Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes Jan-Jun 1980 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 25, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lion"s Park Community Center, '911 Base Lane Road,iRancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, June 25, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chairman Respel, who led the meeting with the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Laura Jones, Jeff Sc ranka, Peter Tol toy, 'Herman Rempel ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None` fiLSO PRESENT: Barry; Hogan, Senior Planner, Ted Hopson, City attorney; Michael Varin, Associate Planner; Paul Rogeau, Associate Civil Engineer; and Joan Kruse, Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Jones, seconded by Pahl, carried to approve the Planning Commission minutes of May 28, 1980 as submitted, Jeff Sceranka, newly ;appointed Planning Commis ione °,abstained from voting. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, announced that Mr. Jeff Sceranka had been sworn in by the City Clerk prior to the Meeting and was now seated as a Planning Commissioner. Chairman Berman Respel, announced that a Commendation Resolution had been prepared. for former Planning Commissioner, Jorge Garcia, and 'read the Resolution. Motion.: Moved by Jones, seconded by Tolst6y, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 80-37, honoring Mr. Garcia. Chairman Rempel also noted. that Mr. Garcia had served as Vice-chairman of the Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF PARCEL MAP NO. 6194 CALDWELL COMPANY - An industrial subdivision of 85.8 acres into 27 parcels, in the R--2—(General Manufacturing) zone generally located on the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 8th Street. APN 209-271-16, 17. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any questions from the Commission re- garding this item. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he had a problem with the street layout as presented on the map. He further stated that he knew this was to be an environmental assessment, however,, he would like to see the tentative parcel map. Commissioner Tolstoy indicated that thus far, in Rancho Cuca- monga, development has been piecemeal. Mr. Tolstoy's concern was that when final development of this property takes place, the streets that are planned in this development will line up with those that are proposed in future adjacent developments. Commissioner Tolstoy further stated that a better circulation pattern is needed. Mr. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, asked Mr. Tolstoy for clarification. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he does not wish to see this map go be- fore the Planning Commission because of his concern with traffic circula- tion and how the streets as planned will affect adjacent property. Chairman Rempel stated that for clarification purposes, Commissioner Tolstoy is requesting to see the tentative map. Mr. Robert Sundstrom, engineer for this development, addressed the Commis- sion and stated that the streets were designed for use of the property owners and the adjoining properties. He indicated that Eighth Street and Cleveland Avenue were to be abandoned. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that this would indicate the addition of two more cul-de-sacs and that he does not want to see necessary streets cul- de-saced. Commissioner Tolstoy further stated that it was difficult for him to understand why "B" Street was not designed to go all the way through to the easterly property line. Mr. Sundstrom stated that the parcel was designed for maximum utilization of the property and to provide rail service to lots 24, 25, 26 and 27. Commissioner Tolstoy stated it was his feeling that "B" Street should be developed to go all the way through to serve future adjacent development. He further stated that as a Planning Commission it is their responsibility to look out for the overall good of the community. Further discussion took place with Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil Engineer, who stated it was not feasible to extend Cleveland to -the north because of a grade separation at the railroad that would be required. Further discussion ensued, relative to street circulation, private driveways for lots 26 and 27, and the possible extension of "D" Street, south. Commissioner Jeff Sceranka stated thattbe matter for discussion tonight was the environmental assessment for this property. He indicated that he would like to see this item come back before the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 25, 1980 Mr. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, stated that if it was the Commission's desire, the site plan would be brought back for their review, Motion. Moved by Sc ra.nka, seconded by Tolst y, carried: unanimously, to approve the negative declaration for this parcel map and to bring the site pain before the Commission for their review. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE - Revised Ordinance to be presented as per Condominium Committee Direction Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report and indicated the changes in; the proposed ordinance. He further indicated that these changes were of a minor nature and recommended that the Planning Commsision adopt the ordinance as presented. Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing; and asked if anyone wished to speak. Mr. John Withers, representing Lewis Homes, addressed the Commission and indicated that he felt the requirements for laundry and parking to be ex- cessive and hoped, that there would be some flexibility in these requirements. Chairman Rempel indicated that he objected to the City getting into the position of telling what private enterprise can and cannot do. He further indicated that he has an aversion to government interference into private enterprise. Commissioner Dahl stated that he hoped the City doesn't ;get into a rent' control ordinance. Motion: Moved by Bahl, seconded by Jones, carried, to adopt the Condomi- ninm Conversion ordinance as amended. Chairman Hempel voted no, stating his opposition to government interference into private enterprise. SITE APPROVAL NO. t -o4 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT RANCHO DISPOSAL The development of a truck and equipment storage yard. on S acres within the M-2 Zone located at 8908 Hyssop'. Michael Vairin, Associate Planer, reviewed the staff report. He indica- ted that in addition to the issue of screening the site, if the Commission considers approval of this project, it should be made clear that this use is for storage of trucks and equipment only and is not to be used for trash collection, reclaimed materials, truck washing, truck repair, and trash- bin cleaning and washing.' Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. Mr. Joe Moore, representing Rancho Disposal Service, addressed the Commis- sion, He asked the Commission for permission to have truck washing and storage. Planning Commission Minutes - dine 25, l')8O He indicated that this site is in the M­2 zone and is hidden ;away from people who may be offended by the sight. fie further indicated that. Rancho Disposal is seeking to operate a rubbish collection company and had the understanding that they could operate as "such, at this site. Moore also stated that a major issue is the screening of this site to obstruct the view from the surrounding area and the freeway. Mr. Moore then read a, letter into the record which 'asked the 'Commission to view the screening as no issue on this project and allow immediate occupancy as a truck and equipment storage facility, including washing ;and repairing as necessary to the dispatching of this business and allow the trailer that is to be used as an office facility to remain until completion of the free- way construction. Following Mr. Moore"s comments, Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that this item 'should go back to staff for review. Michael Vairin replied that if the applicant is asking that such uses be allowed on this site, staff will have to review this project again for ap- propriate conditions'. Mr. Vairin indicated, that a minimum four week con- tinuance would be necessary as the change in the applicant's original re- guest would require County approval.. Commissioner Sc'eranka asked the applicant what he would agree to as far as landscaping was concerned. Mr. Moore replied that he' felt` that all this landscaping was unnecessary. . Hogan indicated to the Commission that the applicant proposed walls along the east, crest and north. Mr. Kogan further indicated that he had met with the owner of Rancho Disposal about the screening and what was required. An agreement had been reached to screen along Hyssop. Mr. Hogan stated that it appeased that staff was now getting two different stories, or else, Mr. Moore was uninformed.. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to con- tinue this item to the first meeting in .August. The City attorney stated for the record that a trailer could be used only for a maximum of two years and not until the freeway was built. It would be illegal to use a 'trailer for any additional time. 8.10 p.m. The Planning Commsision recessed. ` 8.20 p.m. The +Planning Commission reconvened. SITE APPROVAL NO. 80-07 AND ENVIRONMF-NTALASSESSMENT - RICHA DS ON -- The development of a pre-school designed for capacity of 3 ` children can 0.40 acres within the p--8 Zone, located at 9575 San Bernardino Road . Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -4- dune 25, 1980 Commissioner Jones asked if any shade trees would be planted in the play area. Michael Va rin replied that several large trees presently on the site will remain and will; provide necessary shade. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the parking apron would be extended on parking stall number one so that cars can back up. Michael Vairi.n replied that it would. Chairman Rempel, opened. the public hearing and asked the applicant if he wished to snake a. presentation. The applicant replied that he did not wish to do so. Commissioner Beeranka indicated that he wished to question the applicant on traffic in and out both in the morning and afternoon. The applicant, Mr. Eugene Richardson, responded that there were 14 parking spaces and adequate turnarounds room for vehicles entering and leaving. He stated that he did not anticipate any more than five vehicles in the parking lot at any one time. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if children who are loo ped off at the school would have to walk around the back of the cars. His concern was that in doing so, 'there would be exposure to accidents. Richardson stated that he saw Mr. Tolstoy's point, and would remedy the situation. Chairman Rempel stated that he Felt the chain Link fence should be moved so that it would be an the frost of cars parked in the parking lot rather than in back of the cars. Commissioner Tolstoy asked the applicant what provisions there were for draining 'the waiter can this property. Michael. V irin, Associate Planner, stated that before the public hearing is opened, the applicant has some slides of the proposed site if the Planning Commission wished to see then. The slides were shown and Chair- man Rempel thanked the applicant and, opened the public hearing. s. Carmen Alvarette, 9591 San Bernardino Road, addressed the Commission. She indicated her concern was that traffic would be increased as a result of this pre-school and would add to the existing problem of her difficulty in getting into and out of her driveway. Mrs. Alvarette also indicated that there was no problem with flooding in this area.. Dan Burns, 9561 San Bernardino Road, owner of some property to the west of the proposed pre-school, stated that he was in the process of seliing his home and wanted to know what the present zoning of his pro- perty is. Mr. Burns also indicated that the current school which stated its hours of operation to be between 8;00 a.m. and .00 p.m. is opened i from : C a.m. to :00 p.m. Clients and teachers park across street frontages and traffic has increased along this portion of Saks Bernardino which., he said, was now hazardous. Mr. Burns also indicated that the Planning Commission Minutes -5- June 25, 1980 eucalyptus trees that provide shade are old and rotting. Mr. Burns did state that drainage of water was no problem and that it flows right along his house. Mr. Richardson replied that there is adequate parking and does not see park- ing as much of a problem as this is a pre -school. Working parents, he said, will be dropping off their children and picking them up. On the matter of the trees, Mr. Richardson stated that he has been requested to remove some eucalyptus trees because of the necessary street improvments. There being no further comments, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing. Discussion ensued relative to parking in the residents' driveways. It was determined that a call to the sheriff by the residents would be most ef- fective in curtailing parking in other residents' driveways. Following brief discussion by the Planning Commission, it was roved by Jones, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, "tea approve this site approval, amend- ing condition No. 8 to children five years of; age or younger, adding a con- dition for a concrete walkway near the parking lot+and providing wheel, stops for vehicles. OWING COMMITTEE ORDINANCE - revision to proposed ordinance creating a Grading Committee for the review of proposed grading plans. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. He indicated that the proposed ordinance before the Planning Commission was the result of changes suggested by Commissioners `i'olsty acid "Kesel who worked as a special committee to develop it. Brief discussion ensued regarding the inclusion of the Planning Commission as a reviewing body on Item 10 of the ordinance. Commissioner Cceranka inquired about the feasibility of topographical models in depicting grading contours. Mr. Hogan explained that cardboard models are not longer used but that sty- rofoam is now utilized and is 'very effective in hillside developments. Mr. Doug hone, 7303 Hellman Avenue,: addressed the Planning Commission and reiterated :Mr. 'Hogan's comments relative to Styrofoam models and their effectiveness. Mrs hone felt :that such a model should to required of all developers and further stated that in the long tern., a model would reduce grad ngerrors and be cost effective. Motion: Moved by Tolsto , seconded, by Jones, carried unanimously, to approve the Grading Ordinance and recommend its 'adoption by the City Council, as amended. ORAL REPORT SELECTION OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE Chairman Rempel asked that this item be continued to the meeting of July 9. Planning Commission Minutes -6- June 25, 1980 ELECTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION I M D VICE-CHAIRMAN Following discussion, it was determined that nomination,tlon:and selection of the chairman, and vice-chairman be made b voice vote. Motion: Moved by Jones, seconded by Sceranka, carried unanimously, that Richard Dahl. be selected as Planning Commission chairman. Motion: Moved by Rempel, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, that Jeff Sceranka be selected as Panning Commission vice-chairman. n. Following the selection of the chairman and vice-chairman, outgoing Chair- man Rempel stated, that he had en oy d being Planning o fission chair and offered his assistance in any way to the new Chairman, Richard Dahl.. r ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Toned, carried unanimously, to adjourn at 9:20 p.m. Res Ple ctful ubmitted. LAI, secret y i Planning Commission Minutes -7— June 25, 1980 r. .Tim Hix, representing anir Research, addressed the Commission and stated ' the reasons for requesting a time extension on than project. Chairman Rempel asked If there were any questions from the audience. Where were none. Discussion ensued among the Planning Cep uisalcun concerning landscaping ire gather Vanir held properties and whether this proposed project would have well--maintained landscaping. . Hix in answering indicated that while there had been problems with some other Vanir projects which were na in the process of being remedied, that this would not happen at the project proposed at 19th and Archibald. Further discussion took place regarding possible pyramidal waning. The City Attorney replied that uses would be controlled through the business licensing process Co ssia,ier Tolstoy expressed his concern that because of the design of this building, uses other than professional office uses, may result. Mr. Tolstoy suggested that a 'minor design chaise on the windows would create the feeling that this proposed project is an office complex and would; help to acid rib_ . leans in the future in keeping A-p uses only. TheCommission' asked the City Attorney for his opinion on whether proposed changes to the windows would create a problem for the applicant. Mr. Hopson replied that if the applicant does not see this as a problem,, then one dad rust exist. Commissioner Tolstoy asked about the applicant's present landscaping plan. . Hix replied that the plans have been upgraded substantially. Michael yairiru indicated that when the new plans were reviewed, the` land- scaping is conceptually what the planning Commission would desire. Following further discussion, it was treed by Garcia, seconded by purl, car- ried Review No. ` ' �a ''rant a one-year etrrsf.c�n: forDirector_ 9 _a red unanimously, with a condition that the building facade be modified and that the project be examined by the Design Review Committee. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to adjourn the meeting at 9.10 a.m. 9:10 p.m. The Planning Commission Adjourned. Respectfully submitted, terry, P'IL nil g ission r lann rz OMMi sio mutes - - June 11 , 19 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING June 11, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cuca- monga was held it the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga,; on Wednesday, June 11, 180. Meeting was called to order at 70 p.m. , 'by Chairman Rempel, who led the meeting with the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl.., Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Peter Tolstoy, Herman Hempel ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: None ALSO PRESENT: Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Ted Hopson, City Attorney; I Michael Vair n, Associate Planner; Tim Beed.le, Associate Planner, Paul Rou eau, Associate'Civil Engineer , Joan Kruse, !Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Garcia, carried. unanimously, ;to ap- prove the April 9, 1-980 Planning Commission Minutes. Motion: Moved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to approve the April 23, 1980 Planning Commission minutes.' Commissioner Tolstoy requested that the Planning Commission Minutes of May 14 1980 be corrected to read as follows: CARNELIAN STREET LANDSCAPE 'DEMONSTRATION PROJECT Motion Moored by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl., carried unanimously, that the Planning Commission recommended that Concert B„ alternates 1 and 2 be adapted 'by the City'Council. The Planning Commission further recommended that the project start at 'Foothill Boulevard. and proceed northerly and thataddition- al priority be given to the intersection of Carnelian and l th. If monies are available, trees should be slanted at Carnelian and l th to emphasize a focal point at this 'intersection. They also recommended that considera- tion be given to the flood Control project at the Cucammmona, Creed to avoid any conflict in channel construction and the landscaping project. Motiont Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Jones, carried unanimously, to ap- prove the minutes of May 14, 1980, as corrected. ANNOUNCEMENTS Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, advised, that the Citizen Advisory Committee would meet on Saturday, June 14, at the Cucamonga Neighborhood Facility, to review the Housing Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan. Mr. Hogan reported that the City Council has adopted. a resolution oppos- ing the proposed Affordable Housing Task Force and forwarded comments to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Hogan further reported that the Mayors and Planning Directors of ithe West End cities had drafted a letter that was presented to the Board of Supervisors on June 9 which opposed the Afford- able Housing Task Force in its present 'form. Mr. Hogan indicated that as a result of input to the Supervisors, this item was tabled. Further, a letter has been prepared to be signed by Mayor Schlosser requesting that the City be notifed should any further action on this matter be contem- plated. Mr. Hogan reminded the Planning Commission that a new chairman is to be elected at the first Planning Commission meeting in July. Commissioner Tolstoy proposed a motion to congratulate Michael Vairin and Jack Lan for their two years of service to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, indicating that he has appreciated the staff and how much they, have done. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Dahl and carried unanimously. CONSENT CALENDAR Motion: Moved by Jones, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to up- proNe Item A, Environmental Assessment of Parcel Map No. 5997 - Jacobs A residential subdivision of 5 acres into four parcels within the A-1 (Limited Agriculture) zone located on the west side of Et .wander Avenue north of Summit - 5992 Etiwanda Avenue - APN 225-111-31. PUBLIC HEARINGS SITE APPROVAL NO. Bo-M AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - SIGMA SHARE FOUNDA- TION - R. "A `NE i - A request for the establishment of an alcohol rehabi- litatican-center to be located in an existing industrial building within the Vanguard Industrial Park located on the northwest corner of 7th and A:rchl- bald in the M-R (Restricted Manufacturing) Zone - AP N 209-171-16. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any questions from the audience. Mr. R. Payne of the Sigma Share Foundation questioned whether the conditions included Sunday use of the facility for seminars. Staff advised that Sunday use would 'be allowed and, would be included, in the conditions. Planning Commission Minutes -2- June 11, 1980 There being no further questions, Chairman Bempel closed. the public hearing. Commissioner Tolstcay expressed his opinion that he felt it inappropriate for this type of 'business to be located in an industrial park'' and that there is a real problem in allowing these uses. However, that was decided by the Com- mission under the zoning determination and is not at issue here, therefore, he would vote for this item. Motion Moved. by Jones, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, to approve Resolution No. 8 -3 , as amended, allowing Sunday use of the facility park- ing lot. AXES. COMMISSIONERS: Janes, Dahl, Garcia, Tolstoy, Peanpel NOES: Ct IS TON RSe None ABSENT: C0 T a TONERS: None NEW BUSINESS PARCEL MAP NO. 5126 _ THOMAS G. AND JUDITH B. STEPHENSON - A residential subdivision of 3.30 acres into 4 parcels within the R--1- 0,000 wane loca- ted on the northwest corner of Klusman and; Whirlaway. A.PN - 01-071-4C & 49. Michael Va,irin, .Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Mr. vairin indicated that the Planning Commission had two captions; 1) require the ap- plicant to adjust the lines of lots 2 and 3 to meet the minimum "leaning Or- dinance requirement in terms of 'minimum widths, and. accept -the modified map, or ) require the applicant to provide additional street design and lot configuration studies. Following the staff report, Chairman Bemp l asked if there were any ques- tions from the audience. Mr. Bob Gilbert, Civil Engineer, responsible for preparing this plan, sta- ted that this property had been left in its present state by the previous developer and it was his opinion that; the plan as submitted is the only way the property can be developed. Mr. Gilbert further ivndicated that water will drain off of lot,one and into a, 'catch basin within the easement on the west side of the property. Discussion ensued 'between the Commissioners and Mr. Gilbert regarding park- ing space in the cul-de-sac area and water drainage, inasmuch as the area his a ten percent grade. Michael Va.irin, Associate Planner, suggested that a way to alleviate the parking problem would be to create an island. There was further discussion on this suggestion and Mr. Gilbert stated that increasing the cul-de-sac by 7-8 feet to a Tamer radius would also solve the problemof lot width. Mr. Brace Chi.tea, resident of Appaloosa Ct. , Alta Loma, addressed the Com- mission. He stated that he was concerned with inaccessibility around lus- man Avenue.' He indicarted that without an easement there is a ;problem in walking or riding a horse and asked Whether an easement would be provided Planning Commission Minutes -3- June 11, 198 for recreational purposes. Mr. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, responded nded to Mr. Chltea and stated that the slope is so extreme in this area 'that an easement could not be provided on the eastern boundary of this property. Following further Commission discussion, it was mewed by Dahl, sewconded. l Janes, carried unanimously', to approve Resolution No.80-314 , with conditions to enlarge lots -3, if necessary, provides an enlarged cul-de-sac with is- land for vehicle maneuvering, and amending condition No. 48. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl, Jones, Garcia, `olstd , Hempel NOES: C ICCIC , C: None CF COMMISSIONERS: None 8:05 p»rra. The Planning Commission recessed. 8:25 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. TENTATIVFa TRACT NO. 1114,61 «- LEWIS - A requ st to convert a previously ap- proved 248 unit apartment complex on 15.2 acres of land into condom nit rr . The project site is located on the north side of l th Street between Car- nelian and. Beryl ;in the R-3 (Multiple to ple Family Resiaentlal) Zane and generally known as Cu scar.pe II. Mr. Barry .1t ;an, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. He Indicated that the City Attorney had given his opinion that this complex, Cunsca.per II, was excluded from the provisions of the recently' adopted condominium m rat rtu e:rdtn« nce. Further, unless the City has an ordinance regulating the conversion of apartments into condominiums, there is no authority to condition the tentative map relative to design,; landscaping, parking or laundry facilities, etc. There being no further discussion by the Planning Commission, it was moved by Dahl, seconded by Jones, carried unanimously, to approve Resolution No. 80-3 , allowing they unsca e II apartments to to converted into condominiums. