman requested that a
commendation resolution be prepared on behalf of the Planning Commission.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 11893 PLAZA BUILDERS - Reapplication for design
review of new elevations for single family lots on . acres of land
in the Very Low Residential District (1- du/ac) , located west of Sapphire
Street, south side of Banyan Avenue APN 104 -411-01.
P. TIME EXTENSION FOR PARCEL MAP 741 TACETT - Located on the south side
of L Orande, west of Amethyst APN - , 14.
C. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
de elo
6 A REO IN �STORA E Construction ofoii-storage ent
totaling
40,T2 square-feet on 1.17 acres of land in the Industrial Park
District '(Subarea 6) located on the north side of 4th Street, east o
Turner Avenue - APN 210-371-03.
D. TIME EXTENSION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 3-06 - LEWIS - The development
of , square not opping center including drive-through
restaurant, on 8.67 acres of land in the General Commercial District,
located at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hellman - APN
0 - 61- 6, 26.
Items C and 0 were removed for discussion.
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by -McNiol , carried, to adopt items A and E
of the Consent Calendar.
C. RESOLUTION OF DENIAL FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
RED INI RAO
Chairman Stout advised that the applicant for item C of the Consent Calendar,
a t t'he item be removed from
M�an� Stora' e had r uested ha
OR 6. 16 Assured
consideration at this time and granted a continuance
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Stout to continue Development Review 65-
16 to allow the applicant time to redesign the project. The item will be
reverised for a future Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the
following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: RF PE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS- BARKER, CH TIEA -carried
Commissioner Rempel stated that he was still concerned with this use at this
location
Om TIME EXTENSION FOR 'CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5-00 LEWIS
Chairman Stout advised that the applicant of this project requested a
continuance to the July 24, 1986 meeting.
Planning Commission Minutes: - - July 10 198
i
Mot ione Moved by Stout, seconded by McNi 1, carried, to continue the time
extension for Conditional Use Permit 33 to the July 24, 1985 Planning
Commission meeting
PUBLIC HEARINGS
E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - 3 BOARS HEAD - The review of compliance with
conditions of ;approval for a restaurant within a shopping center in the
Neighborhood Commercial District located at the northwest corner of 19th ,
Street and Carnelian Avenue -'APN 0 -811- g
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Larry Arcinage, applicant, stated that to his knowledge the City has not
received complaints by the surrounding neighbors sine the reopening of the
Boar's Head. Further, that the operation was complying with all conditions of
approval.
Chairman Stout questioned if Mr. Arcinage was planning to re-establish live
entertainment.
r. Arcinage replied that he was not planning live entertainment in the
foreseeable future. Further, that extensive remodeling had been done to the
establishment so that live entertainment could not be accommodated.
Theo were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel was concerned with the number of parking spaces' once' the
existing Savings and Loan expands into a more permanent building. He
suggested that the master plan for the center should be reviewed to see i
restrictions need to be unposed to avoid an inadequate parking situation.
Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised that staff could work with the owner of the
shopping cendr and individual building pad corners to determine a more
realistic future parking need. He suggested that staff could prepare a more
comprehensive parking study for the Commission's review, should they so
desire
Commissioner McNiel stated that because of the problems with live
entertainment in the past, it would be preferable to modify the Resolution to
eliminate the possibility of the; Boar's Head offering live entertainment in
the future.
Chairman' Stout advised that, based on previous testimony of the applicant, it
would no longer pose an economic hardship; therefore, the hours of operation
should be modified to bring there into conformance with other establishments in
other Neighborhood enters
Planning; Commission Minutes -3- July 10, 1985
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel, to direct staff to prepare a
Resolution modifying the Conditional;' Use Permit by changing the hours of
operation from :00 a.m. to 11.00 p.m. and to eliminate live entertainment.
