Loading...
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