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl, Jones, Garcia, To stoy, R;empe.l NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None SFNT: COMMISSIONERS: one TIME EXTENSION REQUEST FOR DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. '79- 8 'FA IR RESEARCH CCM- ' k_NY : A r;qu.est'; for an extension-8f a previous., 9P7Pr"3ve-a ``t complex which is to be located on the northwest corner of Archibald' and. Nineteenth Street within the A-P (A inlstsative-P---ofesst.onal) Zone. Michael airin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Following the review, the City Attorneys; t~+r. Ted Hopson, painted out the actions the Commission had a va"llakale regarding this request, stating that if there were major :-evis ons to the plan it would require another Director Review, Ic if the changes were of a minor nature, they, should be alto ed. Itairman Re pel asked .if there were any qnestions from t,,°ae aud:i:,�rcce,. Planning Commission Minute -4- June 11, 1930 CITY CAE RANCHO CCfCA ONG PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 28, 18 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lions Park Community Center,; 11 Base Line Rd. , Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesdayy, May' 8, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7a05 p.m. , by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the pledge to the flag. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard. Dahl, Jorge Garcia,; Laura Janes, Peter Tolstoy, Herman Rempel ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Nine ALSO PRESENT: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, Ted Hopson City Attorney; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil Engineer; Joan Kruse, Secretary a� ANNOUNCEMENTS Jack Lam, ;Director of Community Development, reported there will be a meeting of the Southern California Planning Congress. on June 12 and requested and Commissioners who planned to attend to make their reserva.t'ions. Mr. Lam further advised that on June 14, a meeting was scheduled in the Neighborhood Facility to discus the General Plan. It would be an all. day meeting and will include the Housing and Land. Use Elements. Lam also advised that the City Council had adopted an urgency ordinance to es- tablish a'moratorium on condominium conversions at their meeting of May 21. The moratorium -would be effective for 90 days. He further a.d.vised that the Lewis De- velopment, Gunscape II, is exempted from the moratorium. He stated that because of the urgency of the matter, Planning Commissioners Tolstoy and. Dahl, would meet with representatives of the BIA and, Chamber of Commerce to review the proposed condomi- nium conversion ordinance so that a draft could be provided to the City Council for their action. It was suggested. that 'Tuesday,'; June 3, be set as the time for this meeting. Chairman Rempel asked if them had been any word from the County Planning Department regarding; the development taking place at the top of Hagen Avenue'. Jack Lam, Community Development Director, advised that the response from the Board. of Supervisors and Mr. lien Topping the County Planning Director,, has been that they will coordinate action to betaken on this. Discussion followed can the disparity between the City and County's procedure to disallow development in this seismic fault area.. The Planning Commission requested that staff pursue this matter. NEW BUSINESS REPORT REGARDING NEW COMPREHENSIVE GRADING ORDTNANCI Jerry Grant, Building Official, reviewed the staff report. He stated that the ordinance proposed for adoption by the City Council was divided into two portions. The first portion would set standards, whereas, the second portion Chapter 70 - Excavation and Grading, deals' with. the Uniform Building Code revisions. Grant explained that following input from Chairman Repel,,; some amendments to the originally proposed ordinance had been made and were included in the staff report for the Planning Commission's review. Considerable discussion ensued regarding the definition of natural slope'shaz- ard.s and the responsibilities of the Gradin Review Committee. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that one of the things he wised to see incorpo- rated into this ordinance was a statement that development within the City would have the least detrimental effect on the land. Following more discussion, :Jerry Grant asked. the Planning Commission if the proposed grading ordinance could be divided into two parts, one to deal with the language of the ordinance and the other dealing with the building cede portion. There was discussion on adopting Chapter 70 of ;the code without adopting the first portion of the ordinance. s ' carried una,nirrsou�l to ad d b done_ Moved b' Bahl seconded unanimously, adopt Mcatrcax�. � y , Chapter 70 - Excavation and Grading,of the Uniform Building Code. Further discussion ensued, on the definition of a natural slope; and comments from Mr. Hopson, City Attorney, regarding determination of liability, it was moved, by Tolstoy, seconded by canes, carried unanimously, that' Commissioners Rempel and Tolstoy would serve on a special committee to work out the wording of the; proposed grading ordinance before forwarding it to the City Council for action. ail CONSENT CALENDAR Chairman Rexpel asked if there were any questions from the audience before proceeding with the Consent Calendar. There being no discussion of the Consent Calendar items, it was moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Jones carried -unanimously, to approve the following Consent Calendar items as submitted: Planning Commission Minutes - - May 28, '198o Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 6076 Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 6085 Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 4837 Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 6125 8:: C p.m. The Planning Commission recessed.. 3 30 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. DIRECTOR REPORTS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Mr. Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer, reviewed the staff report which provided projects with priority ratings to be 'accomplished during the 1 8G- 1 fiscal year. Mr. Hubbs indicated that most of the resurfacing and reconstruction scheduled for this year was not accomplished due to funds required for storm damage repair and cleanup. Mr. Hubbs further indicated that it appeared there would be insufficient funds to complete all projects listed; however, these projects were subject to change based upon the reimbursements from Federal Disaster Funds. Mr. Hubbs recommended. that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 80-3 , approving the Capital Improvement Program. Commissioner Tol toy questioned a proposed storm drain crossing at Wilson Avenue Ir. Hubbs explained why the proposed crossing was to go there rather than a more direct crossing route. Commissioner Dahl asked why the traffic signal project was not included in this program. Hubbs explained, that this was a carryover from. the County, was outside of this program, and one that the County would fund. Chairman Rempel asked if there was any further discussion on this item. There being none, it was moved by dories, seconded. by Garcia, carried unani- mously, to adopt Resolution No. 80-30. PROPOSED POLICY STATEMENT RELATIVE TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING [r. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff report. He indicated that it may be anticlimactic to recommend that the City not support the proposed Affordable Housing Task Force Program inasmuch as the Hoard of Supervisors had met on it on Monday. However, he felt it every im- portant that the City voice its opposition to this proposed plan at this time. Following reading of Planning Commission Resolution No. 80-31, it was moved by Pahl, seconded by Jones, carried unanimously, to adopt the resolution re- commending that the City Council go on record in opposition to the proposed Affordable Rousing Task Force based upon the reasons contained. in the resolution.. Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 28, 1980 ESTABLISHING A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF RAISED LANDSCAPE MEDIAN ISLANDS FOR FOOTHILL BOULEVARD Mr. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff report. He indicated that contrary to CALTRANS policies on raised medians, the City Engineering staff feels that raised mediams would be an effective tool for controlling circulation along Foothill Boulevard. Commissioner Tolstoy raised the issue of safety in raised median islands and whether traffic is really, slowed by them. Chairman Re fuel asked if there were any questions from the audience. Mr. Jeff Sceranka, a businessman whose office fronts on Foothill Boulevard, indicated his support of the raised medians citing safety factors in alloving safer 'turns to be completed. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed that having turn pockets does ad.d to the safety dimension. Following discussion to and Resolution No. 80-26, it was moved by Dahl, seconded by Jones, carried unanimously, -to adopt the resolution as amended. Commissioner Dahl requested that staff continue review on the Planned Commu- nities so that it would be ready for consideration -after the General Plan has been approved. Mr. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner. indicated that would be possible, There being no further business, it was moved by Dahl., seconded by Tolstoy, carried iinauimoasly, to adjourn at 9.32 p.m. 9:32 P.m. The Planning Commission adjourned. Respect aal.ly SU mit edl Zeareta"...r. Planning Commission Minutes may 28, 1980 ZONING ORDI14ANCE AMENDMENT NO. 80- 01 - CONDO CONVERSION Community Development 'Director, Jack Lam, gave an introduction to the Planning Com- mission ission on the concerns relative to the condominium conversion ordinance. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, briefed. the Commission, stating that what the Commis- sion had before them was the result of their comments and those of the City Attor- ney, at the last Planning Commission meeting. He indicated that the number of dwelling its was left bland. The intent of the ordinance is not to control rent, but to' limit the conversion of units from ,apartments' to condominiums. can further indicated that this ordinance was different from those of other communities in that conversion was not tied -to the city's vacancy rate. Mr. Hogan related to the Commission, the ber of apartments currently, n than city and stated that Cx & 1 Developers, with 134 units, had filed for conversion. Cun sae Apartments with 425 gaits had also filed. Mr. Hogan further related that some d-uple units near the Magid Lamp restaurant have also submitted their request for conversion. Information from the State Map Act was provided. Mr. Hogan stated that :if the City does not have a condominium conversion ordinance, the City then does not have;the right to set standards an these units. Mr. Hogan indicated that `the ordinance be- fore the Planning Commission was a compendium worked out 'between the Chamber of Commerce, Developers and City staff and that not all, points of the ordinance were in total agreement by all parties. Chairman pe apel opened discussion to the audience. The following developers spoke in opposition to the condominium ordinance: Mr. Bob tVasta,se , representing C & p Builders m John Withers, Lewis Homes, Inc.' . Doug pone, hone and Associates, Inc. The developers, in general, felt that the law of supply and demand should govern whether condominium conversion should be allowed in. the City. They felt that restrictions set by the City would, hamper any additional rental unit construction.; There was considerable discussion by the Commission.is'sion.` Jack Lam asked the Planning Commission for direction in that one-third of the units in the; City were being pro- posed for condominium conversion. Further discussion ensued. It was moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, that Commissioners Dahl and Tolstoy be appointed to a committee to further study the Condominium Conversion ordinance, with input from Staff, the Chamber of Commerce and Developers ! caved. by Dahl, seconded by Rempel, carried unanimously, to adjourn at 11:25 p.m. , with the provision that the Comprehensive Grading Ordinance be the first item of new business can the next Planning Commission Agenda. Meeting adjourned at 1:25 p.m, s:p ct ul' ' bm tt;ed, JACI Community Development Planning Commission Minutes - _ May 14, 1980 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION PH INN May 14, 1980 Re u,la,r Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission f the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lions Paris Community Center, 9161 Base Line Ed. , Rancho Cuca,- mon a, an Wednesday, `May 14, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the pledge to the flag. OL14 CARD PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Peter Tolstoy, Herman Re pel ABSENT: C I ;STONE S: Laura Jones ALSO PRESENT: Jack Lam., Director of Co zunity Development; Teel Hopson, City Attorney; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Michael Va.i ri.n, Asso- ciate Planner; Tim Beedle, Associate Planner; Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil Engineer; Joan Kruse, Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Black Lan, Director of Community Development, reported there would be a ;present- ation at the Ontario Motor Speedway, pan May gl 1,980 at ` w C a.m. , by the Mobile Home Industry. Additionally, pending legislation concerning this industry would be discussed. He reminded the Commission of the Economic Development Conference to be held on May 22 in San Bernardino. "The Planning Commission was apprised of a tour of Hahn Regional Centers scheduled by the Ernest Hahn Company on Friday, May 28. All Planning Commissioners were invited to attend these meetings. reminder was also given' of the Planning Workshop scheduled for May 20. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Dahl requested that Item D be removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion. Upon a, motion by Commissioner Garcia, seconded, by Commissioner Tolst,oy, carried unanimously, the following Consent Calendar items were approved as submitted: Negative Declaration for Parcel Map o. 6011 Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 6070 Negative Declaration for a"Nortb Town" Street Improvement Project City of Rancho Cucamonga; Time Extension for Site Approval No. 7 -17 - D. Salter and Company Time Extension for Director review No. 7 -41 Westway Tnuektments, Inc, ?I t Commission discussion ensued regarding the requested time extension for Director Review No. 7 - - Mobil Oil. It was moved by Tolstoy, seconded. by Garcia, carried unanimously, to grant an ad- ditional.. six-month extension with the proviso that should construction not begin within that time, the station is to 'be rased., 'tams filled or removed, in accord- ance with the Fire and Uniform Building Codes. PUBLIC HEARINGS NEGATIVE IVE DECLARATION O CHANGE NO. 80--0 7 - C. H. BRUB ; R Change from w -1-.10,00 for property located ed on the southeast corner of Banyan and Amethyst Streets. Michael Viarin, Associate Planner, ner reviewed the staff report. Staff recommende d that the Commission adopt Resolution No. 80-27 approvingZone Change No. 8 a' with the issuance of n Negative tiv Declaration to the City Council.. "there was some Commission discussion regarding the realignment of Banyan Street near Amethyst as s result of the proposed development. Chairman empel opened the public hearing. r. Doug Hone, Hone Associates, Inc. , representing the applicant, C. H. Brubaker, explained the reason' for the requested change to 1.0,000 ;square foot lots in this i area. He further explained that the property ,;t be developed woul.d to properly buffered to ensure compatability with existing properties with animals. Mr. Floyd Herman, 9446 Banyan, Mancha Cucamonga, addressed the Commission and ex- pressed concern that rezoning to a smaller lot size than presently exists world precipitate complaints from future residents about smells' from adjacent animal properties;. Mr. Herman also indicated that he felt the existing water line would to a better plate to start 10,000 square foot lots than what was proposed by the developer. l Hawes, resident on Banyan Street expressed his concern that down sizing lots in this area would result in problems for current residents who have animal property. He also cited that increased density would result with lot size changes. Commission discussion ensued relative to lot sizes to preclude a "cookie cutter" look. There being no further comments from the',audience, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearings Potion: Mewed by Garcia, seconded. by, Dahl, carried unanimously, to approve liesolaxtion No. 81- 7 with the conditionthat all prospective buyers in this, proposed tract he made aware of the' adjacent animal properties. Planning Commission Minutes - - may 14, 1 8o CORRECTION to Planning Commission Minutes of May 14, 1980 CARNELIA,N STREET LANDSCAPE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, that the Planning Commission recommended adoption by the City Council of Concept B, alternates 1 and 2. The Planning Commission further recommended that the project start at Foothill Boulevard and proceed northerly and that additional priority be given to the intersection of Carnelian and 19th. If monies are available, trees should be planted at Carnelian and 19th to emphasize a focal point at this= intersection. They also recommended that consideration be given to the Flood Control project, at the Cucamonga Creed to avoid any conflict in channel construction and the landscaping project. NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND SITE APPROVAL NO. 0-0'3 - BILL WYCKOFF - The development of a preschool to be located, at '9 12 Rase Line.` Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommended approval of Resolution No. 80-28 with the addition of conditions of approval. Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. Mrs. Charlotte Wykoff, Administrator of the California Learning Centers, addressed the Commission. She explained the number of students and parents her enterprise serves in both Upland and the City of Rancho Cucamonga at the present time. In answer to Commission questions regarding the amber of square feet required per preschool child she indicated that state codes require between 20-25 square feet. Chairman Rempel asked if anyone wished to spew in opposition to this propose site approval. Mr. Del Hubbard., 7234 Hellman Avenue, indicated that he repres-ented< a. large num- ber of property owners in the surrounding area who were opposed to this preschool and who had signed petitions citing their;disaproval. Of concern to the oppos- ing property owners was alteration of the rural atmosphere; noise, increased traf- fic and the possibility of- displacing; those residents with animal property, There being no other comments, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing. Planning Commission discussion ensued relative to provision of a block wall around the proposed preschool., a corner cut-off on the northwest cornier of the gall to allow proper vision by oncoming traffic, and a condition that children in the play area to impeded from entering the parking lot and, street. Following discussion; the Commission felt that the stems of discussion should be Left to staff for dei.si.oi t was moved, by Pahl, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to approve Res- olution No . 80- , subject to the conditions of approval and correction to con- dition No. 8, amending the hours of operation. ' : C p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. : 53 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. Chairman Rempel requested that Item K, Carnelian Street Landscape Demonstration Project be moved up in the agenda. CARNELIAN STREFT LANDSCAPE DEMONSTRATION PROJECT - from Church Street to Reechwood Drive r. Tack Lam, Director of Community Development introduced the report, and Harry Rogan, Senior Planner, discussed the item. r. Stephen Fong of Genge and Associates, consultants for this project, introduced Mr. Alan Fishman and. Mr. Mark Brennan, who had worked on;this preliminary report. The consultants reviewed for the Planning Commission, the existing conditions and urban framework of Carnelian Street,' citing drainage, view, image of the community, and the plan goals and design. objectives.' Following the' explanation of various conceptual designs for Carnelian Avenue, slides were shown to the Planning Com- mission, depicting proposed landscaping alternatives. Planning Commission Minutes -3- may 1. , 1980 Various tree concepts, i. ,.;, , vertical and canopy, were an-..,,. as landscaping pos- sibilities. Treatment of walkways, equestrian trails, parkway landscaping and node planting in shopping centers was presented.. The Planning Commission questioned the spread of trees that would farm canopies over the streets; and whether considerable maintenance would be required after ma- turity of the trees was reached. r. Alan Fishman of tlenge Consultants, answered: that the treed would reach a height f C }rC' and would not require pruning. The trees 'would form an umbrella that mould cover the entire street. The Commission spoke to the issue of costs of landscaping. The consultant stated that the cost of Concepts A and B, which were presented, would be about the same. In toddy's dollars, approximately 3-1/2 miles of landscaping would cost about oo,CC11. BarryHogan, ra Senior Planner, asked. the.. Com mission n to make adeter determination ofprior- ities _ aand concepts to forward to the City Council. for action. Commissioner empel asked if there were a possibility of working out a cooperative' agreement for development of the commercial node :landscaping and also requested that the planting of pecan trees be investigated because of their easy care and attraction to birds. f t Chairman R�p el. asked if theta. as an discussionusuaodiscussiontom the sud.ience. Sharon, Romero, member of the Citizens Advisory Committee, stated that the majority of the CAC r°eecommended that work. on Carnelian Avenue landscaping proceed from Foot- hill Boulevard, north. She stated that: the Commission also recommended that one variety of trees be planted. It was the feeling of they Commission that this pro- ject would have immediate _positive impact on the community. Motion: Moved. by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, that the Planning Commission recommended adoption` by the City Council of Concept B, alternates 1 and C. The Planning Commission further reco ' ended that the ;project start at Foothill Boulevard and proceed norMtner•ly. They also requested that consideration be given to the Flood Control project at, the Cucamonga Creek to avoid any conflict in chan- nel constriction and the landscaping prol dct. ADOPTION OF INTERIM RECRFATION ELEMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN Mt. Tim Reedle, Associate planner, reviewed the staff report and provided the Plan- ning Commission with information relative to the adoption of the interim Recreation Element to the General Plan. Brief discussion ensued yang the Commissioners concerning urbanization factors contained in the draft element. Community Development Director,' Jack Lam, advised the Commission of the urgency of providing the Interim Recreation Element to the General Plan and stated that Cedway/Cooke, the City's consultants were in the process of developing one. Following discussion by the Planning Commission on the interim mature of this ele- ment, it was moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, to adopt Resolution No. 80-29, recommending that the City Council approve an amendment to the General Plan to include the Recreation Element. 10<10 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. 10. 'p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. Planning Commission Minutes -,a- l ery 14, l 3C CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 23, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, April 23, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. , by Chairman Rempel , who led the meeting with the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl , Jorge Garcia, Peter Tolstoy, Herman Rempel ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Laura Jones ALSO PRESENT: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Ted Hopson, City Attorney; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, Michael Vairin, Associate Planner; Tim Beedle, Associate Planner; Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil Engineer, and Joan Kruse, Secretary CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM A, PARCEL MAP NO. 6011 was removed from the Consent Calendar on request by S-taff. -Upon-motion by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, and unanimously carried, the following Consent Calendar items were approved as submitted: Environmental Assessment of Parcel Map No. 3383 - James Banks, Jr. Enrivonmental Assessment of Parcel Map No. 5792 - Warmington Environmental Assessment of Parcel Map N . 5981 - Arlan W. Walton NEW BUSINESS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 11434 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - R. R. WILCOX - The division of 8.10 acres of land zoned MR into 10 lots, located on the northwest cor- ner of Seventh Street and Hellman Avenue. Paul Rougeau, Associate Engineer, reviewed the staff report in detail . Upon con- clusion of the staff report, the staff recommended issuance of a Negative Declara- tion for the map and approval of the map with the standard Engineering conditions and special conditions listed in Resolution No. 80-20. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to staff. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what the existing uses were to the north of the subject site. Paul Rou eau stated that there was a mixture of residential and industrial with three single family residential dwellings located on the northeast corner of the subject property. i the applicant present and whether r not the would Chairman Rempel asked f app ca was p � y p like to add to the staff report. Bob Mom Mack of Mim Mack Engineering, stated that they would like the Planning Com- mission to consider changing condition three of the Engineer's report to either require non-vehicular access to Hellman on lots 1 and Z or lot 1 only. He stated that the main entrance would be from lot 10. Chairman Rempel asked for any further comments from the applicant or audience. `here being none, Chairman Rempel asked for further discussion from the Planning Commission. The Commission discussed the idea of limiting access to Hellman and whether that access should be limited to lots l or lots 1 and 2. The consensus of the Commission was that limiting access to lots 1 and 2 would make more sense and be more compatible with the present access policy previously approved by the Planning Commission . A motion was made by Commissioner To stay seconded by Commissioner Garcia, to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 1134 and issue a Negative Declaration based upon the conditions and findings listed in the Resolution No. '80-20 and changing con- dition 3 to prohibit access from Hellman Avenue to lots l and Z, AYES; COMMISSIONERS: DAHL, TOLSTOY, GARCIA, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS; 'NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS. BONES DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 80-16 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - 'MEYER INVESTMENT - The development of an Industrial Park located on the east side of -Archibald,-south of Sixth Street. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report in detail which is on file in the Planning Division. He reported that the proposed development plan was in conformance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance pending adoption of the proposed conditions of approval . Staff recommended issuance of a Negative Decla- ration based upon review of the Initial .Study and approval of the project based upon the findings and conditions listed in the proposed Resolution 'of Approval ® In addition, it was recommended that the condition listed to require the removal of the illegal uses on the front of the property be done prior to the issuance of building permits. Commissioner Rempel asked the Commission if they had any ,questions 'of staff regarding the staff report. The Commission asked several clarification questions iwhich were responded to by staff'. Commissioner Rempel then asked if the applicant 'was present and whether or not he had anything to add to the report given. Cary Ocumura, the project architect, made further clarifications to the project and answered questions for the planning Commission. motion was made by Commissioner Tolstoy and seconded by Commissioner Garcia;, to approve Director Review No. 80-16 and issuance of a Negative Declaration based upon the findings and conditions listed in the Resolution of Approval with the amendment by staff. Planning Commission Minutes - - April 23, 1980 In addition, a motion included amending condition 1 of the Resolution to require staff to review the tree study provided by applicant and determine which trees would be possible to save and incorporate into the final landscape design and that speci- men size trees will be replanted in the area where removal is necessary. ,RYES:: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl , Garcia, Tolstoyf, Rempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jones DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 80-17 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - ARNOLD AN ERSON - The de- velopment of a mobile home park to be located on the east side of Vineyard Avenue,, approximately 600 font sough of Foothill Boulevard. Michael Vairrn Associate Parmor°. reviewed i d he staff report in detail which ;is on .ewe t p file in the Planning Division. He reported concerns relative to the park not meet- ing the existing code standards for a mobile hone pare. Further, he stated that substantial' revisions will be necessary in order to bring the park into conformance with the present standards as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission discussed the different types of improvements they felt were necessary in the mobile home park to portray the character which the community would like to see in such developments. The majority of the Commission felt that the proposed design did not meet the present standards of the City Code and would require substantial redesign Commissioner Rempel felt that enough time had already been spent on the review of the project and significant revisions have already been rude to the project and that mobile hone parks are an entirely different kind of development providing a different kind of life style motion was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Garcia to re- turn this item to the Design Review Committee for their review and recommendations on design considerations and brought back to the Planning Commission for final review} RYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl , Garcia, Tol st y NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Rempel ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS Jones Commissioner Rempel stated' that he voted no because he was opposed to the additional time constraints placed on the project. APPEAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 5893 - BARTON - Dividing a lot into two parcels for the property located on the north side of Victoria between Etiwanda and East Avenue. Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil Engineer, presented the staff report in detail , which is on file in the Engineering Division. He reported that. the ,applicant is opposed to the installation of street improvements which is a requirement that has been established through Ordinance by the City Council . He further reviewed for the Commission the technicality that the Commission cannot overturn an Ordinance re- quirement and an Ordinance amendment would be required in order to allow deviation from the Ordinance policy. Planning Commission Minutes -3- April 23, 1980 Chairman Rempel asked the Commission if they had questions of the staff 'regarding the report. There being none, Chairman Rempel asked the applicant if he had a pre- sentation to make. Mr® Bob Barton addressed the Commission, stating his concerns for the appeal . Ba- sically, he reported that installation of street improvements at this time would not be warranted' given the fact that either side of his parcel was not improved and that such improvements may destroy gees in the area and that a sidewalk' would lead from nowhere to nowhere. The Commission responded to Mr. Barton by stating that it is the City's policy to require the installation of improvements and that we could be `flexible on the in- stallation of the sidewalk and trying to save the existing trees. motion was made by Chairman Rempel and seconded by Commissioner Dahl to deny the appeal and direct staff to establish a bond for the construction of the sidewalk at a later time and work with the applicant to save :as many trees as possible. AYES: COMMISSIONERS : _ Dahl , Garcia Tolstoy, Rempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT, COMMISSIONERS: Tones DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. '0-1 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DLON/GARTCN - Conceptual review o the Master Plan for the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park generally located; on the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Haven ,Avenue. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, presented the staff report in detail ,; which i on file in the Planning Division. He reported that` this `is a review of the concep- tual master plan for the entire Business Park development. This review will also include review of the Environmental Impact Report and whether or not the EIR is adequate in terms of its contents and findings* Additionally, Mr. Vairin stated that two actions would be necessary for this item, one being the finding that the IR is adequate, the other being approval of the conceptual master plan. Mr. Vairin reported that a master plan is generally consistent 'with 'the overall goals and po- licies of the City for this area and that the EI1I is adequate in terms of the re- quirements of the State Environmental Quality Act and Local City Environmental Or- dinances. Mr. Vairin reported that detailed pamphlets and brochures have been de- veloped by ;the applicant and are included in the Commissioner's packets for their review and consideration. A further' detailed presentation will be done by the ap- plicant and questions may be addressed to the applicant for detailed explanations. Chairman Rempel asked the applicant to present his material . Jack Corrigan, of the Gaon Corporation, addressed the Planning Commission and intro- duced his development; staff, He stated that he is available for any questions or comments that needed to be clarified and that he world tarn over the presentation program to the project planner, Gil Martinez. Gil Martinez approached the Planning Commission and presented a detailed exhibit with slides, sketches and narration.' Chairman Rempel asked' the Commission if they had any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Garcia asked the applicant to give a more detailed description of their concept of water carrying streets and how flood control and drainage of the project will work„ Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 23, 1980 Mr. Gil Martinez outlined the various aspects of flood control within the project and how the design of the project and the streets were done for drainage and flood control purposes. Further, he explained that the phasing of the project is due to the timing of improvements to Deer Creek and other flood control measures. The perimeter of the project area will be developed first with the central region of the project area developing last as the central area of the project is most suscep- tible to flooding. Jack Lam indicated to the Commission that there are appropriate mitigation measures placed on the first phase of the project which will require bonding for improvements to the storm drain master plans system prior to issuance of building permits and occupancy. Commissioner Garcia requested that the applicant discuss the traffic circulation concepts and how the circulation system will function. Paul Wilkinson, traffic engineer for the applicant, approach the Commission and in detail outlined the circulation system proposed for the project, including s,ig- nalized intersections , traffic volumes, stop signs, and projected street capacities. Commissioner Garcia was concerned about the projected air pollution impacts that may be caused as a result of this project. Sandra Gaffney, representing the EIR consultant for the applicant reviewed the air quality aspects of the project with the Planning Commission. She reported that the EIR has incorporated mitigating measures as requested by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Commissioner Garcia asked if there is any analysis within the EIR relative to fis- cal impacts of the project to the City. Sandra Gaffney, the EIR consultant, reported that the fiscal impacts of this project to the City are 'very positive. Long range analysis indicates that the City would gain a revenue of approximately $161 ,000 per year. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any other questions from the Commission to the applicant. There being none, he asked if anyone in the audience had any comments to make. There being none, the Chairman asked the Commission if there were any further questions or discussion on this project. There being no further discussion by the Commission, the motion was made by Com- missioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy to approve Director Review No. 80-12 and find that the FIR for the project is adequate. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl , Tolstoy, Garcia, Rempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jones Since the meeting time was approaching 11 :00 p.m. , the Chairman asked if there was a motion to continue with Items K and E, after a short recess. It was unanimously approved by the Commission to continue with Items K and E following a brief recess, 10:57 p.m. The Planning Commission recessed. 11 :10 p.m. The Planning Commission reconvened. Planning Commission Minutes -5- April 23, 1980 DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. C-13 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT G-13 - GA N R R U A TN - Spe- cific site plan review for the development of a lg acre light industrial park as a portion of the overall development known as the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park. r. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reported in detail the findings of the staff report to the Planning Commission. He reported that this phase of the project has been designed in accordance with all applicable zoning ordinances, General Plan and other development standards. He reported that the Design Review and Develop- ment Review Committees both have reviewed tbem and had the same concern that the single lot/single building portion of the site is too rigid and net flexible in its design nor site planning. He reported that the applicants are providing some additional information this evening that would better shown what kind ofdevelop- ment will be done as a result of this proposed design and that the Commission has the opportunity to review those additional plans and decide whether or not the pro- posed development is one which meets the standards of the City. Chairman Rempel asked for questions of the staff report from the Commission to staff. Some questions were asked relative to clarification on the access policy which were clarified by staff. There being no further questions from the Commission to staff, Commissioner Repel asked if the applicant had anything to add i to staff's presen- tation Jack Corrigan of Gaon Corporation, reported to the Commission that they have changed the project to reflect some of the concerns of the Design Review Committee. In addition, he reported' that they have prepared additional graphic representations of the project as it may look when constructed. He 'stated that any further ques- tions `or details of the architectural design of the project can be referred to his design; team. Commissioner Dahl asked if there were areas in this phase that could incorporate the use of benches or seating areas to create a better atmosphere within the park. Gil Martinez responded by indicating'that there are mounded areas and landscaped areas where such furniture' could be incorporated. He further reported that the designs of the facility would be low key park-like settings with high quality and a significant amount of landscaping. He further reported that this; site contains approximately 18 percent landscaping which is somewhat higher than even the stan- dards used by Irvine. Commissioner Garcia voiced concern to the applicant that this phase of the project is so significantly different thatn the rest of the project in than the density of the: building is extremely high and the amount of open space and site design is much less. Mr. Corrigan of Gaon Corporation stated that they have done several market studies in the area which have indicated that there is-a great need for a small 'industrial business complex. Phase I of this project is not intended to be repeated through- out the rest of the project and Dann is willing to comply with all landscape stan- dards and zoning ordinance requirements . ommsisioner Garcia stated that some focus on main entrances into the project would significantly increase the aesthetics of the project and asked whether or not such could be accomplished'. Planning Commission Minutes -6- April 23, 1980 Mr. Corrigan stated that increased landscaping and designs can be applied to those main entry areas to help accomplish this. After no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Com- missioner Dahl , to approve Director Review No. 80-13 based upon the conditions listed in the Resolution and subject to the following additional condition; That the detailed landscape and irrigation plans be brought back to the Commfssion for their review and consideration and that such plans should focus upon main entry ways off of Haven and into the condominium section of the project. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl , Tolstoy, Garcia, Rempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jones REQUEST BY HENRY REITER FOR USE OF FLAGS FOR AN INDUSTRIAL LEASING OFFICE - Located on the southwest corner of Arrow and Archibald. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reported to the Commission that this was an item that was continued previously by the Commission to allow the developer an opportunity to present a plan of action. Mr. Reiter showed the Commission various slides of the community indicating that there is a need and justification for use of flags for onsite leasing offices in the industrial area. The Planning Commission discussed the appropriateness for the use of flags. Much discussion centered around the idea of developing a pilot program to see whether or not the flags would be an appropriate use for attracting potential tenants to this particular site. After considerable disucssion, it was finally decided that a pilot program of somethingalong that line should be developed by the Design Review Committee and brought back to the Planning Commission for their review and consideration prior to final review and consideration prior to final review and ap- proval by the City Council . A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl , seconded by Commissioner Rempel , to have a pilot program developed for this site by the Design Review Committee and brought back before the Planning Commission for review and approval prior to consideration by the City Council . AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Dahl , Garcia, Rempel NOES: COMMISSIONERS: Tolstoy ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Jones There being no further discussion by the Commission, a motion was made by Commis- sioner Dahl , seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy, and unanimously carried, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of April 23, 1980. 12:20 p.m. The Planning/Commission adjourned. Resper,tfidly submitted,, # JACK LAM, Director of Community Development is Planning Commission Minutes -7- April 23, 1980 Commissioner Tolstoy asked why he felt the industrial site was more to his liking then if he were to go to office professional or office area. Mr. Payne replied the amount of space of area available and secondly the cost. Commissioner Tolstoy expressed his concern with the request and wondered whether or not the M-R zone should contain these kinds of uses which do not operate within the industrial area but to the greater community. Mr. Lam explained that there is a broader consideration. The General Plkan indi- cates the area for industrial use. One of the key issues that is under considera- tion by the Industrial Committee of the Chamber of Commerce is the whole issue of what are appropriate uses in the industrial area. The concern is twofold; one is that the gateways to the industrial area seem to be developing in a commercial strip and that is looked at as undesirable and the second point is given the state of the market now, the more non-basic industrial uses that are put in the industrial area take away from the administrative-professional areas primarily because of cost. The matter before the Commission tonight is not only whether it is consis- tent with the M-R zone but also how the General Plan as interpreted by the Plan- ning Commission. Commissioner Dahl made a motion that the partciular use be allowed on the basis that it is similar to the other allowable uses in the M-R zone district subject to Site Approval. Seconded by Commissioner Jones. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any wishing to speak. There being none, Chairman Rempel closed the hearing. Motion 4-1. Commissioner Tolstoy wanted the record to show that he is not against the project but feels it is an inappropriate use in the industrial zone. AYES: DAHL, JONES, GARCIA, RE24PEL NOES: TOLSTOY ABSENT: NONE There being no further discussion by the Commission, a motion was made by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously carried to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of April 9, 1980. The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Resp ctfully s7lbmitted, L4 JA& AM, Director o Community Development Planning Commission Minutes -7- April 9, 1980 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA' PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 9, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Liens Park Community Center,; 9161, Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga on Wednesday, ;April 9, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura .banes, Peter Tolstoy, and Herman Rempel ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None ALSO PRESENT: .lack Lam,, Director of Community Development; Ted Hopson, City Attorney Rarer Hogan, Senior Planner; Michael Valrin, Associate Planner; and Paul Ro gea , Associate Civil Engineer MINUTES The Planning Commission minutes of March 12, 1980 were approved upon a motion b Commissioner ,Jones, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously carried. ANNOUNCEMENTS Joan Kruse was introduced. .lack Lam reminded the Commission of the Irvine tour on April 12,- 1980 8:00 a*m at the Lions Park Community Center. Mr. Hogan informed the Commission of the Alta Loma Cable T : completing their requirements. — iJ CONSENT" CALENDAR motion :was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, and unanimously carried to approve the following; consent calendar items. 1. Environmental Assessment of Director review No. 0 -0 - L.V. Hofgaarden . Environmental Assessment of Director Review No. 80-10 - Howard Hocks PUBLIC HEARING SITE APPROVAL NO. 80-92 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - JOSEY BARKAN - The development of an auto dismantling yard to be located at 13195 Whittram Avenue Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the Staff Report. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the' Commission of the staff. There being name, the public hearing was opened. Wayne Tlehdrycks, Kreuper Engineering and Associates of San Bernardino, repre- senting Josey `Barka:n (applicant), _questioned' the stacking of vehicles. The appli- cant asked for 14 foot high stacking a minimum of 150 feet from the wall.. The applicant also questioned the width of the opening from Whittram Avenue. Mr. Vair n explained the zoning ordinance requirements in addition to the fire district requirements. Chairman Rempel asked for questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what the type of vehicle storage is proposed. The applicant explained it will be auto, dismantling specializing in foreign cars. Commissioner Tolst y asked how the stacking would be done. The, applicant explained it would be done stacking in the rank. Chairman Rempel asked if there are any other; questions. Chairman asked if there are any others in the audience wishing to speak in favor or opposition of the request. There being none, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Rempel asked for additional comments from. the Commission. Commissioner Bahl made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 80-19 with the change to Section 3, Item 2 to change that auto bodies shall he stacked no more than 14 Y high within the line of site of the 8" fence to a maximum of 14 r » Jonas seconded the motion. AYES: DAHL, JCNES, GARCIA, TOLSTO , REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Planning Commission Minutes -2- ' April 9 198 PUBLIC HEARING ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-04 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - ACACIA CONSTRUCTION - A change of zone from A-1 to R 3 or more restrictive zoning for property located on the southwest corner of Faker and Foothill. Barry Hogan, Senior P'l.anner, reviewed the staff report;, and, reported that the request is consistent with the General Plan. Chairman Rempel opened the public ;hearing for all those who would like to spew on the zone change request. There being none, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Jones recommended adoption of the Resolution which was seconded by Commissioner Garcia. The motion was unanimously carried, AYES: JONES, GARCIA, DABL, TOLSTOY, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT; NONE PUBLIC BEARING ZONE CHANGE NO. 0-05 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - JUDITH AND THOMAS STEM' SON change of zone: from R--1- 1 to R-1-20,000 or more restrictive zoning for property located on the northwest corner of Kinsman and Whirlaway. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. Chairman asked what the size Lot I was in the Staff Report that was 20,000 square feet, i Staff indicated that the parcel map would return- to the Planning Commission for consideration and Lot i.'s configuration would be eviewed at that time. Chairman Rempel asked whether the applicant was present. They were not. Chairman Rem pl then asked whether or not there'were any an the audience wishing to speak in favor of or opposition to the zone change. There being none, the public hearing was closed. Chairman Rempel asked for comments of the Commission. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what the size of the lots were on Amethyst. I Paul Roueau replied they were half acre or ;greater. Commissioner Dahl expressed his desire that the applicant be notified of the Commissions' concern on the site Layout with particular consideration to the configuration: of Lot #1. Planning Commission Minutes -3 April 9, 1980 Jack lam stated that the Commission could state their concern when theenviron- mental assessment for the Parcel Map comes before them for review. A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl to adopt Resolution No. 80-07. Co i sinner Garcia seconded. There 'being no further discussion on the motion, it was unanimously approved. AYES: DAHL, GARCI , JONES, TOLSTC , REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT. NONE CANE CHANGE NO. 80-06 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - DELL MCDANIEL. INC. lone Change from A-1 to R-1 for 10 acres located on the northeast corner of Church and Ramona. Assessor's Parcel No. 1077- 01- 7. Michael Vairin presented the staff report. Chairman R mpel asked for ;questions of Staff. Commissioner Garcia asked if there was a subdivision proposed. Tyr. Vairin explained that this is preliminary* to subdivisions which might occur when the Growth Management allows the filings on August 1. Chairman R mpel asked if the applicant wished to add anything to this report: Applicant did not. Chairman then asked if there was any opposition to the report. built ` Cindy Craig r i on Teak. a asked what would be b t on thatro property, and asked_ l _ whether one or two story buildings could be allowed. She felt that some of the privacy uvuld be lost if two story homes were allowed. Chairman Rompel assured Mrs. Craig that the City would look into the development f the property very closely. Chairman Rempel then asked if there were any others wishing to speak. There being none, Chairman Rem el closed the public hear-ink;. Commissioner Garcia moved for recommendation of approval of the zone change to the City Council, seconded by Bahl. There being no further discussion, the motion was unanimously approved. AYES: GARCIA, DAHL, JONE S, TOLSTOY, R MPEL NOES• NONE SENT: NONE Commissioner Tol.stoy asked for a five Minute break. Meeting reconvened at 7:54 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 9°, 1.98 NEW BUSINESS TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11428 - DATA DESIGN-- Located north of Foothill Blvd, between Center and Haven. This item was presented. by Jack Lam, Director of Community Development. Commissioner Tolstoy;asked a question relative to the building set-back from Deer Creek. He was concerned that there may not be enough land available. Paul Fougeau explained that there was enough land since the channel itself was ' to 45' wide. Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the applicant. Carlton Lockwood, spoke for the applicant and requested that sidewalks be struck from conditions of approval. He also asked that Condition #3, Section 3, that additional statement be added tht would allow other means of flood' protection to minimize building set-back now rewired by the condition. Commissioner To stoy expressed some concern regarding amendment to Condition # because of the flow during storm periods. He expressed concern that we might e creating a dangerous situation for the structures. r. Lockwood felt that the City would be `protected `if the flood control had to approve the. alternative °measure. also. Commissioner Garcia asked if the condition might read; A 10 ' building set -back line from the flood control right-of-way ;shall remain in force until permanent drainage facilities are installed in beer Creek or other alternative measures acceptable to the San. Bernardino County Flood Control Department. After much discussion over whether or not the conditions should be allowed, Chairman empel recommended approval of Resolution No, 0-1 ' subject to amendments to Section .3, Condition #3 as stated.;by Commissioner Garcia with the addition of "and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer". Also sidewalks should be deleted. Seconded by Commissioner Garcia. The Planning Commission vote was --2 with Commissioner Tolstoy and Commissioner Dahl in opposition due to the flood control. problems. AYES: T'EL GARCIA, JONES TOLSTOY DAHL SENT: NONE TENTATIVE TRACT'MAP NO. 1141 CITY 4F RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Reversion to acreage. of Tracts 9399 and 9 00 _ Located on the north side of Banyan Strait, west.. of Beryl' Street. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, presented the Staff Report. Planning Commission Minutes - - April. 9`, 1980 Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of staff. Commissioner Jones asked why the need for a tentative tract map? Mr. Lam explained the procedure required by the State Subdivision Map Act. Chairman Rempel asked for anyone wishing to speak regarding this item. There being none, he asked for discussion from the Commission. Coumissioner Garcia asked whether there was any bonding money that would have Ito be reimbursed. Mr. Lam explained that there is a small amunt of bonding left that would be used to pay for the cost of reversion. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any further comments. There being none, Commissioner Garcia moved for approval of Resolution No. 80-14, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy and unanimously approved. AYES: GARCIA, TOLSTOY, DAHL, JONES, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE COUNCIL REFERRAL - None DIRECTOR REPORTS - REQUEST BY SIGMA SHARE FOUNDATION for locating an operation in, the industrial. area. Report presented by Michael Vairin. Commissioner Garcia asked if this was an out-patient clinic or would there be overnight staying. Staff referred the question to the applicant. The Chairman asked for questions or, presentation by the applicant. Ron Payne, of Sigma Share, stated in answer to the question that it was an out- patient and in the evenings there would be classes and seminars no later than 10:00 p.m. There would be no weekend activity, seminars or classes. Traffic presents no problem. The people that come to them would not be intoxicated. If they are, they would be arrested. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the service was treatment and education. Mr. Payne replied that they are both. Planning Commission Minutes -6- April 9, 1980 CITY OF CHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TINO March C , 10 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the City of Ranches Cucamonga Planning Commission was held in the ;Lion's Park Community Center 9161 Base Line Read, Rancho Cucamonga, an Wednesday, March 26, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Rempel, who .led in the pledge to the flag. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners: Berman Rempel, Jorge Garcia, Richard Dahl , Laura Jones, Peter Tolstoy Absent: Commissioners: None Also Present: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, Ted Hopson, City Attorney Paul Ron eau., Associate Civil Engineer APPROVAL OF MINUTES No action was taken on the Minutes since ozone were available. ANNOUNCEMENTS o announcements were made at this time. CONSENT" CALENDAR Motion: Moved by Garcia, seconded by Tolstoy, carried unanimously, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 8o-o - GEORGE ROBINS - A request for the development of a 44,625 square foot industrial building to be located on 2.8 acres of land located on the crest side of Hyssop, south`;of "nth Sheet M- `Zone ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF PARCEL MAP NO. 55 _ BARRY J.. 1 CL ' A re- quest for the division of approximately 2.49 acres of land located approx- imately 1,000 feet south of Summit Avenue and. 250 feet east of East Avenue into four ()4 ) lots in the R-1 Zone. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: GARCIA, TOLSTOY;, JONES, DAHL, REMPEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried- GENERAL PLAN REPORT on Alternative Regional Shopping Centers Mr. Lam, Director of Community, Development, presented the staff report. He provided a brief history for those of the audience who had not been attending the previous meetings on the alternative shopping center or the general plan. Mr. Lam stated that in order to complete the work of developing a draft General Plan for public hearing, and in order to complete the draft envi- ronmental impact report, the Planning consultant needs some direction from the Planning Commission and City Council as to policy, in terms of the location of a potential regional shopping center, so that a Land Use Ele- ment can be completed. The Director stated that the decision made tonight would not be for the approval of a regional shopping center not for the design of a shopping center, but about the location of a shopping center relative to the goals and objectives established for the community. Mr. Lam indicated that he would request that the Planning Commission give a recommendation to the City Council in terms of policy direction for the consultant, in order to guide them in preparing a draft General Plan for public hearing purposes. Chairman Rempel asked the Commission if there -were any comments or ques- tions of this report. There being none, the Chairman set out the ground rules for the presentations by the Lewis abd Homart Group and by the Hahn and Lyon Group. The Chairman asked that there be a five to ten minute presentation, then comments from the audience, then discussion by the Commission. The Commission agreed that this was satisfactory. Chairman Rempel indicated that the Commission would like all points to be brought up but that there be no repetition or redundancy. The Chairman asked Mr. Lewis to lead off. Ralph Lewis of Lewis Homes, owner and developer of Terra Vi sta., approxi- mately 1300 acres loca:ted at the intersection of Haven and Foothill. Mr. Lewis wished to point out that traffic -was not a major issue and that any reasonable location for a regional shopping center could be made to -work trafficwise. He felt that a major issue is what the people of Rancho Cucamonga want. He indicated that his staff had taken a survey at some of the shopping centers and there was a preference for the Haven and Foot- hill site over the Devore and Foothill site. They approached 1053 people and asked to sign a petition. Out of those, '(45 signed it and said, in effect, that 70% of the people approached preferred the site proposed by Lewis rather than the site by the freeway. Of the people who refused to sign, 48 of them said they did not live in the City and Mr. Lewis did not want strangers to sign the petition. Another 107 of the shoppers said that they were too busy or did not have an opinion. Out of the 1053 people contacted, only 89 refused to sign because they said they prefer the Hahn site. That is less than 9% of the people interviewed. Mr. Lewis indicated how their park system would approach the center and how people would get there. Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 26, 1980 The specific design and engineering has not been worked out but either an underpass or an overpass could be provided crossing Cleveland. You -would be able to ride a bike, stroll, or walk from anywhere along the greenbelt right into the center. Mr. Lewis also indicated that their Flood Control Engineer was present tonight to discuss any problems that may be associated with the project. Additionally, Mr. Lewis pointed out that the center is more convenient for all the people at Chaffey College and would, in fact, employ many of the students at Chaffey. Mr. Lewis indicated that Mr. Hahn had offered an interest in the property to May Co. and Broadway. In talking with their associates in Chicago to- day, the Lewises and. Homart thought why give an interest to the department stores, that they would rather give it directly to the community so they were prepared to say that they would offer to the City 10 acres for a civic center attached to the shopping center, which the Lewises believed has a market value in excess of $100,000 an acre so that the donation could amount to over $1 million. They believe it is more in the public interest than sharing the site with the department stores. Alan Tibbetts, 120 Linden Avenue, Long Beach, an attorney appearing for Homart, relayed that there were two concerns for Ho-mart. First, that whatever form the recommendation the Planning Commission makes tonight not preclude Homart from presenting further evidence in support of the project since there are many questions, and studies underway of interest that will bear on the decision that is to be made. Second, that as the General Plan comes before the Planning Commission and City Council for certification or approval there will be an environmental impact report presented for certification and under the California Environmental Quality Act, our alternatives with respect to the environmental economic and socio- economic concerns should be considered. Again, it was their hope that any recommendation presented to the consultant preparing the General Plan be drawn in such a way that he not be foreclosed from considering the merits of the Homart site in addition with other sites in the City. Chairman Hempel asked. if there was anyone from the Lyon Company or Hahn Company that wished to make a presentation. Mr. Taranton of the Ernest Hahn Company, indicated that he is the project manager for the Hahn Company and that this project had been assigned to him. The points that he wished to bring up are as follows: the plan for the community regional center here at Rancho Cucamonga is a -multi-use center. Not only will the center contain six major department stores and approximately the same square footage that is being proposed by Homart Company, but the Hahn Company has a very good track work record on multi- use centers which include day care. Additionally, they would have an ice skating rink and community rooms. In one of their centers they have a museum and 50,000 square feet of floor area devoted to community uses. Additionally, there will also be housing connected to the center. Mr. Taranton indicated that one of the things that Mr. Lewis alluded to was that traffic was not a major consideration. He believes this not to be exactly true. In the L. A. area, as in most of Southern California, a regional center of this size will draw in the neighborhood of 16 million visitors a year. The impact of that on local streets is massive and very major. Also, the studies in the trade area for the regional center that is being talked about is approximately 1,000,000 people. In Rancho Cuca- monga, when it is completely developed, there will be between 120,000- 150,000 people. We believe that for a center to be successful in this area, that there must be high line goods. We have the mid-line stores Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 1980 as our partners presently. May Department Store is'a .partner as is Carter- Holly-Hale and the Broadway. In addition to that, there are commitments from the Walker- cottlCompany out of San Diego and Buffurs out of Long Beach. Major department stores are the key to building any regional shop- ping center and the freeway visibility that is necessary is the key to why major department stores have thus far committed. to this site. Mr. Taronton indicated that they were currently negotiating with Robinsons, Bullocks and Nordstroms, to bring in the high line merchandise which is presently missing in the entire marketing area in the Pomona. Valley. The only place that you can go to bray high line goads now, is down to the South Coast Plaza or very 'far to the west and it's a good hour to 45 minutes to get these high line goods. �7an �,.x understood that they are looking at commented that he un Commissioner Dahl c.omme s z C,o a customer 'list 'of about 16 million people for this center. He stated that he believed: that only ar fear centers ever reach that number of clientele. He further stated that he didn't think that this is commonplace even for the size or magnitude that the Commission is presently looking at. r. Taranton replied that the size or magnitude that we are looking at right now is 1.2-1.3 million square feet of fluor area, and will draw in the area of about 16 million people in a trade area that is l million. You will have to remember, he said., that we presently have in this area very similar centers, They all have a Penneys, Sears, or a Wards. Very few of them have high line stores. We are talking about drawing customers to these centers by having those high lane stores. Cary Frye, William Lyon Company, Newport Beach, indicated that he wished to cover a few points. First, the importance of the City of Rancho uca- monga, obtaining a regional shopping center. The benefits to the City are obvious, he said., and need. not ;be delineated. If a regional shopping center can be achieved for the City, it would do more in his mind, than any of the other goals. It would provide funds that will enable the City to accomplish other goals much more easily. .Nuli.na, 'of Homart Development Company,', project director for Terra Vista Mall, felt that there were misrepresentations anode by Mr. Taranton that needed to be answered. Mr. Hulina stated that the tenants that were men- tioned. for the Hahn Center are the same kinds of tenants who would be in- terested in the Terra Vista Mall. Additionally, as part of the town cen- ter in San Diego, Mr. Taranton stated that there was a museum. Mr. Nul na. pointed out that as past of the -town center at Brea, there is a. theater- play house, gallery, TV studio, meeting rooms and various other types of community services and this is the same kind of thing that they are talk- ing about at Rancho Cucamonga. Chairman Rempel stated that bath Boza.rt and Hahn are probably going to have equal stores represented in the centers. The real issue tonight is the availability of the center, the:traffic at the center and the feasi- bility of the center as it applies to the City and the future General Plan. Chairman Rempel asked. if -there were any ether questions on the presentation y the Commission. There being none, he 'asked if there was anyone in the audience who would like to speak. Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 26, 1980 i !;I '� Mr. Sceranka, Chairman of the Citizens Advisory Committee on the General Plan, addressed his comments as to the type of discussions that the Gene- ral Plan Citizens Advisory Committee have had on the subject of the regional center and the conclusions that the committee have come to. His main points were the focus of the community, i.e. -that it should be on Foothill and Haven near the Winery; traffic, that the impact of traffic on the com- munity is one of the biggest concerns that they have and they do not want to see flow through traffic going through the main central part of the community; in terms of utility of the regional center to the community, the committee felt it extremely important that they,recognize the fact that a regional center is to serve a region and not just a city. The best way to serve that region is to be located in close proximity to a freeway. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any comments from the Commission. Commissioner Dahl stated that he felt that traffic is not one of the is- sues to be concerned with -- that traffic impacts from both centers are equal and can be handled with good traffic engineering. Mr.- Dahl was also concerned with the mix of tenants in the shopping center and its target for high line vs mid-line or mass merchandising. Chairman Rempel commented that traffic, he believes, is one of the major factors but not the primary factor in determining the center. Most im- portantly, he felt, the Commission should consider who the center is to be built for. He believes that this is twofold. The reason it is being cal- led a regional center is not only for the region but for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Additionally, he felt -that the focus of the City is also on a very important factor. As a Commission, he stated, they must not look to what the City needs now but also at what the City may need in 20 years, 30 years, 50 years down the line when the City is fully built. It is a very difficult decision that the Commission has to make. Decisions still must be made however,, and they are hard decisions and must be made not necessarily on what the short range profit is for the City but what is the total future of the City. Commissioner Garcia indicated that he would like to collaborate on some of the traffic statements. His concern was -that all of the projections are made based on the automobile and not on multi medal transportation which might be quite likely in the future because of the energy crisis. Another factor that puzzles Commissioner Garcia was -the different parameters of development. One is at the regional level and one is at the local level. The question in his mind is should we have both? Can we have both? Mr. Hopson clairifed that this is not the final decision that they would be making tonight. There will be other opportunities at several public hearings for input at the environmental impact report level. At that time when the Commission finally has the proposed General Plan before them and they are forced to say we will recommend and certify the adoption of the Land Use Element of that plan to the City Council is the time that the options are precluded. What we are doing right now is trying to give the City's consultants some idea, some focus, to let them start concen- trating on. traffic patterns and everything else that goes into the prepa- ration of a total General Plan. That is not to minimize the importance of this decision tonight, as it is a big decision, but the final decision is not being made now. Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 26, ig8o Commissioner Tolstoy stated that they have been sitting as a Commission for about 18 months to two years and that a commitment had been made a to way back that this community sohuld have a regional center. This was not the Commission's decision alone but the Community's decision and a decision of the City Council, On the interim plan that was adopted, the one that Blayney and Associates helped with, he said, three alterna- tives were proposed showing different locations for regional shopping centers. At, that time, he stated, we could not focus on what was the best location. We have pretty well eliminated one of those alternatives and we now have two to look at. What we do tonight will be advisory to the City Council and be of aid in helping them to make a decision as to the direction to be given to the current consultant, Sedway/Cooke. He stated that he had to break things up into compartments, so the first one he thought about was traffic. Traffic is awesome, he stated. He would like to keep the regional traffic off of City streets. This is a must. He indicated that he did not know how many cars that would be, but only that they must be kept off the streets and out of the City. This is going to have a tremendous effect on traffic he said. People living and working in the community and doing all kinds of -things in their cars should be impacted as little as possible. The market area is something that Commissioner Tolstoy thought about as he listened to the presentation, he stated, and it was his impression that the Homart Company was talking about a market area that was rather local, whereas, the Hahn Company was taling about a more regional, broader market area. Mr. Tolstoy said that he liked one of the things that the Hahn Co. was trying to do, attracting high fashion stores. He felt this is some- thing that the whole valley needs. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he did not think the Montclair Center was going to be modified to include any high fashion stores. He did not feel that any of the other shopping centers are going to do this either. He stated that the Hahn Company said that the high fashion stores are what they are looking for, and he was sure that the Homart people are after the same thing, too. But, Commissioner Tolstoy stated he got the impression as he listened that they had a better handle on that. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that another thing that he thought about was the City's image. He felt that the City's image, for the people who live in the City, is one of a rural community but that he and other people in the community would think about the congestion that will be created. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he knew that Mr. Lam said that design should not be considered, but that he had. to consider design, because it was part of the presentation that the Lewis Company made and the Lyon Company made, also. Both of them came before the Commission with con- ceptual drawings. He stated that he looked at the Hahn Plan and they said that they tied. -the regional center in with their planned community with the lakes and the green belt. He looked at Homart and stated that he did not see a tie in with Terra Vista and that it really bothered him. The Citizen Advisory Committee on the General Plan, of which he was a mem- ber, stated that a dual nuclei in the City was needed. He agreed with that. Community benefits are another thing that Commissioner Tolstoy brought up. One of the things that the Hahn people talked about was the town center concept. Public rooms for regional use and City use, day care center for people who are going shopping, etc . The Homart people came in and talked about the shopping facility, didn't say too much about the public rooms or other amenities. Planning Commission Minutes March 26, i.98o One of the young ladies in the group stated that she didn't know who would answer the question. They said they don't do that anymore. Then somebody said, "gee, T'll do anything you ask for". We haven't asked for anything, Commissioner Tolstoy stated. One developer showed as, and I thought, high- lighted, that, and the other developer said to ask us. Those are all the things I had to think about, Commissioner Tolstoy said, and with that be asked for a break. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any other comments. There being none, the Chairman called for a short break. Chairman Rempel :reconvened. the meeting. Commissioner Dahl indicated that in listening to what the rest of the Com- missioners had to say regarding the centers proposed, that both centers are both very similar in design and very similar in what they intend to -do, From that standpoint in looking at the two centers, he stated that he had no ob ection to either one of them as a center. However, he wanted to get back to the traffic issue. Wo matter where the center is located he said, because traffic will be coming from Upland and West Rancho Cuca- monga areas where the largest population lies, there will, be traffic on the surface streets. Therefore, looking at it from a traffic standpoint and utilization of surface streets from the west, he saw, no difference between the two projects. In looking at it from the south and east there is no doubt, he said, that there will be significant difference in traffic coming from the east from Foothill and those coming from the free-way direct. He stated that he would like to see the community develop with a regional center. Commissioner Dahl stated tha-11; he had some concern about the other two-thirds of the population that can't afford to use 'the high line stores. He thought high line stores arei a beautiful thing to have in a community, but did not know if this is actually what is needed. He stated that we need to provide viable places for people to shop and to obtain merchandi- sing goods that they want. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any, more comments from the Commission before he opened it to the audience. There being none, he opened the for to the audience, noting that they should, keep it very brief from, the few partieis that were involved. Then if there was more input from the audience, he would allow that. Mr. Lewis pointed out some conceptual drawings of the proposed center at the northeast corner of Haven and Foothill, indicating the continuation of the greenbelt and the types of uses proposed. Mr. Lewis also objected to some, of the traffic figures as being inaccurate and did not think that the traffic situation for the Terra Vista Mall was undesirable. Mr. Hulina of the Homart Copointed out that the type of center proposed by the Ho mart Co. is very similar to the -type of center proposed by Hahn. It would have community- rooms, eating places, TV studios, libraries, as well as city offices. Gary Frye, William Lyon Co., indicated that they had seen a tremendous opportunity for a planned community. It would capitalize, they felt, on all the goals and aspirations of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. To name a few that he thought were essential, retention of rural flavor, yet financial soundness. Mr. Frye stated. that he thougut the City perceives and recognizes that they are truly at a genuine crossroads and have an opportunity that very few cities ever have had before them. They have Planning Commission Minutes -7- March, 26, 1980 a dual freeway system I-10 and 1-15, and the possibility to capitalize on the regional transporation system by locating industrial where it be- longs, which you have, and' the capability with the Devore Freeway, another regional transportation system to locate major commercial on that system. As we see it, and as we have always seen it, that should<cast a mold for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, he stated. What you are looking at are not community facilities at this time, you are looking at regional facilities. Regional. facilities should go where they naturally belong which is on re- gional transportation systems. The fact that on occasion regional shopping centers are not on regional transportation systems is true, but if you closely analyze those cases, you will find that the population and the growth is not on the regional transportation system. I guess if you think of things in terms of a win or lose situation, he didn't see any major community goal but it is up for grabs or even has the possibility of being lost not choosing the Hahn 'Regional. I see a lot of community goals in my mind, he said, if you choose the Foothill-Haven site. The fact that you may or may not believe that traffic will be a problem is something that you may not know for 20-30 years, but I'll guarantee you that the risk of traffic being a problem has got to be substantially greater at Foothill and Haven. I think that the Hahn Center in my mind is regional, he stated, has alwasy=been regional, I am not convinced that the other site has been conceived in a regional atmosphere. Chairman Rempel closed the public for portion of the meeting. Commissioner Dahl addressed the chair and stated that he would like to do two things. One, he would be making a motion, but first he needed a point of clarification from staff: He asked Mr. Lam what comprises a community center and what stores are in a community center in terms of major. anchors. Jack Lam, Community Development Director, stated that a community shopping center is one of a smaller scale than a, regional shopping center, less in terms of anchorage. It could be anchored by one or more major anchors like a Sears sitting alone, it could be a Mervyns or it could be a junior department store or a series of junior department stores, junior meaning smaller in scale and in floor area. Mr. Dahl asked if it could be a Sears, Mervyns, and several department stores plus a major drug or anything like that. Mr. Lam Stated that it could. Mr. Hopson indicated that it is defined in the General Plan and sw=arized it. It states, he said, that a community shopping center anchored by, to use an example, a 100,000 sq. ft. K-Mart discount type department store, and they discussed the possibility of one of the two alternative sizes abandoned as a regional center using that as a community center. My im- pression of textual material, and I will bring it over and let you read it, he stated, is that it is not conceived as being a grouping of 100,000 sq. ft. plus stores. Mr. Dahl then inquired if it would be a 100,000 sq. ft. store. Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 198o Mr. Larn stated that Mountain Green is an example of a community shopping center. A community shopping center doesn't mean that only traffic within the, community goes there. In any kind of commercial use you have in a Cty, whether it is a free-standing K-Mart, Gemco, or community center, there are always bound, to be some people who will come from outside the City. The scale is s-ach that it is really targeted towards a larger area than just the neighborhood. Mr. Dahl moved that the Planning Co fission recommend that the Council. recommend, to the consultant that the regional center should be placed at the corner of Foothill and the Devore Freeway and that -the designation of Civic Center and Community Center will be placed at the corner of Foothill and Haven, at the northeast corner. Mr. Garcia seconded the motion. He stated that he would also like to discuss it and make an amendment. He stated that be would like to see it designated as a major community shopping center separated from all. the other shopping centers that the City has. Mr. Dahl indicated that he had no objections to designating it as a major commiinity shopping center and called for the question. Chairman Rempel asked those in favor to signify bysaylngaye. The motion passed by a b-1 vote with Commissioner Tolstoy abstaining because he felt there should be two motions: One for -the location of the regional. center and one for the location of a major cormnunity center. PURLTC HEARINGS ZONE ClLkNGE NO. 80-03 AND ENVI AL ASSESSMENT - THOMAS COL A request for a change of zone from R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) to ®1 (Light Industrial) or more restrictive zoning for 2.4 acres of land located on the north side of 9th Street, approximately 10001 west of Vineyard Avenue. AP N 208-262-28. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any questions of staff. There being none, he opened the public hearing. The applicant came forward and indicated that he had no problem with the change in zone request from M-1 to M-R. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Dahl, carried unanimously, to recom- mend approval. of zone change No. 80-03 and a negative declaration to the City Council. ZONTNG ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 80-01 AND EITVIRONMENTAL ASSESWENT - CONDO CONVERSION - The development of a condo conversion ordinance. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, presented, the staff report recommending that the item be continued to May 14, 1980, for a study session on April 30, 1980 to discuss the issues. Motion- Moved by Dahl, seconded by Tolstoy, and carried unanimously, to continue the public hearing on Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 80-01 and envirormiental assessment to the May 14, 1,980 Planning Cc=mfission meeting and schedule a study session for April 30, 1980. Planning Commission Minutes -9- March 26, 1980 NEW B-OSINESS DIRECTOR REVIEW NO, 80-01 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - OWEN LOFTUS A request for the development of an office building to be located on ap- proximately a half acre of land at 8137 S. Malachite Avenue in the C-1 zone. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any questions of staff. There being none, the Chair- man asked the applicant if he -wished to make a, presentation. The applicant indicated that he had no presentation. Motion: Moved by Garcia, seconded by Jones, to approve Director Review No. 80-08, unanimously carried. DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 80-06 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - ARNOLD ANDERSON A request for the developmenToT 4 1 fight industrial buildings to be lo- cated on 4.5 acres of land located on the north side of 6th Steet and ap- proximately 3001 west of Turner in the M-2 zone. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. The issue centered around the subject of the access policy. The applicant proposed two drive- ways along 6th Street, a special boulevard, where the access policy allows only one use. Staff's recommendation was to approve the project with only one driveway. Chairman Rempel asked if there were any questions by the Commission of Staff. Much discussion ensued regarding the access policy with the final determi- nation of the Commission reaffirming the previously adopted access policy. Motion: Moved by Garcia, seconded by Tolstoy, to approve Director Review No. 80-06, with one driveway. Chairman Rempel indicated that he could not vote for this item and would be abstaining. Motion was approved by 4-1 vote with Commissioner Rempel abstaining. ADJOURNMENT Re sp],ct f ully ubm(tted, JACK LAM, Secretary CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 24, 1980 Special Meeting CALL TO ORDER The Special Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cuca- monga was held in the Lion's Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, on Monday, March 24, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7 :10 p.m. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Peter Tolstoy, and Herman Re ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None Chairman Rempel made introductory remarks regarding the Planning Commissions' consideration of the two regional shopping center locations. He stated that this meeting was to allow the representatives of Ho mart and Hahn Development Corporation to make a presentation to the Planning Commission. Jack Lam indicated that the Commission would hear the Homart Development Company first and entertain questions followed by a break with the Ernest W. Hahn Company making a presentation followed by questions. He suggested that questions from the general public be held to the end of the meeting. The Ho mart Development Company made their presentation. The presentation included discussion of the shopping needs of the co unity, the overall market area,public opinion survey, and the traffic considerations. A 15 minute break was held at 9:20 p.m. Ernest Hahn made the presentation for the Hahn Development Company. His dis- cussion included their marketing concepts, servicesa facilities to the community, design of the project and traffic considerations. Following a few questions from the Planning Commission and public, the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. I Respectfully s bmitted, f JACK L Director Community Development CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING March- 17, 1980 Special Meeting CALL TO ORDER The Special Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho C ca- nga was held in the. Lion's' Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, on Monday, March 17, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by:Chairman Rempel. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Herman Rempel, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT, COMMISSIONERS: None STAFF PRESENT: Jack Lain, Director of Community Development; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; and Tim. Eeedle, Associate. Planner ALSO PRESENT: Fred.. Et el and Rod. Jeung of Sedway/Cooke Jack Lam indicated this meeting was for a study session on the General Plan Alternatives. He introduced Fred Et el from the Consultant firm of Sedway/ Cooke. Fred Etzel indicated that their planning has included the undeveloped area; and thesexisting land use areas within the. City. The plan concepts for the fisting land use area are being developed and will be refined once the overall general ,plan concepts are determined. Mr. Etel presented the overall guiding concepts. These included Regional. Shopping Center location and transit linkages. Following this presentation, the Planning Commission took up several topics regarding the General Plan Land Use concepts. The following is a summary of discussion which occurred regarding those topics. Office area: Several members of the Planning Commission felt that it was not consistent with the past Planning Commission and City Council policy for office: area to be extended south of Foothill. Also that it would be desirable to have the office services area more compact, to allow for a person to conduct his business within walking range. Commissioners Tolstoy, Garcia and Rempel indicated that office area should be considered, more compact and intruding less into the it area south of Foothill. !te ox l gho in Center Traffic.% Several comments were raised regarding the effect of regional shopping center traffic traversing or crossing within the community. It was felt by most of the Commissioners that locating a regional shopping center at Haven and Foothill would cause larger volumes of traffic to cross through the City. This was not considered desirable. Commis- sioner Hempel. summarized by stating that he'would not want regional shopping center traffic coming through town such as along the Foothill Boulevard. lei hboarhooad hoe Centers Considerable discussion occurred regarding the location of a neighborhood shopping center and its proximity to resides- tial environment. Both Commissioners Rempel and Commissioner Garcia stressed the need for more imaginative concepts for the location and utilization of neighborhood shopping centers to pedestrian linkages. It was suggested that the consultant consider other concepts including "mom and pop" stores that are within walking distance and that pedestrian linkages to neighborhood shop- ping centers be included. Upon motion by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, and unanimously carried, it was voted to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of March 17, 1980. Meeting adjourned at 11:00: p.m. t Rc,spec fir y(submitted, rl JAGk LAM, Di rector Community Development 4 CITY CP RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING March 1 , 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was geld in the Liens Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, March 12, 1980. 'i Meeting was called to order at 7:0 p.m. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. I ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Bahl, forge Garcia, Laura ?ones, Teter Tolstoy, and Herman Rempel 'I SENT; COMMISSIONERS: None ALSO PRESENT: ;hack Lary, Director of Community Development; Ted Hopson, City Attorney; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Michael Vairin, Associate Planner; Tim Beedle Associate Planner; John Martin, Civil Engineer CONSENT CALENDAR Upon motion by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Jones and unanimously carried, the following Consent Calendar items were approved as submitted: Environmental Assessment of Parcel Map No. 5767 Fin Environmental Assessment of Parcel Map No. 5130 Cohen Environmental Assessment of Parcel Map No. 592.2 - Newton Environmental Assessment of Parcel Map No. 5893 - Barton Environmental Assessment of Director Review No. 80--07 Kalbach PUBLIC HEARING ONE CHANGE NO. 80-01 a ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - JOHN IS CS - A change of zone from R-3 to C-2 for property located on the northwest corner of Base Lane and East Avenue. Michael. Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report in detail.. It was 'reported that the request .for the zone change is being done in conjunction with two other items on the Agenda; namely Director Review No. 80--05 and Minor Deviation No. 0--0 . Separate actions are required for each of the items even though they all occur on the same project site. It was further reported that the request is consistent with the General plan and that the uses proposed for the site are permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to Staff. There being none, Chairman pel opened the public hearing. Jim :Banks:spoke in opposition to the proposed zone change. The opposition was based upon. the ,fact that the project site is located within 600' of the property; that Mr. Banks owns on Victoria. Mr. Banks felt that the proposed zone change would be spot zoning and not appropriate and that it would adversely affect his property. The Commission responded to Mr. Banks by stating that the project site is bounded by the freeway off ramp and major streets and that no other type of zoning could be :feasible in this area. In addition, the request is consistent with the adopted General Plan. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Hempel closed the public hearing'. A motion was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy to recommend adoption of Zone Change No. 80-01 to the City Council. AYES: DAHL, ,TGLSTOY, JONES GARCIA, REMPEL NOES NONE ABSENT; NONE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 80-0 ,; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - CONDO CONVER- SION ORDINANCE - Development of a Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reported that the City Attorney had submitted com- ments on the draft ordinance and that further revision and review of comments are needed prior to review and discussion with the Planning Commission. It was recommended that the item be continued to March 26, 1980, for further reviews and revision in accordance with the City Attorney's comments. Chairman Re pel opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the public, the public hearing was closed. Upon motion. by Commissioner Janes, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, and unani- mously carried by the Commission, it was moved to continue the pudic hearing for the Condominium Conversion Ordinance to the regularly scheduled planning Commission meeting of March 26, 1980. Manning Commission Minutes - �- 'March 12, 1980 OLD BUSINESS for the use of flags for an industrial leasing office located on the southwest corner of Arrow and Archibald. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reported that the applicant had requested postponement of this item until he can provide additional information on the issue. There being no discussion by the Commission, it was moved by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Jones and unanimously carried to continue review of this item to allow the applicant time to provide additional. information on this issue. NEW BUSINESS DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 80-05 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - JOHN IS` CAS Develop- ment of a Service Station Center Proposed on the northwest corner of Base Line and East Avenues. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the Staff Report in detail, which is on file in the Planning Division. It was reported that any approval of this development would be conditioned upon final review and adoption of the zone change by the City Council and adoption of the associated minor deviation. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to staff. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned the amount of building area and arrangement of buildings on the site. He felt that the arrangement of buildings could be done in a better and more efficient way to provide a more aesthetic and reasonable looking site. He stated that he -realizes this use is one which would be compatible for the site; however, he felt the site could be designed better. Barry Rogan, Senior Planner, 'responded by stating that several design concepts have been developed for the site and that this appeared to be the most efficient way of designing the site. The unusual shape and configuration of the site pre- sents major problems in design. Amotion seas made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Garcia to approve Director Review No. 80-05 and issue a Negative Declaration based upon the conditions and findings outlined in the Resolution. AYES: DAHL, JONES, GARCIA, RE NOES: TOLSTOY ABSENT: NONE Commissioner Tolatoy stated that he voted "no" for the project because> he could not agree with the way the buildings were arranged on the site. Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 12, 1980 ------------------- a MINOR DEVIATION NO. 80-02 - JOHN IS ACS - Deviation of set-back requirements for a proposed Service Station Center on the northwest corner of Base Tine and East Avenue, Michael Vai.rin, Associate Planner, reviewed the Staff Report in detail. He stated and reported that the unusual configuration, size and shape of the site presents a difficult design problem and that strict interpretation and enforcement of the set-back requirements for freeway right-of-way would cause undue hardship on the applicant. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission to Staff.- There being none, a_motion was made by Commissioner Garcia and seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy to approve Minor Deviation No 80-02. AYES- DAHL, ,TONES, GARCIA, TOLSTOY, REMPEL; NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE TIME EXTENSION OF DIRECTOR REVIEW O. 7 -05 - JERRY LANTING - A request for a one year time extension for the 18 unit apartment complex located on Archibald Avenue, south of 1th Street. ,Tack. Lam, Director of Community Development, presented the Staff deport in detail. He reported that on a previous action by the Commission on a similar case a ,six month time extension was granted. Therefore, based on previous Co mission action, it was recommended that a ssix month time extension be granted for this project. There being no discussionby the Co mission, it was moved, seconded and unanimously carried to Brant a six month time extension to Director Review Now79-05. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS EORT re ardin 1iillsade Develo meat Standards I Tim Beedle, Associate Planner, presented a 'Staff Report in detail. He reported the development of hillside standards for the north portion of the City is needed for proper hillside development. I The Planning Commission agreed that there is a need for strict hillside develop- ment; standards and directed Staff to prepare such 'sta.ndards for their review and consideration. Planning Commission Minutes - - March 12 , 1980 COMMUNICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING TENTATIVE ARI1eSCHEDULE FOR_ GENERAL PLAN Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, distributed a schedule of General Plan hearing dates. In addition, Mrs Lain orally presented special meeting dates - in addition to "those that are listed on the schedule. Mr. Lam then reported that the Planning Consultants had prepared several General Plan alternatives which the 'Commission now has the opportunity to review and comment upon. Alter a brief explanation and review of alternative plans by ter. Lam, the Commission discussed their views on the alternatives provided by the Consul- tant. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he did not like the encroachment of the office area into the presently designated industrial area south of Foothill Blvd. Commissioner Jones shared the same feeling. Commissioner Tolstoy also had concerns with Alternative A-4 which; he feels will increase the overall popula- tion density. His concern for the increase is based upon a fact that the community in its original: deliberations on the adoption of the General. Plan ' wanted to maintain the rural atmosphere and not have large areas of high density residential. districts. Commissioner Dahl felt that the. Alternative Plans prepared by the Consultant do not reflect the concepts of the Planned Communities. He felt that the Alternative Plans should incorporate more of the open space and greenbelts as proposed by the planned comunitaes. Commissioner Tolstoy felt that: the General Plan Alternatives do not contain necessary greenbelt concepts that will give continuity between the planned communities and the rest of the City. Commissioner Garcia. was concerned that the General Plan was not considering the Image of the City. He felt the approach to alternatives is in error as it appears the City is 'being guilt around a stopping center. Commissioner Rempel felt :that 'both."the "Terra Vista and Victoria projects gave the City some overall concepts to considers He stated that it is up to the Planning Commission to consider such things as greenbelt, office and regional locations and transit routes. He also agreed that the office encroachment into the industrial area was not consistent with the original goals and policies developed by the. Commission. i Commissioner Tolstoy felt that the'commercial area should be dispersed rather than,concentrated in one single area. Planning Commission Minutes - - March 12, 1980 There being no further discussion by the Commission, a motion was made by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy and unanimously carried to adjourn the Planning Commission -meeting of March 12, 1980. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Res f,ectful ,y ubmitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development Planning Co mission, Minutes -6- March 12, 1980 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING February 25, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, on Monday, February 25, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dabl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Peter Tolstoy, and Herman Rempel ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None ALSO PRESENT: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Ted Hopson, City Attorney; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Michael Vairin, Associate Planner; Tim Beedle, Associate Planner; Paul Rouge au, Associate Civil Engineer; and Nancy McAllister, Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reported there will be a series of public hearings in June of this year in regard to the General Plan. He asked that the Commission reserve every Monday during the month of June for these public hearings. This would then allow the Council time to conduct their public hearings , 'during the month of July so that the August deadline can be met. CONSENT CALENDAR Upon motion by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously carried, the following consent calendar items were approved as submitted: Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5892 - Prescher Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No® 5441 - Schultz Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5760 - O'Donnell Commissioner Dahl stated in regard to Item ""p"r", Parcel Map No. 5891, as a condition of the Parcel Map will the applicant be required to improve Shasta, Summit and Etiwanda streets? Paul Eougnau, .Associate Civil Engineer, stated the southerly strut (Shasta) , has been improved. Improvements on Etiwanda and Summit will be required at the time of development There being no further comments regarding this item, a motion FAUs made;by Commis- sioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy and unanimously carried to approve Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5891 as submitted. Commissioner Tolstoy stated in regard to` Consent Calendar Item "D", Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5626 (Data Design), he asked if all the lots meet the requirements of the Ordinance as some of the lots seed awfully narrow and long. Mr. Lam stated all lots created are basically new bats. The City Engineer is empowered to approve the. Parcel Map; unless requested for review by the Planning Commission. In review of the tentative main, Staff has found that some of the lots do not meet ordinance requirements which means any approval of this parcel p rust have technical modifications made to it so that the requirements are stet. Furthermore, staff was not aware that the lots shown along Haven, ;west of the channel would be divided with this parcel map. That area is not shown as indus- trial but as administrative professional on the General Plan. Normally in the -P area., ;all property is developed at one time which means a coordination of accesses, etc. is required. Therefore, Staff would not be recomnending approval of those three lots at this time. He suggested if the. Commission is interested in this particular application and has interest in a number of elements of that, plan that this item come to the Commission in its entirety ,for review. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he also has a number of other questions in regard to this parcel and 'felt the map should come before the Commission for review, motion was made. by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously carried to continue review of the Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5626 to the March 12 1980 Planning Commissionmeeting. It was further requested that the Parcel Map application be submitted to the Commission for reviews at that meeting. After general discussion, a motion was made by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Dahl and unanimously carried to approve Consent Calendar Item "F",, Resolution of approval for General Plan Amendments No. 80-01, , 80-01B and. 80-41C.` Planning Commission Minutes - _ February 25, 1980 PUBLIC HEARING NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ZONE CHANGE O. 80-02 - WATT INDUSTRIES - Change from R-3 to C-1 for property located on the east side of Haven Avenue between Lemon and Highland. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 80-05 which recommends approval of Zone Change No. 80-02 and issuance of a Negative Declaration to the City Council. Staff further recommends that if the zone change is approved that the following conditions be added to Resolution No. 80-05: 1) That the zoning revert back to the original zone after a one year period if the applicant is not successful in obtaining building permits for the project. 