The Resolution is to be placed on the duly 24, 15 Planning Commission agenda
consent calendar. Staff was further directed to prepare a more comprehensive
parking study. Motion carried byte following vote:
AYES® COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA carried
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5-15 S RIC LAND -
To o construction of an 8,10 square oot automotive sericeire
store on
1.20 acres of land in the Industrial Area Specific Plan, General
Industrial District S ' ea
4 located t the northwest corner of
(Subarea Archibald and 7th Street - AP 0-171-48
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing
Bruce Strickland, 1126 W. Foothill , requested clarification of conditions; L-
and L-7 'regarding `the reciprocal access. He advised that this project is on
an approved and recorded parcel map. He also requested clarification of
condition MJ regarding the driveway. Additionally, in reference to
conditions requiring sidewalks and street lights, he advised that they
currently exist
arrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that these conditions had been
placed on the Conditional Use Permit as assurance that the site was improved
to =current City specifications and codes. Further, that some of the items in
question are final plan check items and if they currently exist to code, the
applicant would not be held responsible to reconstruct then.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Motion: ; ove by Re pel, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration _
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 5-15. Motion
carried by the following vote
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA carried
Planning Commission Minutes -4- July 10, 1985
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 5- 5 - -CUCAMONGA
CHRISTIAN PCLCWSIIIP - A proposal to locate a church facility within an
Industrial Park Subarea at the northwest corner of 7th Street and
Archibald - APN 207"-171- 5.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the Staff report.
Chairman Stout asked if staff had monitored ;the other businesses in the center
to see if they are open on Sunday.
Mr. Meyer replied that the only tenant open on Sunday is an auto parts store.
Chairman Stout stated that the Department of Public Social Services currently
parks its vehicles in the area which is to be occupied by a propoed tire
store. He asked if staff had coordinated with therm to see where their parking
would be relocated.
Mr. Meer replied that the 'Department- of Public Social Services had; not been
contacted, however, 28-34 spaces currently exist in front of their building.
Chairman Stow opened the public hearing
Douglas Milner, representing the owners of the center, advised that parking
spaces directly in front of each business were provided through the center ;
lease covenants, with the remainder of the spaces shared in common. Regarding
the. Department of Public Social Services parking issue, Mr. Milner stated that
parking in the area of the GTE warehouse could be utilized to accommodate
those parking need's.
Chairman Stout stated that a chinch use had been previously approved at this
site; however, the improvements were not completed to bring the building into
conformance with City and Fire Codes. He suggested that occupancy not be
granted for this use until those improvements are installed.
Mr. Milner replied that the owners of the center were also concerned with the
safety of the occupants of the church facility, and would not object to such a
condition of approval .
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rempel requested that conditions 2 and 6 of the Resolution
reflect that all requirements of Fire Marshall and City Code shall be complied
with prior to occupancy.
Chairman Stout stated that ove parking an area has been a past concern
associated with the approval of a use in a center which is designed for uses
other than large assemblies of people. further, that the City determined that
this is permissable, as long as the other uses in the area have different
operating tires. He advised that the parking for this center is about as
close as it can get and rationally think everyone is going to be able to
park. He requested that staff monitor this Conditional; Use Permit in six
months to see how it is working and to report 'back to the Planning Commission
at that time.
Planning Commission Minutes -5- duly 10, 1985
Motion: Moved by _Stout, seconded by Mc Niel, to issue a Negative Declaration , .
and adopt the Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 5-16, with
conditions P 'and 5 of the Resolution reflecting that all requirements of the
Fire Marshall and City Code are to be complied with prior to occupancy. The
staff is to monitor any parking; conflicts and report back to the Planning
Commission in six months. Motion carried by the following +vote::;
AYES- COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNICL, RPMPPL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ASSENT: _ COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA carried
H. VARIANCE 5 05 - DEPARTMENT P WATER AND POWER CITY LOS AN ELES - A
propose o ea on os on t e north ' e ;o t b oc of La
Colina. These lots gill not eet the rinirur�r lot size nor the setback
e6t th Ver Low OIstrict - AP 105 -11-10, and 1O51-PO1-
re r�r'�reF61_ , "
,
30.
John Meyer, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
June Iwamoto, representing the Department of Water and Poorer, gave an overview
of the request,
Chairman Stout advised that, under decision of the State of California,
another city owning land within our city has as much control as if it were in
their own jurisdiction.
The following individuals addressed the Commission with regard to the granting
of the Variance and were concerned with the keeping of horses or other large
animals front yard landscaping and architecture' of the future dwelling units:
Phyllis Hendrix - 5036 Via Serena - Rancho Cucamonga
Dick Pa in - 8371 `LaCol'ina Drive Rancho Cucamonga
Martin Solis - 5039 Via Serena Rancho Cucamonga
John 5arecca - Rancho Cucamonga resident
Ron Walsh - Rancho Cucamonga resident
Mrs. Mariano - 8424 La Colina - Rancho Cucamonga
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated that based on the concerns of the surrounding residents,
it would be advisable for the applicant to 'conduct a neighborhood nesting;..