2) The zone change would cover the area starting at the north of Lemon Avenue south to within 250 feet north of the centerline of Highland Avenue. The Caltrans right- of-way is not to be changed to C-1. If at a later time the freeway does not go in then there would be an opportunity to came in and re-zone that area. Commissioner Jones asked if we are currently reaching saturation point on commer- cial centers. Mr. Vairin stated at this point we are merely considering a zone change for the property and its appropriateness for the potential of a shopping center. Commissioner Garcia asked if the applicants have considered the entire 80 acres in their planning. Mr. Lam stated at the present time the applicant is pursuing the center portion of the property. Their intention is to have'a planned development with combina- tion A-P type use and perhaps condominium type uses. Both uses are allowable under the mixed use designation of the General Plan. Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. Mr. Scott Bell, representing Watt Commercial Properties, stated they have reviewed the staff report and are in concurrence with that report. They are pursuing the Zone Change in order for the zoning to be in conformance with the General Plan. Clara Veloz, 10522 Lemon Avenue, stated there are 34 homes within her tract and they all share one thing in common - their desire to preserve the residential neighbor- hood. They chose to live in a small community below the foothills for their children to play. They deliberately did not want to move into an area next to commercial development. It is felt more emphasis should be placed on the needs and desires of the residents in the area. A shopping center would be very nega- tive for the area. There are currently many vacant shops within this City in existing shopping centers. In a quick survey of eight centers, 37 shops were vacant. She submitted a list of residents willing to work toward keeping their community residential. JoAnn Burns, 10570 Lemon, submitted a petition signed by residents of the area in opposition to the .one change. Their main concerns are: the safety of their children, ecological impact, the community impact, the deterioration of property surrounding shopping centers, the proximity to sales of liquor and the misuse of liquor sales by Chaffey students and the proximity of liquor sales to school bus stops. Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 25, 1980 Mr. Fred Sherman, 6225 Dakota, stated an environmental assessment was included in the staff report which has assessed no impact to the residential area sur- rounding this zone change. However, these is; nothing to back up those conclusions. He finds it hard to believe there would be no impact due to the increase of traffic in the area. These will also be trucks to stock the stores and a lot of this will be done at night. development of a center would cause a lot more noise and traffic problems in the area. There could also he a significant increase in the crime rate. e already have an overburdened police department without enough personnel to pro- tect the entire area.. Commercial development in this area will cause a drop in real estate values. The entire appearance of the area is going to change from residential to commercial. He asked that the Commission consider rejection of the zone change. It a rejection is not given he asked that at least a 50 day postponement be given so that they nay be given a little more time to assess the impact this is going to have on; the area. Mr. Roland Smith, 6235 Valinda, stated the reason he moved to this area was to get away from commercial d elopment surrounding the residential. He would like this area to remain residential. He moved out here for peace and'quiet and does not want another Montclair Plaza. There is a large area in the City which could be zoned commercial. Mr. Steve' Heimann, 10423 Ca tilla, stated he moved from Los Angeles to come to this city. They moved to this area because of the value of property and the serene, pleasant atmosphere of the area. The effect of a shopping center in this area is going to be very damaging. He is concerned of the increased- crime rate. The impact of commercial would have a detrimental effect on the children in the area . Looking at this project he does not see how the City will benefit. Mr. ]lave "Fanner, 6563 Valinda, stated commercial areas :should definitely be Dept' separate from the residential areas. He bought his home in this particular area due to the fact there was all residential development in the;area. At the present time, he can see the mountains from his home; however, if a shopping center is developed it will block his. views Mary McNamee, stated she'moved to this area from Downey. She lived next to a Junior High School and off of two major streets. It was not the kind of area you would want'your' children to grew up around. She moved here for the peace and quiet.. She does not want her children to live in are area where they are afraid to walk out their front door. Mr. David Delgado, 6646 Mesada, stated there are many people in the audience here in opposition to the zone change. It is his opinion the people that live in the area should have some say as to what is developed around them. More schools and parks are needed in the City instead of commercial development. Chairman R.empel stated the City has no control. over the schools as the school district is an entirely separate entity. The City has worked since incorporation to get schools: and their problem solved.. The City is trying to find funding for schools Mr. Robert Todd, 622 Castilla Avenue, stated this City needs street sweepers and -needs to take care of drainage problems. We need to take care of what is currently in the City before new commercial is developed. We also need more parks. Planning Commission Minutes - - February 25 1980 Chairman Hempel stated the City currently does not have the money for parks, street sweepers, etc.. Who is going to pay for the parks? It is up to: the citizens of the community to work with the school district and agree to pay higher tees to have new schools:. Mr. Mark Whitehead, 6542 Val in a, stated he is in opposition to the zone change and can not see a need for commercial development in this area. Chairman Rempel stated this Commission can not deity a developer to come in and submit a erne change request. That is why the zone change is before the o is- sion for public hearing. Mr. Jack. Sylvester, applicant, stated. in 1966 a shopping center permit was granted for this area on Haven and Highland. Lemon Avenue at that time was abandoned by the County of San Bernardino. He made it possible for the people to develop Lemon avenue so they could comply with County requirements to have a 60' wide street. When Jahn B ayney was retained as the General Flan Consultant he recommended at one time that the entire 80 acres be a regional shopping center. Only when he discovered that 14 odd acres could be takers for right of way for the proposed Foothill Freeway:and interchange on that cornerA was it downgraded to a community shopping center area. He then found in going to the Planning Staff that although Caltrans notified him in writing that they would not stand in the way of development, it was suggested that he move any commercial site to Lemon Avenue and that he voluntarily agree to a. CC & R prohibiting access or egress on Lemon Avenue for any commercial project. He raised no opposition and voluntarily agreed to sign the CC & R's. Their project, as proposed, will not 'block` anyones view of the mountains. Their buildings would not exceed 22' in height. The Planning Division will also insist can a landscaping buffer on Lemon Avenue and they will. do their best to screen any unpleasant aspects that may arise. They are not proposing any development that is not in the best interest of the City. They are prepared' to sit down with any committee to work out anything which is fair and reasonable that is in the best interest of the community. President of Watt Commercial properties, stated for the people in the audience, he would like to state that the City of Rancho Cucamonga has adopted one of the strictest development standards within Southern California. In regard to property values, the homes built around their existing developments have increased in value. With the adoption of proposition. 13, one of the few remaining items left' to create income for a City is shopping center development. He hoped that the City would leak favorably on their request. Mr. Dave Mulligan, ` 620 Mesada Street, stated when he -moved -to his home this area: was basically a rural area. There was all kinds of wildlife and nature around. They moved' to an area which he 'hoped his children could grow up, have animals and be able` to live in a rural area. .. They are in opposition to the zone> change and asked that the Commission consider what the people living in the area want Mr. Steven beck., 6233 Cartilla, stated the fact that the developer does not live. in this City says a lot for the project. Those living in this area will have to continue living with any development that may go in, but the developer will leave the; area once the development is completed. Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 25, 1980 Mr. Sid Silliman, 6316 Haven Avenue, stated he is in opposition to the zone change. He stated at the time the General Plan was adopted for this area, a number of people did dame to the Commission and object to the designation of commercial development. They also submitted a letter and petition to that effect. There being no further comments from the audience,' Chairman R.empel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how long the asterisk has been at that intersection. Mr. Lam stated it has been there since July of 1978. Commissioner ,cones stated she disapproved of the commercial designation at the time of the General Plan hearings. Also it is her; opinion Haven Avenue should be developed as a scenic route. For that reason she has been apposed to the asterisk shown on the General Ilan throughout the whole; process. Commissioner Garcia stated his concern at the present time regarding this pro- perty is that it is taking only a portion of the total 80 acres. It has been our policy to request master planning of major parcels of land. The applicant has a right to ask for the best investment of his property and at the same time the residents around the area have 'a right to protect this project. In tens of 'a zone change for this property at this time, he feels that it is not time. Commissioner Dahl stated in his review of comments received from the audience, he has to separate the emotional from the factual points brought out. In regard to increased crime, in looking at the centers on lth and Carnelian, we have not been affected in that area with a major crime increase and have no reason to believe we would be affected in :this area. On the other nand, there would be a definite increase in traffic. There would be a 'possible increase in debris as indicated. He doesn't necessarily feel that property values would go down because of commercial development in the area. A valid point is the possible over-building of commercial development in the City, as there are a number:of units that are vacant now. On the emotional :side is the liquor statements made. Students from the college can get liquor any place if they want it, and we can not eliminate that. From a factual standpoing is the drainage problem. He would;agree with Commissioner Garcia that we are not ready for a center at this location at this particular time; however, he would not want to shut the door to that center being developed in the future either. More evaluation of this particular proposal is needed. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the asterisk: was placed at this location as it was felt by the Commission and the Council that this would be a good location for a commercial center. He would agree with the other Commissioners, however, that this is not the time for this particular change of zone. This is not to say that this Commission will never feel a center would be appropriate for this area. Chairman Rempel stated in regard to statements made that the. City should keep some of its ,land open, the City is working with the County to develop a wildlife habitat restricted from vehicles, etc. We can not say that we are never going to allow a property 'owner to develop his land as the City would then get into Planning Commission Minutes -6- February 25, 1980 inverse condemnation which means the City would be forced to buy that persons land. He stated it has been discussed on manor occasions that we need approi- tely ld, 00 residents in an area for another shopping center, therefore, it is also his opinion that a center at this location is premature at this time. In regard to drainage, if water starts coming down 'Haven without any facility to accept that water, it would also have a serious impact because of the amount of runoff. He feels it is totally premature to develop a cuter within the next two or three years. A motion °was made by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy to deny Zone Change No, 80-02 without prejudice, AYES: DAM, TOLS Cy, .ICNE S , GARCIA, RE24PEL NOES NINE ABSENT: NONE :Recess galled at 9:05 p.m, Meeting reconvened at 9: C p.m. with all Commissioners present, PUBLIC BEARING NEGATIVE DECURATION AND SITE APPROVAL No. 80-01 - HONE AND ASSOCIATES - Pro- posed shopping center to be located on the southwest corner of Lemon and Haven. Michael. Vai_rin, Associate planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 80-07 subject; to the following amendments: Condition #5: A ratio of 20% of the trees to be planted on the site shall be specimen size trees to be "" box trees. Amend Condition #7 to read: No additional food uses may be permitted within the center unless 'parking requirements of the zoning ordinance can be meet and that such use is specifically reviewed and approved by the Planning Division: Chairman Rempel asked for questions .from the Commission of the. staff. Commissioner Dahl asked that staff review for the Commission the comments b the. Design, Review Committee. Michael Vai.rin reported the Design Review Committee reviewed the project and requested redesign of the service station which has been complied with somewhat. r. Mogan added that the application will improve Lemon Avenue if the Commission considers approval of the site approval.. There is also a pooling of water in this area during the rainy season, The .applicant will be required to install a major drainage structure to handle the, water, so that it ,will not cause pro- blems for downstream properties. Mr. Vai.rin stated one letter was received from the Garden Apartment Homeowners Association, expressing abjection to the proposed development. This letter has been forwarded to each Commission member for review and is on regard in the Planning division, He reported in addition, numerous telephone comanications in opposition to the development have been received, Planning Commission"Minutes -7- February 25, 19801 There being no further questions from the Commission of staff, Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. Mr. Doug Hone, 7333 Hellman Avenue, stated they have owned this site for approximately 3 years. The original Chaffey plan which was done for this community a number of years ago depicted the commercial designation at this intersection. The back portion of the site is proposed for the Shibata Nursery. They have tried to buffer the site in a village theme. The plan will represent the high development standards of this community. Plans are now before Caltrans that Lemon and Haven will be 'major streets in the West End of San Bernardino next to Euclid Avenue. Commissioner Jones asked Mr. Hone if they would object to a one story office building if it is found this could cause problems to the apartment complex next to this development. Mr. Hone stated they would be willing to reduce the second story; if their engineer determines that the second story would take from the view of the Garden Apartments. Mr. Sid Silliman, 6316 Haven Avenue, stated he would hope that the Commission would see fit to add some additional conditions to the Resolution if approval of the development is considered. He would specifically like to speak in opposi- tion to the gas station and fast food restaurant, as he feels these developments would have the most impact on the residents in the area. The combination of the two would have"a detrimental effect on traffic then what currently exists in the area now. It will lead to a significant increase in traffic on Haven and Lemon Avenues. He would like to suggest that a fast food establishment not be approved in this location. We need a high quality sit-down restaurant. The com- bination of a fast food drive-in and gas station will lead significantly to litter and increase of traffic. Consequently, there would also be an increase in van- dalism. He asked that the gas station and fast food restaurant not be approved at this location. Children meet in this area to catch the school bus and increased traffic in the area could cause a negative impact. Mr. George Godlin, 6344 Haven Avenue, stated he is in opposition to the proposal from a conceptual and planning standpoint. He would not like to have a gas station as a neighbor to him. He does not see any need for an additional center in the City at this time. The area is also subject to a tremendous amount of flooding. This will cause a host of problems and he can not see building deeper and deeper into the foothills. He finds Mr. Hone's proposal totally unacceptable. The economics of what the center will turn into is largely going to be dictated by the economics of the market place. Those living in the Garden Apartments take a great deal of pride in the development. It is heavily landscaped and they pay a heavy price to keep the landscaping up in' a rural setting. He feels this is a complete affront to them and will not compliment their area. Mary McNamee stated due to the gas crunch, lines will be backed up for blocks. There is no indication that the gas crunch is going to be ending soon. If we have cars backed up for blocks trying to get gas in addition to the college traffic, she stated there will be problems of getting out of the tract to get to work. She would also agree that a fast food restaurant should not be allowed but a sit down type restaurant is needed® She would not object to the development of the nursery in this location. Her opposition was also to the gas station and fast food restaurant. Planning Conmission Minutes February 25, 1980 Mr. Roland Smith, stated he is in opposition to the gas stations Most stations are not open when the people need gas at, this time anyway. How can anyone with any foresight want to put in a gas station when the supply of gas is uncertain? Them will be lines several blocks long when ;there is gas available. This e develo mnt will have more than a mini impact on the area. He would not- p - p object to a large nursery and. 'high quality restaurant rather than a gas station at this location. Mr. Greg Justice, 6330 Haven, stated he is in opposition to the two story structure as it will destroy the privacy of 8 or 9 units within the Garden Apartments. Mr. Dave Mulligan, 6620 Mesada, stated the drainage problem, in the area is going to be quite extensive. They turn to go into their tract at 19th and Haven. During the fast rain, they had 2 to d feet of water over onto the road. An extensive review of the drainage problems need to be made prior to any develop- ment: A resident of the area, stated his child is picked up every morning on Cartilla and Lemon at the school bus stop. What is going to happen when there is a lime up of cars going to the gas station facility? He asked if the station will be a self- serve or full serve gasoline station. Will it be a station that tires can be changed and minor car repairs will be done? He is also in opposition to the fast food restaurant. Is the gas station going to be a company owned station or 'leased station? A representative of Mobil: Oil. Corporation stated they are going to be bringing in over a hundred thousand gallons of -gasoline a month to this City, which is desparately needed. There will be a number of gasoline pumps which will help serge the customers faster. They would like to have a company owned station; however, it is not known at this time whether or not it will be. However, if it is not company owned they would like to have strict controls over the dealer. They station will be both self- serve and full serve.. The station oul.d'be removed if it is found after a period '- of time that it is not profitable. Mr. Allen, owning property within the Carden Apartments, stated he would like to go on record in support of Mr. Hone's proposal., providing safeguards for landscaping, buffering, and architectural control are met. Mr. Allen Snapp, Architect for the proposed development, stated the character of this development was quite a concern to thus." They took a hard look at the winery character of the area. He reviewed the ;proposed plans for the Commission. It was felt the nursery location as proposed was the best location for buffering of the apartment complex. Mr. Hone stated if it is found the view of the apartments will be blocked b the second story strucutre of the development, they are willing to change their design® Also, if he can attract a dinner house restaurant he is willing to cut down on his pad area in the wain part of the center. "There being no further co ents from the audience, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes - - February 25, 1980 Commissioner Tolstoy stated it was mentioned earlier that the drainage facility in haven at this time was not big enough to take any more water. He asked if this development will be 'responsible to alleviate this problem. Mrs Rougeau stated the Haven Avenue ditch is a flood control facility. The flood Control District will be`revie;wing ;this matter at the time the application i made by the developer. Commissioner Garcia stated it is his opinion a gas station is needed and that this would be a geed location for such a facility. It is also his opinion there i a need for some type of economical fast food service due :to the college in the area. It is the management that could create problems, not the service. Conmissioner Tolstoy stated haven Avenue is one of the major north/south streets in the City. if we can't handle the traffic on this street with this development, than we do have problem. The only problemhe can. see with traffic is where would the people line p to get to the gas station. He does not feel., however, that traffic in and out of the project is going to be a problem.. He stated,his only problems with the developments are as follows. The Garden Apartments have a lot of nice visual effects with their landscaping. He would li .e to see the south side of the project have a specific landscape plan indicating where the trees will be placed and possibly add more trees to that area. It is also his opinion the center should be landscaped to blend in and compliment ghat is already; developed on the Garden Apartment site. He stated an additional condition should be added to the resolution stating 50% of the parking area shall be shaded by vegetation within 15 years. Commissioner Dahl stated in regard to this center, there will be such a few shops in it that it is very unlikely that there will be any vacancies and the center should be a viable one. It is his: opinion a traffic light as, proposed, at the inter- section will slow down traffic along Haven Avenue and would be less of a hazard. He would also like to see landscaping Increased along the southerly end of the property. An additional condition should be added as follows: Phase 3 (second story construction) shall be returned to the Planning Commission prior to issuance of the building permits to determine if such addition would block views of resi- dents to the south. Chairman Rempel started in regard to the service station, it is his opinion the canopy should be lowered. fie has no objection to the station itself; however, if the canopy is lowered, it would be much more effective then the high canopy in this location. He would life to see a bicycle and pedestrian lane coming into this center as this would be a very viable type of client to have in this area. Commissioner Tolstoy stated if we can bring another hundred thousand gallons of gasoline into this City, people would be buying gas in our City and we would get the benefit of the gas tax. We need this tax to help improve our roads. A motion was made by Commissioner Garcia and seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy to approve resolution No. 80--07 subject to the following amendments and addi� tions: Planning Commission Minutes -10- February 25, 1980 <a Amend the following conditions 1. Condition #I: The development plans on file in ,the Planning Division indicate: several buildings and uses. Of those indi- cated, the nursery, the service station and the retail buildings were approved by the Commission. The second story office addi- tion and drive thru restaurant were approved in concept only. Final review and approval by the Planning Commission is required for these two uses. 2s Condition #5: A ratio of 2 % of the trees to be planted on the site shall be specimen size trees to be 6 box trees. 3. Condition #7>c No additional food uses may be permitted within the cuter unless parking requirements of the zoning''ordirance can be meet and that such use is specifically reviewed and approved by the Planning Division. 4. Condition #1 . All parking; lot landscaped islands shall have a 'minimums inside dimension of 4 o and shall contain a 12" walk adjacent to parking still enclosed by a Sao' raised P.C.C. curb. Add the following conditions: 5. Phase 3 (second story construction) shall be returned to the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits to determine if such addition would block viers of residents :to the south. 6. If the gasoline station ceases operation as a service station after 90 days, the station is to be demolished and removed, and the site is to be landscaped. Underground storage tams shall also be removed. e etatio�n `t f 't s kin" area. shall b shaded b v 7. Fifty perco�n o e p r g �' g within 15 years. AYES CIA, TOLSTOY, DAHL, JON S, REMPEL NOES: ONE SENT: NONE Recess called at 11:00 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 11:10 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Planning Commission Minutes -11 February 25, 1980 AMENDMENT 80 �Jl CONDOCONVER- SIONS� DECLA RATION ZONING _ NEAT '� - The development of a condominium conversion ordinance, Barry Hogan, Senior 'Planner, reported the condominium conversion ordinance needs a little more work prior to presentation to the Commission. At this time, he would like to have co epts from the Commission and requested that the public hearing then be continued to the March 12, 1980 meeting to allow the Staff the opportunity to consult with the City Attorney in order to clean up some of the language in the ordinance. He stated if the Commission desires to review the ordinance,prior to making comments, they may do so and submit their desires in writing to the Planning Division prior to the; next meeting for incorporation into the ordinance. Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. r. John Withers, representing the Building Industry Association, stated under Section 5Conversion Limit Procedure, item "A!' (Annual Limit) , they want t maintain the appropriate level of units. In terms of scarce flexibility there is exceptions that state if found appropriate (using specific findings) the too is sion'can approve an additional %. They would like to recommend that perhaps if specific findings are found and the Commission would find additional conver- sions necessary they should be allowed to set whatever amount that should be. They: feel, that a five year limit is unnecessary. The ordinance takes careful considerations in looking at conversions and the five year exception is not really necessary. Mr. Hogan,recommended that the public hearing be left open to the next regular meeting for further review. A motion was made by ComTaissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner ,loves to continue the public hearing for Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 80-01 to the March 12, 1980 Planning Comnission meeting. AYES': DAHL, JONES, GARCIA, TOLSTOY, R124PEL NOES ONE S ENT e NONE EE( L3ST H y BETTER for the use of flags for an industrial leasing office located on the southwest corner of Arrow and Archibald. Henry Reiter, applicant,; stated they in the past, have advertised in every focal paper trying., to get leases for their industrial offices. They have not gotten one lease from the newspaper. They requested that flags be allowed in order to tell; people that they are there and have something to offer,; otherwise people will just drive on by, In reality, the only way they can get tenants is by people driving b . He would like to know what they can do as we need to come up with some way of helping each other. Planning Commission Minutes ' 12- February 25, 1980 I Commissioner 'Tolstoy stated he does not like flags. However, he would like r. Reiter to cone back to the Commission with a plan to see exactly what he is planning at this location in lieu of flags. Mr. Bob Clark, -representing Reiter Development, stated what they are trying to achieve is to attract attention in as tasteful a way as possible and for a reasonable period of time. Mr. Lam stated at issue is whether or not the Commission wants to allow another form of advertisement. We have gone through the adoption of the sign program where the Commission has said this is the type of sign program they wanted in the community. We have also tried to develop a temporary off-site sign programs for subdivisions. The direction at that time was that all flags were to cote down. The issue is whether or not ''flags ,are 'legitimate as a method of attracting a tenant to a site. The present ordinance does not recognize this as a legitimate method of'advertising in this City:. Commissioner Dahl stated to promote future development in our City, people Like Mr. Reiter have to be able to lease their project. The problem we have is to determine what it takes for our City to help a developer promote his product. He would like to see us develop some type of permit (renewable within a certain amount of tine) with the condition that at any time the permit could be revoked. He stated he is opposed to .flags, but also feels that if it generates more business for the community as a whole and serves a purpose of helping; to increase our own' revenues and improving the City then something should be worked out. Mr. Hogan stated if this is the Commissions' desire, he would suggest that staff work with the applicant to review alternative programs other than flags for the development. Chairman Rempel stated there has to be so way to come to an agreement with Mr. Reiter. He does not know if he would have than much objection to well designed flags for advertising purposes. However, he also feels there may be other methods of attracting attention to a development. One of those;might be to landscape the front along Archibald. and Arrow and place a monument sign at this location. A motion was made by Commissioner Reuapel and seconded by Commissioner Garcia to continue review of this ratter to the next regular Planning Commission meeting of March 12, 1980 requesting that Mr. Reiter present alternative methods for advertising at this location. AYES: REMPEL, GARCIA, DAHL, JONES, TCLS°TOY NOES NONE SENT: NONE Planning Commission Minutes -13- February 25, 1980 REQUEST BY CHAFFEY COLLEGE for use of an off-site directional sign for the Chaffey College Skills Center. Kathleen Brindell, Division Chairperson for the Chaffey College Vocational Skills Center, requested that the Commission consider approval of directional signing to their facility on Peron Street. Due to the newness of the location and its lack of visibility they are plagued by students calling them to help find their classes. Signing would help alleviate much confusion. Comissioner Garcia asked if there is special provisions within the sign ordinance for schools and colleges. Mr. Lam stated the sign kiosk with the temporary directional signing for subdi- visions could possibly be a location for such a sign; however, the college would have to pay for a slot on the sign program. Commissioner Tolstoy stated in his opinion it would be to the advantage of the developers to place the location of schools on their sign kiosk program. It would also be to their advantage to indicate where the library, and possibly even historical landmarks, are within the City. Mr. Hogan stated we can put Chaffey in touch with the sign company; however, they will need to work out a private agreement with them. A motion was nude by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Garcia to allow two directional signs for the skills center; one at the corner of 9th and Archibald and one at the comer of 9th and Helms. The signs should fit the standard kiosk signs for the City which is presently utilized'. AYES: DAHL, GARCIA, JONES, TOLSTOY, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Mr. Lam stated a General Plan Amendment has been requested by the Lewis Develop- ment Company. The property is located in the area at the extreme north end of Etivanda Avenue north of our City limits for 453 acres of, land. The San Bernardino County Planning Commission will be reviewing this matter at their meeting tomorrow and staff would like to request some direction from the Commission in regard to this matter. He reported Michael Vairin will give some background into this matter. Mr. Vairin stated Lewis Development Company is proposing a General Plan Amendment from a rural conservation designation to a one-acre residential density which is extremely high for this area and above what the General Plan calls for in that area. The County had requested an environmental impact report; however, Lewis has appealed that decision. Staff would like to request that the Commission go on record recommending that the County deny the appeal and require a full EIR. Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 1980 motion was made by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously carried to support the County`; of Sin Bernardino in their recommendation asking for a full EIR for the General Plan Amendment. Upon motion by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Rempel and unani- mously carried, it was voted to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of February 25, 1980. Meeting adjourned at,; 12:15 p.m. Re pectfmm ly submitted, JACKDire ctor or-of �7 _ t Community Development meant Planning Commission Minutes -15- February 1980 a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING 'CQ ISISON MINUTES February 13, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission or the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lion s' Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, can Wednesday, February 13, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:05 p. n. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting,with the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Herman Rempel, Peter Tolstoy SENT: COMMISSIONERS: None ALSO PRESENT. Jack, Lam, Director of Community Development; Ted Hopson, City Attorney; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Michael Vairin, Associate Planner; Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil Engineer and Deanna BurRert, Secretary. APPROVAL OF MINUTE Upon Motion by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner' Garcia and unanimously carried the minutes of January 23, 1980 were approved as submitted. ANNOUNCEMENTS la Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, stated that the last week in February is the Planning Commissioner's Institute which falls upon the regular Planning Commission meeting date .and suggested that the Planning Commission reschedule the meeting to February 25, 1980 so it does :not conflict with the meeting mate. A emotion was made by Commissioner Garcia and -seconded by Commissioner .Jones to change the Planning Commission regular meeting date to February 25, 1980. AYES: JONES, GARCIA, RE EL NOES: NONE SENT: DAHL,, TOLSTCY 2. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reminded the Commission to adjourn to the February 19, 1980 meeting with the City Council for the Energy Workshop at the Neighborhood Facility located on Arrow Route. Chairman Rempel also reminded the audience that the meeting is open to the public. CONSENT CALENDAR Upon motion by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously carried the following Consent Calendar items were approved as submitted: A. Negative Declaration for Director Review No. 80-02 - Shook Building Systems B. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5733 - McNay C. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5505 - Harkins and White D. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5832 - Nelson E. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5803 - Hone and Associates F. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5795 - Granger PUBLIC HEARING NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 79-01 - GVD COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC. Proposed community shopping center consisting of 164,860 square feet of building area located at the north side of Foothill Boulevard approximately 600' east of Vineyard Ave. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 79-01 based on the findings listed in Resolution No. 80-04 and all recommended conditions of approval included in the staff report. Chairman Rempel asked the Commission for questions of staff. Commissioner Jones asked where the loading zone would be. Michael Vairin stated that Gemco' s main loading zone is located in a recessed or sunk well with a ramp and a truck turn around. The rest of the loading zone and customer pick up would be at the opposite side of the structure. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what distance there is between the Winery to the west and the proposed project. Michael Vairin stated that there is approximately 450' to 500' . Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the property goes all the way back to San Bernardino Road? Michael Vairin stated to our knowledge, at this point, this property is all one piece or Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 13, 1980 owned by; the same people. One signal mould be at the location of the main entry with a left turn pocket and the other at Vineyard and San Bernardino Road. Chairman- Rempel asked if there is a median island proposed` Michael Vairin stated that there is a condition that would require a raised landscaped median island on Foothill Boulevard® Chairman Rempel asked the applicant for their presentation., Richard Lewis, Lewis Hoes, introduced his associates and stated that this project is in partnership with CVD Commercial properties. He stated that the staff report reflects the changes and innovations that the Design Review Committee and staff asked them to do. e have read that staff report and are happily in agreement with; each' and every one of the recommendations. This is a first Mass project and does not act negatively on any surrounding homes and areas, The only paint that I've wanted to raise is the light standards. We had felt that 12 foot high light standards would be agreeable in all the areas that would be sensitive to residential and that a 18 foot standard would be better and the light plan could be worked out with >staff as the final plans coarse in. Chairman Rempol opened the public hearing Chairman Rempel stated that he feels that the height of the light at the 12 foot level was inadequate and should be raised to '15 to 16 feet in the parking which would give greater coverage. Commissioner Tolstby agreed with Chairman Rempel':s remark. Michael Vairin stated that the intent of the condition was to make sure that the lights adjacent to residences were at a lower height and we foresee no problem allowing the higher height. Commissioner Tol.stoy stated that the lights, adjacent to some of the residences could be higher if designed well Michael Vairin stated that if the Commission is concerned about this, it could be your option to add a specific condition which would require a detailed lighting plan to b submitted. Commissioner Tolnstdy feels that the City should be sensitive to crime in the parking lots. r. Joseph Filipi,' owner of the Thomas Winery along with his family, has no disagree- ment with the project and that the architectural renderings and the demands made by the Planning Commission looks like a very worthwhile project, Vale Jordan, 2nd house in on Rstacia, is concerned abut the noise level and questioned the Cul-de-sac. Planning i Commission Minutes - - Februarys 13, 1980 F Michael Vairin stated that from Foothill Boulevard to the back property lines it is approximately 250 feet. Ultimately this property adjacent to the Cemco site will be developed. The> cul-de-sac will be designed within the existing right-of-way and will not encroach into any of your yards. Mr. Jordan questioned the auto shop location. Michael Vairin stated that from the back side of the shop there is no vehicle circulation and there will be 10 foot of landscaping plus a 10 foot block gall.' Mr. Jordan asked if there would be any;vehicle circulation. Michael Vairin stated that there is a paved area for circulation. It will mainly be employee parking stalls and people going to the nursery but there will be 15 feet of landscaping. Mr. Jordan stated that he did not .feel there should be vehicle circulation next to a residential area and feels there will be a lot of noise even if there is a block wall. Mr. Casselberry of Fstacia Court, feels there will be a lot; of reverberation between the block wall and block building and will create more sound than it stops. Mr. Duane Walters, from Cemc -lucky, stated that the northeast part of the building is for customer pickup. We have one ramp for the grocery section and we will not have trucks idling all day long. They come at certain hours and leave at certain hours. We could work a delivery schedule to suit the City's requirements. Chairman' Remp l stated that if there was a condition put on your approval restricting deliveries between the hours of 7 30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. , would you abide by that condition. Mr. Welters stated that they could live with: that. Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing. 1 A motion was made by Commissioner 'Tolstoy and seconded by Commissioner Jones to approve Resolution No. 80-04 and. Conditional Use Permit No. 7 -01 with the modification of lighting and restriction of delivery hours to 7:30 a.m. to :00 p.m. AYES: Dahl, Garcia, ,Jones; Rempel, Tolstoy NOES: None ABSENT: None Recess called at 7;0 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 8: 10 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 13, 1980 `` NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 80-OIB - DAON/BARTON - Request for change in the General plan from Industrl_af_Eo_ ighborbood/Community Commercial land use designation for property located on the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Highway. Barry Hogan reviewed staff report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve General Plan Amendment No. 80-OIB to the City Council. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if Arrow Route is projected to be six lanes, Paul Rougean explained there would be only four. Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. Jack Corrigan:- of Daon stated they feel this would be an asset to the Community and if there are any questions they would be happy to answer them. Chairman Rempel asked the Commission for questions of the applicant. There being none, Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the public, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing and asked for Commission discussion. Commissioner Garcia felt that the traffic issue should be discussed in reference to the shopping centers along Haven Avenue recently proposed. Barry Hogan stated that this commercial designation requested would not be for the centers like we have recently discussed. Those centers are considered neighborhood centers and what we are talking about at this point in time is a center that has a major tenant on the order of regional or semi-regional basis and would probably take in our City as its service area and perhaps some of Fontana and Ontario, which is not competitive in that regard to those other centers. We are not aware of the uses proposed other than the major tenant. Paul Rougeau stated that the major reason that Haven at this location should be able to handle traffic generated by this kind of center is that Haven Avenue, at present, and in the future carries commuter traffic. Commercial and commuter peak hours of traffic do not coincide and the traffic will be spread throughout the day. Haven is situated with right of way that we can provide six or eight through lanes plus extra lanes at intersections for turns so that the intersection will work effectively. Arrow is a 4 lane through lane street and there are provisions for turn lanes and even right turns at the major intersections like Haven and Arrow. Jack Lam stated that the City will be looking at median islands along Haven which means the turn movements will be further controlled and there will not be the haphazard left turn movements by a series of curb cuts. Any curb cuts going into the project site will be right turn only and control will be at the intersections with signals. Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 13, 1 1980 Commissioner Dahl stated that he doesn't feel, that this is an area that we want to get involved with in determining if a market or grocery store type use should be allowed. He also stated that he does not feel the City has reached a saturation point in that area and feels that the Commission should just act on the basis of whether or not to allow Commercial/Professional designation or retain the Industrial use. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he would like to see the Industrial Area preserved and that does not exclude commercial. He feels Commercial in the Industrial Area is a good thing and the main concept should be for service of the business park and does not feel that the area should contain a market. He is not against Commercial but feels Commercial should be of' a certain flavor and that it should be mostly to serve the business park people. Commissioner Dahl stated that there is also a high density designation abutting to the area and this would be the only service area. Jack Lam suggested that at the present time if the Commission is undecided about the feasibility of or the appropriate type of use, and if the Commission is considering approval, that the Commission place a condition on this amendment recommending to the City Council that the General Plan Amendment does not take effect until approval of the Conditional Use Permit. If the General Plan Amendment is approved there are two steps in order to accomplish the project rezoning consistent with the General Plan change and the actual Conditional Use Permit. Those would happen concurrently and the next step is the actual site approval for the Conditional Use Permit. The Commission will then have the ability to condition the Conditional Use Permit and specific uses on the C.U.P. and address specific uses at the time of the C.U.P. and then further condition it at the discussion on that date. Commissioner Garcia asked if this will cancel the C.P.A. Barry Hogan stated that it would. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that he is not against Commercial just against certain types of commercial in that particular area. Chairman Rempel stated that he feels that any type of commercial venture on Haven Avenue would be viable. Commissioner Jones stated that possibly in the Arrow area, commercial, would be very beneficial. Chairman Rempel stated he feels the architectural design proposed in this instance would make Haven a scenic route. Upon motion by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Tolstoy, to approve General Plan Amendment No. 80-GIB to the City Council that the C.P.A. does not take effect until the approval of the C.U.P. and add a condition that the C.U.P. should be approved wihtin one year or approval expires. Planning Commission Minutes -6- February 13, 1980 AYES. Garcia, Tolstoy, Bones, Dahl, Rempe7 NOES; None ABSENT: None NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND DIRECTOR REVIEW NO, 80-01 - BA R''I.AN/G7flLFF AND ASSOCIATES The development of a restaurant to be located on the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Center Avenue. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 80-02 and issuance of a Negative Declaration. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of 'Staff. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what the zoning is to the north of this property. Michael. Vairin stated that it is C-2 approximately 300 feet then° residential. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the plan .lends itself to some type of common access to Foothill. Boulevard`,on the west side. Michael Vairin stated that it is possible with some design change. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that it could then be done without much change to the plan and the initial. design. Paul Rougeau stated that the basic access policy provides for one access point on a for highway per parcel, but the overriding conditions in the access policy are that if there.` is a suitable alterative access from a minor' strut then that is what should be used before accessing the major. We felt the ;public intersection mould eventually provide for better turning movements and eventually a median island. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if there would not be ;a problem later with shared access. Paul Rougeau stated that yes, it would be possible because they don't have any problem with the; present design of the parking lot. Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing. John Erlan.d on o f s of Barma 'an 4olff and Associates spoke on hehal. of the applicant. � - �. r� � p e_ pp t. The point of the access off of Center is vague but we are also unsure of approval from CALTRANS. Access tiff of Foothill is desirable and vital to this; project, The owner has band commitments and they are 'contingent upon, access off of Foothill, and feels the Commission should consider the access carefully. Commissioner Garcia asked if ;the applicant is indicating that the plan reflects two accesses? Planning Commission Minutes -7- February 13, 1980 John Erlandson stated that yes, it is hard to see it shown in a dotted line. There is a note subject to your approval on here because this plan was prepared for submittal prior to getting the approval from Caltrans. We have not gotten approval because Caltrans has turned the matter over to your= hands. The access as shown were is 10 foot from the property line and a 30 foot wide drive which leaves the center of the driveway about 200 feet from the center of Center Street which is a significant distance. It has always been shown here subject to approval because we had to prepare plans rapidly. Commissioner Garcia asked if the proposed access will be met if it is combined with access in the future? Paul Rougeau stated yes, the distance requirement would be met with this one because it is required to be only 100 feet from the corner. Jack Lam stated that this is a similar situation we looked at in the City on an Industrial project on Jersey and Haven. It was appealed to the City Council; they desired to take traffic off of Haven. The appeal was denied because it was felt from the traffic standpoint it would be best if there was alternative access from Jersey, and the access should be taken off of Jersey rather than from Haven. It was shortly thereafter that the Planning Commission adopted its access policy. Commissioner Tolstoy asked that if the problem would be solved by combining the access with the project next door when it gets started. John Erlandson stated that yes it would, but there is no planned development and the economics of the restaurant are now and I am sure the owner would be in agree- ment to common access. Chairman Rempel stated he thought this is a different condition than what we were talking about in that industrial area, but he thinks the applicant has a very valid point and if a sign program is worked out and there could be no left turns. He also feels it could be an asset and possibly work some deal now with the adjacent property owner to pave a little bit of his property in order to get that access in there. Jack Lam stated that there is also a practical reason for not considering the driveway at this time. We have found that in our reviews, we try to combine driveways. The reason for doing this is the more curb cuts you have on your major arterials, the more turn movements you encourage. In other cases, we have found the <adjacent property owners are sometimes reluctant to enter into agreement, everyone wants their own driveway. In this case, if there is no driveway, there will always be an incentive to work for this other driveway. Furthermore, the next person coming in a condition of approval is fitting the joint access. In this case, both parties would have the incentive of cooperating in joint access. Therefore, no driveway should be granted off Foothill until joint access is worked out by the property owners. Doug Hone, Hone and Associates, stated that the applicant could put in half of a drive- way 15 feet into her property line for assured access right turn only into the site and as the other property develops they can finish the other 15 feet and have a shared access and she could submit the revised site plan. Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 13, 1980 Michael Vairin suggested the Commission should consider a raised landscaped median island to be consistent with other Foothill Blvd., approvals. Chairman Rempel stated that this would happen in the future when the median island is designed. Capon motion by; Commissioner Tolstoy and seconded by Commissioner Dahl to accept Director Review No, 80-01 with.. its 'findings and conditions and Resolution No 80-02 and add the following two conditions: 1. Permit a shared access with at least a minimum of 15 feet of paving to be built can bath properties to form a 30 minimum full drive. 