Planning Commission Minutes -6- July 10 1985
Ms. Iwamoto agreed to a continuance of this item in order: to conduct a
neighborhood meeting.;
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by Rempel, to continue the public hearing
for Variance 85-05, Los Angles Department of Water and Power, to the July 24,
1985 Planning Commission meeting in orders for the applicant to conduct a
neighborhood meeting addressing the concerns of the surrounding residents.
Motion carried by the following votes
AYES: COMMISSIONERS.- STOUT, RCMP L, MCqIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIFA -carried
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 1 969 YAZFGdIAH A total
rear enti l development f single family lots with cup e es totaling
28 units on 4.78 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential' District 4 5
du/'ac) located on the south side of Arrow Highway, between Comet Street
and Sierra Madre Drive APH 07-2 - »
Nancy Fong, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing,
Pete Volbeda representing the applicant, steed concern with the Design
Review condition of approval which required the preservation of the trees
along the west property line and the adjustment of the block wall to
accommodate this condition. He advised that the applicant would prefer to
remove the trees and replace them with an another species.
The following; individuals addressed the Commission and expressed concerns with
the continuation of Edwin Street and traffic impacts.
Bob Cable ® 8680 Edwin Street - Rancho Cucamonga
Dean Potts 8625 Edwin Street Rancho Cucamonga
Mike Garcia G514' Edwin Street Rancho Cucamonga
Additionally, a petition containing 23 names was presented to the Commission
stating support that Edwin Street regain a dead-end street.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout advised that the City has a Master Plan for existing and
proposed streets which designates Edwin Street as a through street to
accommodate the traffic which will be generated not only from this project but
those which already exist
Planning Commission Minutes -7- July 10,, 1985'
Commissioner Mc Niel stated that other streets in that area are now carrying
traffic generated by the residents of Edwin Street, which is unfair to the
residents of other streets; therefore, would agree that Edwin must be
constructed as shown on the master plan.
Commissioner Rempel stated that he would agree with the applicant that jogging,
the wall along the west property line would damage the existing trees.
Further, the preferred method would be to alloy the wall to continue in a
straight fashion, with appropriate replacement of the trees. He also agreed
that Edwin was originally proposed' as a through street, and must' be
constructed as such with the development of this project.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Tentative Tract 159 with amendments to
the Resolution to reflect that existing healthy trees: are to be preserved
where possible. A tree removal permit is to be required for selective removal
of existing trees, with replacement to be a a ratio of :1. Motion carried by
the following vote.
AYE'S: COMMISSIONERS: RE PEL MCNIEL, STOUP
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT. COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA -carried
g.Og p.m. - Planning Commission recessed
9: 5 p.m. - Planning Commission reconvened with Commissioners McNiel, Rempel .
and Stout present
J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE, PERMIT 85-09 - KNITTER
C1 request to eve op a square foot child daycare center
within the Terra Vista Planned Community on 0.91 ages of land in the
Medium Density Residential District (4-1 du/ac) located on the northeast
corner of Haven and Valencia APN 201-221-11.
Chairman Stout advised' that the Commission had received correspondence from
the applicant requesting a continuance of this item. He then opened the
public hearing
There were no comments
Motion: Moved by Rempel , seconded by Stout, to continue` the public hearing
for Conditional Use Permit 85-09, Knitter and Associates, to the duly 24, 1985
Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried by the following vote*
AYES COMMISSIONERS- REMPEL, STOUT, MCNIEL;
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHIIEA carried
Planning Commission Minutes - - duly 10„ 1985
Chairman Stout announced that item Q on the agenda, Environmental Assessment
and Development Review 85-14, Aja, was related to the following parcel map,
therefore would be heard out of regular agenda order.
K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND PARCEL MAP 9204 - THE EN LEY CORPORTATION
Adivisif—on of cros`of lend into parcels In the 1 ustrlal Specific
Plan Area (Subarea 11) located on the northwest corner of 6th Street and
Cleveland Avenue - APN 209-411-11. (Related file- DR 85-14, Aja)
Q. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-14 - Ad A - The
development of two -story researc and development bull ings consisting
of 26,490 square feet and 104,7ZO square feet on 8.42 acres located on the
northwest corner of 6th Street and Cleveland
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing. There were no comments, therefore
the public hearing was closed.
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Parcel Map 9204, Kensley Corporation.
Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ASSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA -carried
Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Mc Niel, to issue a Negative Declaration
and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review 85-14, Aja. Motion
carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: REMPEL, MCNIEL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA -carried
L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 85-10 - OLYMPUS - The
dove ,,—en — 7W_aa_rts on acre o? an ---1n___t`fi_e Medium
Residential op t OT (8 nt units
located
District Ile d u I ac) , at�;don the west side of Archibald
Avenue, south of Monte Vista Street - A 202-141-11.
Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- July 10, 1985
Miles Anderson, 10 E. Carr, , Santa Ana, California, addressed the Commission
on behalf of the applicant, stating concurrence with the Resolution and
Conditions of Approval.
Commissioner Stout asked Mr. Anderson to address the issue of speed bumps at
the project entrance on Amethyst
r. Anderson replied that the applicant was grilling to put in both sped bumps
and a school crossing sign at that location. Additionally, the project
residents would be encouraged to use the Archibald driveway as an exit during
morning school hours
resident at 9665 Monte Vista stated concern that this project would block
off his access to Amethyst.
Carrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, advised that a recent title report did
not indicate access easements from the;property to the north.
Mr.' Anderson, stated that he would be willing to work with the adjacent
property owner on his access concern
Donna Harden;, 6905 Layton, stated that she thought a solid block gall
separating the school from the project would be preferrabloa
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Rem el stated that this ;project would be an enhancement to the
property to the north and help to improve the area. He commended the
applicant for their cooperativeness during the Design Review process. He
advised that the stamped concrete proposed for the project entrances should
not continue into the walkway' area, because ; it creates a' _potential for
pedestrians to injure themselves
Commissioner Mc i t agreed. Regarding the issue of the speed bumps, he
suggestedle the d serve to slow traffic down it wouldbe
h�_ .
o
that y
preferrable to have it Borne to a stop
_
would prefer a stop sin at the
t concurred and su steel that.... he you, e g
Chairman Stout suggested p p
Amethyst driveway. Regarding the use of a block gall between the school and
apartments, he stated that the School Districts prefer to have screening which
is not a solid barrier so that it does not lend itself to graffiti, and
provides visibility into the school yard
Motion: Moved by Rernpel, seconded by McNiel, to adopt issue a Negative
Declaration and adopt the Resolution approving Development Review g -1C,
Olympus, with an amendment to Planning ivision condition 1 of the Resolution
to require a stop sign at the Amethyst Avenue driveway. Motion 'carried by the
following vote:
Planning Commission Minutes -10- July 10, 1985
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: RF PFL MCNIFL, STOUT
NOES: COMMISSIONERS.: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIFA -carried
M. TENTATIVE; TRACT 12801 ;DEER CREED - A request to modify the conditions
of approval regarding the esign and construction of Opal Street and
proposed elimination of pedestrian access to Opal Street for a 97 lot
subdivision located at the southeast corner of Banyan Street and Carnelian
Street.
Dan Coleman, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report.
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
Michael Vairin, representing the Deer Creek Company, withdrew the applicant's
request for modification of the conditions of approval; however, requested
that the Commission recommend the issuance of a credit towards systems
development fees to the City Council.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated support for the applicant's request because he felt a
mistake had been made in stopping that street. He further stated that since
the cul-de-sac had ben a request of the residents and not of the applicant,
the City should be responsible to grant a credit towards systems development
fees.
Motion; Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel, to recommend to the City Council
that under these specific factual circumstances where there is no benefit to
the developer for improvements requested by citizens, a credit towards the
system development fees should be granted. Motion carried by the following
vote.
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: ; COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CNIIEA ®carried
N. FOOTHILL BOULEVARD CORRIDOR STUDY: INTERIM POLICIES -`The Commission will
d1scuss interir m-ensures and po Icies to be applied to development
projects along Foothill Boulevard prior to adoption of the Foothill
Boulevard Plan.
Otto Kroutil, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff' report and advised that staff
was seeking input from the Commission for inclusion in further refinements of
the policies.
Planning Commission Minutes duly 10, 1985
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
George Guderra, addressed the Commission, asking if all property owners along
Foothill would be notified of hearings.
Rick Gomez, City Planner, advised that property owners would be notified and
encouraged to provide input.
There were no further comments, therefore the public hearing was closed.
By consensus, the Planning Commission determined that the following topics are
to be addressed in the Interim Policies for Foothill Boulevard:
Projf�ct Area: The area along Foothill Boulevard in Etiwanda to be included in
study area.
Land Use: Land uses on: vacant or developable properties are to be studied as
they relateto neighborhood compatibility and transition, appropriateness of
use given size, configuration and access, economic viability of uses given
site constraints and any unique or special problems.
Additionally, Chairman Stout suggested that a mechanism be developed which
would enable preliminary project proposals located along Foothill Boulevard
where potential conflicts may exist could be brought before the Commission for
a policy decision. This same mechanism is to include projects with potential
traffic conflicts.
Chairman Stout also suggested that a goals statement be established for the
Foothill Interim Policies, as was done in the Haven Avenue Overlay District.
Urban Detisj2nj Urban design should be done at time of interim policies and
given one of the highest priorities.
Economic Viability. The study will consider the impact on existing viable
activities along the corridor and develop a strategy to enhance land uses
along Foothill Boulevard of community-wide significance.
Otto Kroutil , Senior Planner, advised that staff had the direction needed with
this input for further refinement of the Interim Policies. He suggested that
the Commission might want to include the Interim Policies as a workshop topic.
Chairman Stout advised that the following items were related and would be
heard concurrently by the Planning Commission:
U. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA PLAN AMENDMENT 85-03 - An
�a a anned mmu'
1 �o
ist
v
'amendment to thementPlan f the Terr lanned ommunity to
ig t
change the land use des nations 1 in the sou theast quiadrant to include a
m Comm rc j , offi residential
I uses. F
hospital and mixed e a ce and e iden al uses. Related
file: Southeast Terra Vista Area Development Plan.
Planning Commission Minutes -12- July 10, 1985
SOUTHEAST_ TERRA VISTA AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN LEWIS A conceptual
development plan for the southeast quadrant of t e Terra Vista Planned
Community, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, crest side of
Rochester Avenue, and east side of Milliken Avenue. Related File: DOA
BS- 3.
Curt Johnston, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report
Chairman Stout opened the public hearing.
John Melcher, representing Lewis Development, addressed the Commission in
support of the amendment
Chairman Stout stated that it was his understanding that there is no increase
in residential density as a result of this amendment, the same number of
dwelling units were provided on the same number of acres.
Mr. Melcher replied that this was correct
There were no further comments, therefore the pudic hearing was closed.
Chairman Stout stated that at the time the City Council reviews this request
it 'might want to discuss with the applicant the agreement which establishes
the maximum number of dwelling units.
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel , to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval of Environmental Assessment ; and Terra Vista Plan
Amendment 85-03. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNI L, RE PEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CH TIER -carried
Janes Markman, City Attorney, advised that a second paragraph should be added
to the Resolution recommending approval of the Southeast Terra Vista. Area
Development Plan which would reflect that approval is effective upon City
Council approval of Environmental Assessment and Terra Vista Plan Amendment
BS- B
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNio`1 , to adopt the Resolution
recommending approval to the City Council of the Southeast Terra Vista Area
Development Plan, contingent upon the City Council 's approval of Terra Vista
Plan Amendment 5 . Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES COMMISSIONERS: STOUT, MCNIEL, REMPEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, CHITIEA -carried
Planning Commission Minutes - 3- July IO, 198E
DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
R. PARKING REVISIONS
Howard Fields, Assistant Planner reviewed the staff report
Chairman Stout suggested that a definition of research and development uses be
included in the draft Ordinance. Further, that R&D/Office and R&D/Light
Manufacturing be studied in other cities to see if they require different
parking ratios.
Rink Gomez, City Planner, advised that the parking revisions would be refined
and placed on the Planning Commission agenda of July 24, 1985.
S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that this item had been
placed on the Planning Commission's agenda at the request of the Chamber of
Commerce Economic: Development Committee. However, the Chairman of the
Committee, dim Barton,; was unable to attend tonight's meeting; therefore,
suggested that the Planning Commission continue consideration of this item to
the Commission's first meeting in August
Motion: Moved by Stout, seconded by McNiel, unanimously carried, to continue
discussion of the Chamber of Commerce redommedations regarding the Design
Review process to the August 14, 1985 Planning Commission meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by Rempl, seconded by McNiel , unanimously carried, to adjourn.
11:0 papa. Planning Commission Adjourned
AeecIfulubmitted,
puty Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes - - duly 10, 1985