2. A landscaped median island to be installed; by applicant. ANTES: TOLSTOY, DAHL, GARCIA, ,JONES, REMPEL NOES NONE ABSENT: NONE DESIGN OF BASE LINE THROUGH TERRA VISTA Paul. Rougeau reviewed the Staff Report and gave a slide presentation. Staff is recommending that the Commission approve Resolution No. 80-03 permitting the elimination of the eucalyptus trees along Base Line and requiring appropriate replacement trees. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the Corp. ,of Engineers is going to improve the I extra width of the bridge. Saul: Rougeau stated yes,, the poles are irrelevant w ith the type of plan proposed. Gene Hoggatt of Lewis Homes stated they support the staff report :and appreciate its .adoption.. I Upon motion by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner .zones and unanimously carried, Resolution No. 0-03 was adopted as submitted. AYES`: TCLSTC° , JONES, GARCIA, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT; DAHL `planning Comni,ssion Minutes -9- February 13,;, 1980 Jack Lain informed the Planning Commission that the desire for quality street naming' was presented to the City Council authorizing staff to develop a program with the Planning Commission to develop a. sub-committee. Chairman Rempel felt that the Commission should go out into the Community and .set a future date to assemble the Committee. ,Jack Lai then introduced Tim Needle, new Associate Planner. Tien comes to the City from the City of Lompoc. Barry Hogan informed the. Commission that a Condo-Conversion Committee was formulated and the Condo-Conversion Ordinance has been presented to the Committee. The BIA will be coming out with a letter of support on the final draft and will be presented to the. Commission on February 25, 1980. March 3, 1980, the Zoning Ordinance Committee will meet from 4:30 p. n. to :30 p.m. , in the City Hall to review the proposed Admin- istrative Section of the Zoning Ordinance. Upon motion by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Chairman Rempel and unanimously carried', it was voted to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting of February 13, 1980 to the Energy Conservation. Workshop, and the Monday, February 25, 1980 planning Commission meeting. Meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development JL.c d Planning Commission Minutes 10- February 13, 1980 CITY OF NC C CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 23, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the. City of Rancho Cuca- monga was held in the Lion's Park Community Center, 161 Ease Line, Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, January 23, 180. Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p. a. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: CO 1SSIONBRS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Peter Tolstoy, Herman Rempel ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None SO PRESS Jack Lam, Director of CommunityDevelopment; Bob Dougherty, City Attorney; Barry Rogan, Senior Planner; Michael Vairin, Associate Planner; Paul R' a l ou Associate Civil Engineer; e -_ and Nancy McAllister, Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES_ Upon motion by Commissioner Jones, seconded by Commissioner Garcia, and: unani- mously carried, the minutes of December ber 12, 1979 were approved as -submitted Upon motion by Commissioner Garcia, seconded by Commissioner Jones and unani- mously carried, the minutes of January 9, 1980 were approved as submitted. ANNOUNCEMENTS ,Tack Lam, Director of Community Development, reminded the. Commission of the joint City Council/Planning Commission -meeting to be held February 19, 1980. This will be an Energy Conservation Workshop and will be held at the Cucamonga Neighborhood facility at 7:00 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR Chairman .empel asked that Item 'W' of the Consent Calendar be pulled for further discussion. Upon motion by Commissioner ,cones, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unani- mously carried, the 'following Consent Calendar items were approved as submitted: H. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No 5819 �- lien Shipley C. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 571 - liarmakian/Wolff & Assoc. D. Negative Declaration for Tentative parcel Map a- Richard Beck and Ronald Mayfield Chairman Hempel stated in regard to Item "A" of the Consent Calendar, he is concerned about the letter sent to Vanguard Companies which indicates that the City is going to force the.; joint driveway'requirement on the development of bath properties. He believes that there are wetter ways to state the City's desires. Mr. Vairin stated when the site plan was approved by the Commission, they were informed in order to meet the access policy, a combined driveway would. be one way in which to accomplish the; policy. A motion was made by Commissioner Hempel, seconded by Commissioner Tol toy and unanimously carried to approve Item "A", Request for Extension of Director Review No. 7 -06 to expire October 21, 1980 as requested. PUBLIC HEARING .NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 0-OIA - LEWI DEVELOPMENT �- Request to place a neighborhood commercial designation can the southeast corner I of Haven Avenue and Base Line presently designated as Alternative Land Uses.' Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends approval of General Plan Amendment No. «-01A designating the southeast' corner of Haven and Ease Line Road as Neighborhood Community. Chairman Eempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. There being none, Chairman Rempel opened the public hearing* Mr. Gene Roggat , representing Lewis lopm nt, stated their project is ready to begin construction and asked that the Co fission consider approval of the General flan Amendment in order that they may proceed. He stated if the Com- mission has any; questions he would he happy to answer them, Mr. David Herendeen, 10476 Pepper Street, asked if the adopted General Plan is subject to radical changes based on developer interest. In this City, most intersections have shopping centers'of one kind or another already developed on them. There is also a great deal of vacant store frontage: in those centers. He asked if a demographic 'need has been shown to warrant any farther shopping center construction. Planning Commission Minutes - - January 23, 1980 Chairman Rempel stated to a large degree this site ties in with the total planned community development of Terra Vista.. In the Terra 'vista develop-- ment 'plan this corner is shown as a commercial center. There will be approximately 6,500 homes built within the Terra 'Vista development over the next 15 to 20 years. Mr. Lam stated if anyone in the audience is interested in the Terra. Vista plans but have not seen them, they are welcome to come into the Planning Division to look. at the exhibits. Since incorporation, this City's effort has been to upgrade all development standards and promote more orderly growth in the City. In regard to this Genera. Flan. Amendment, if approved tonight this does not mean that the shopping center has been. approved. What Lewis must do if the Amendment is approved is seek a zone change and site plan approval. The residents in the area will be notified prior to the public hearing on the zone change and site plan review. At this time everyone will have an opportunity to take a look at the plans and to make ;judgements as to what you life or don't like about the particular project. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman Rempel closed the public hearing. Conmissioner Garcia ;stated in previous meetings, the possibility of requiring a feasibility study of all commercial developments was discussed. He asked if such a study will be required of this development. Mr. Lam asked that the Commission give guidance tonight`regarding this matter. The Zoning Ordinance at this time allows the City to require a market analysis. There was, however, some opposition to that requirement when the issue was raised previously. The opposition raised was that anyone could get a market analysis and have it say whatever they want it to say. The other part of the argument was that for someone to make an investment they would do their own market analysis. Cormissioner Garcia stated the reason he brought this up is the fact that w are reaching saturation paint of shopping centers within the;present community. He is concerned that there are several existing shopping centers that are having trouble finding tenants at this time. This should be carefully analyzed prior to any additional development being approved. Thisdoesn't Lean that he is opposed to this general plan amendment as part of the planned community of Terra Vista but he does runt to be cautious that this project comes at the right time so that it can be supported by the, population. Chairman Rempel stated in regard to a market study, it is his opinion s developer is going to take that into consideration before a development is proposed to insure that it will be economically feasible. The area which lies east of Haven Avenue at this time has no shopping area. It is his opinion a center of this nature is needed. A motion was made by Commissioner Bahl, seconded by Commissioner Jones to recommend adoption of General Flan Amendment No, 80-01A and that such recommendation be forwarded to the City Council, AYES. DAHL, ;JONES, GARCIA, ;TOLSTOY, RE24PEL DOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Planning Commission Minutes - - January 23, 1980 NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 80-01C - CITY O RANCHO CL ONCA -- Request for a change in the General Plan to relocate the Asterisk presently designated midway between Lemon and Highland on the east aide of Haven to the intersection of Highland and Haven. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report in detail, ;this being on file in the planning Division. Staff recommends that the Commis- sion recommend to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 8 M-OIC to relocate the asterisk on the east side of Haven Avenue between Lemon and. Highland Avenues to the intersection of Haven Avenue and, Highland Avenues. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. Commissioner Jones stated as she recalls the policy at the present time is that no more than one center is allowed per intersection. Mr. Hogan stated no, the policy adopted is to allow two centers per intersection. That policy was set quite.: early in the general plan. process. There being no further questions from the Commission, Chairman Hempel opened, the public hearing. Mr. Tito DeV"ito Francesco, representing Mr. Jack Sylvester, stated, if the asterisk is moored to the intersection of Highland and Haven, this would allow two proposed developments at the intersection. The reason Mr. Blayney did not feel a regional center should be located in this area was due to the free- way problem. By mooring the asterisk to this intersection, there will again be the problem of the freeway. If the asterisk is moved down to Highland and Haven they would want to be assured that Mr. Sylvester would be able to proceed with his plans starting at the Lemon Avenue and Haven intersection. He hopes that this will be elastic enough to allow development of a center in this loca- tion working down toward the proposed freeway. He would like it placed in the minutes that Mr. Hone's proposed project really does not conflict with the other two centers. Mr. Mogan stated the asterisk is elastic enough to allow Mr. Sylvester to develop from the intersection of Lemon and Haven down toward the freeway. In regard. to Mr. Hone's property, the center he is proposing will have specialty shops that will not he competitive with and does not count as a shopping center toward the two center policy. Mr. Loan Evans, representing T & S Development owners of property on the south- east corner of Highland and Haven, stated he would be happy to answer any ques- tions the Commission may have concerning their proposed'development. Chairman Eempel staged questions concerning the project itself can not be answered at this time as this request tonight is for a General Plan Amendment only and not review of the site plans. In regard to the proposed Foothill free-- way, this Commission has gone on record favoring protection of that right-of°-way.` e are going to look very closely to any developent to insure it does not encroach onto that right-of-gray. There being no further comments from the audience, Chairman, Rempel closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -4- Januaay 23, 1980 Mr. Lam stated during the General Plan discussions when we developed the policy of no more than two centers, at that point the Commission and Staff took the position that only the northerly site would count as a center. The applicant in that case argued that the asterisk should be moved down to be con- sistent with this policy .and let whoever was able to secure tenants for their center to proceed and build a center. The Council agreed with this and felt the asterisk should be -moved to the intersection of Highland and Haven to he consis- tent `with that policy. That is why this is before the Commission this evening. This was initiated by the Staff at the request of the Council. After examining both sites, staff finds that both Mr. Sylvester and Mr. Evans have no more advan- tage over the other because the freeway goes between those two sates. It is really up to whichever development interests are able to secure tenants and able to move forward on the center. Co issioner Dahl stated he would like to port out that by approving the General Plan Amendment it does not 'mean that we have to approve either site. Zoning has not been approved as yet. Also, development plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to any development. A motion was made by Commissioner Garcia and seconded by Commissioner Dahl to recommend adoption of General. Plan Amendment No. 80- 1C `and that such recommenda- tion be forwarded to the 'City Council. AYES: GARCIA, DAHL, TCL STOP, REMPEL NOES: JONES ABSENT: TONE Commissioner Jones stated she is opposed to the amendment as she does not want to see any additional commercial developed along Haven. Avenue. Chairman Rempel called a recess at 8:15 p.m. Meeting reconvened at 8:30 p.m. with all Commission members present. PEAL OF SITE APPROVAL NO. 79-19 - ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY (Referred back to the Commission by; the City Council) - Improvements and conversion to existing service station located at 9533 Foothill into a mini-mart station. Michael Vairin,'; Associate' Planner, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and discuss the issues and provide the necessary direction to staff and applicant for revisions to plans, if required, and final compilation of conditions of approval. Chairman R�empel' asked for questions: from the Commission of the staff. Commissioner Tolstoy stated at the last meeting at which this item was reviewed, he was in abjection to the development because of the Layout of the site and circulation problems. There are circulation problems getting onto the site from Foothill and Malachite. There are also yin--site circulation problems, The Commission stated in its earlier review that one of the driveways 'along Foothill Boulevard be closed; however, the Council in its review did not see any problems Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 23, 1980 J I with the driveway as it exists. Particular attention needs to be grade for traffic to purchase gas, with a separate parking area for those wishing to purchase food items. This Commission has bad a long standing policy in regard to 'aesthetics on Foothill Blvd. in order to convert Foothill Blvd, into 'a street that this City will be proud of. We need to upgrade and make sure that the aesthetics on the buildings are upgraded to be compatible and consistent with what we have dine on Foothill in the past. Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the applicant. r. Sara Biic , ;Attorney, representing Atlantic Richfield, stated the Commis- sion needs to remember that this property is not a new development but an existing site. They are only amending the interior of the building for sales of convenience items. At this point to say that the City would like to redesign the building, that, as a practical matter, would kill the project. They are only refurbishing an old building, Their purpose is to take a service station that is in trouble and try to keep it functioning. Commissioner Garcia stated it is his opinion since a convenience store will be added, 'especially along Foothill`' Blvd. , that it should resemble such and not a gas station. From what he can see no outward changes will be made to the building with the exception of additional<landscaping. Mr. Blick stated the building will be painted; the color scheme they are proposing is one which has been used in other mini mart locations Staff has suggested that earth tones be used, however, they object to that as they wish to use the typical Atlantic Richfield color schemes. Commissioner Garcia 'stated in many cities Arco is identified by the sinage, not by the building colors. The refurbishing that is being requested at this site will be here for many years, and he is very concerned with what has been proposed. Mr. Lam stated the Design; Review Committee reviews all plans which would also include any remodeling plans. Where will be an opportunity to review the eleva- tions of the buildings. Chairman Rempel' stated this matter should be reviewed by the Design Review Com- mittee, but at the same time the Commission needs to establish some of their°. concerns. Be is very concerned about traffic circulation, bath on and off site. 3e would like to see the requirement of a median island on Foothill in this area. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he is also concerned about on-site and off -site circulation. Additional on-site paring should be provided that would be easily usable to the customers using the mini-mart. It is necessary that the Resign Review Committee review this site for design of the building, landscaping,; and ,site circulation. Chairman Rempel stated in regard to landscaping, it is necessary that the Resign Review Committee review this and that the landscaping be required to at least match what has been installed in adjacent developments, Foothill Blvd« is ai highway which is traveled extensively in the community. All the developments which this Commission has approved have had an average. of 5° landscaping .from the property line. He realizes that this would not be realistic to that site Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 23, 1980 but the areas of landscaping around it should be improved so that we get somewhat of an idea that this station will be here for many years. Commissioner Dahl stated this Commission has the right and the obligation to insure that what will be the finished product will be desirable for the City. This site should be reviewed by the Design Review Committee. He is also con- cerned about circulation. The possibility of;' a median island on Foothill should be discussed and such median island should be landscaped. A left turn should not be allowed from the station onto Foothill Blvd. Landscaping should be extended along Foothill to be in conformance with other sites approved along Foothill Blvd. He would also like to see landscaping extended along the Mala- chite Street frontage to perhaps another 3 or 4 feet. He, would like to see better parking conditions so that those purchasing food items are not causing interference with the gas line. From his review the south side of the station would be the best area for parking for ingress and egress onto Malachite. This would mean the relocation of the proposed addition to the east side instead of the south side of the station. There are other problems with the overall architectural design but this should be left to the Design Review Committee to review and make their recommendations. A motion was made by Commissioner Tolstoy and seconded by Commissioner Jones that Site Approval No. 79-19 be referred to the Design Review Committee for review, and that consideration for the building, landscaping and circulation on the site should be looked at during the review. The Commission also strongly recommended that a median island be constructed on Foothill Blvd. AYES: TOLSTOY, JONES, GARCIA, DAHL, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE REVIEW of Rural Road Standards` JackLam, Director of Community Development, reviewed the staff report. Staff recommends adoption of Resolution No. 80-01 approving Option #2 to the City Council. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. After general discussion, Chairman Rempel asked for comments from the audience. Mr. Comes, Real Estate Agent, stated he is glad to see the City taking this step as there are a number of people that do have this type of problem. A motion was made by Commissioner Jones and seconded by Commissioner Garcia to approve Resolution No. 80-01 as submitted. AYES: JONES, GARCIA, DAHL, TOLSTOY, REMPEL NOES: NO ABSENT: NONE Planning Commission Minutes -7- January 23, 1980 Commissioner Garcia stated he would like to discuss the;possibility of 'requiring feasibility studies for slopping centers. It is his opinion some sort of infor- mation relevant to the implementation of a shopping center should be presented to the staff. He does not feel this would require an extensive amount of analysis. Most developers have this; type of information available prior to developing their plans. In order for our 'own piece of mind when a project comes before the Commis- sion supportive data should be presented especially when citizens are concerned that we are overbuilding the city with shopping centers. Chairman Re el stated if a developer is required to have a detailed feasibility study, the developer is going to get the information that he wants to have. It would be well to 'ask that they show that they have looked into the feasibility of the center. He stated such information should also be required of administra- tive professional developments'< as there seems to be a considerable amount o vacancies in the -P areas. We do need information from the developer showing that they have really considered this facet of development. Commissioner Dahl stated he world agree with Chairman R mpel. He stated the main item that would' be necessary in such a study is some indication of the area intended to sure and the population within that area, It was the consensus of the Commission to instruct Staff to develop some basic guidelines for feasibility studies. Upon motion by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by; Commissioner Garcia. and ,unanimously; carried, it was voted to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. of January 23, 1980 to the next regular meeting of February 13, 1980. Meeting adjourned at : C p.m. Res ectfully ubmitted, iµ 2 JACK LAM, Director of Community Development Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 1980 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 9, 1980 Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga was held in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line, Rancho Cucamonga, on Wednesday, January 9, 1980. Meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Rempel who led the meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Richard Dahl, Jorge Garcia, Laura Jones, Herman Rempel, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None ALSO PRESENT: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development; Barry Hogan, Senior Planner; Michael Vairin, Associate Planner; Ted Hopson, City Attorney; Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil Engineer; and Nancy McAllister, Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, reported at the last Council meeting, the Council took action to approve the appeal by Atlantic Richfield of Site Approval No. 79-19. At that time, this item was referred back to the Planning Commission for further review to deter-mine conditions of approval. There are two options for the Commission to consider at this time. The Commission can send this item to the Design Review Committee before it is reviewed by the full Commission or it can be reviewed by the Planning Commission first. A motion was made by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Jones and unanimously carried that Site Approval No. 79,-19 be brought back to the Commission at the next regular meeting of January 23, 1980 for review of conditions. 2. Jack Lam, Director of Community Development, stated the Advisory Committee will be meeting next Tuesday, January 15, 1980 at 7:00 p.m. All Planning Commission members are urged to attend this meeting as this is the first meeting at which Sedway/Cooke will present data base on housing, land use, noise and environment. They will also present to the Committee a wide range of goals and policy options to develop into a comprehensive goal package. This is a very important meeting which should be very informative. 3. Jack Lam stated on February 19, 1980 at 7.00 p.m. , a meeting will be held at the Neighborhood Community Center which will be ea joint City/ Commission Energy Workshop. The program revolves around energy conserva- tion. Mr. Fred Etzel of Sedway/Cooke will be present at this meeting and hopes to provide information and educational materials to the Commis- sion and Council at that meeting. A representative from the Solar Office from the State of California, a conservation person from the Energy Com- mission, and perhaps someone from the office of Planning and Research will be present. Two speakers will talk about energy conservation and Mr. Fred Etzel will talk about policy implications and the context in which these kinds of issues would be integrated into the General Plan and what it means for Rancho Cucamonga. This will be a very informative workshop. 4. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reported CVD (developers of the proposed Gemco site) have indicated they would like to come back before the Design Review Committee on eJanuary 22, 1980 at 4:00 p.m. if possible. He asked Commissioners Garcia and Dahl, members of the Design Review Committee, e if they would be able to meet at this time. Commissioners Garcia and Dahl indicated they would be able to meet at the above specified time. 5. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the C & L Tract in the north part of the City had a problem in December because the Corp. of Engineers cut off the direct route to their tract and the sign as the City now allows was insufficient. Barry Hogan worked out a solution to this problem with C & L so that during the construction by the Corp. of Engineers, C & L was allowed some signing which would lead to this tract. It is time that the Comnission and public realizes that we do work very closely with the public and their problems. CONSENT CALENDAR Upon motion by Commissioner Tolstoy and seconded by Commissioner Dahl, the following consent calendar item were approved as submitted: A. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map No. 5687 - Edward J. Feduniw B. Negative Declaration for Parcel Map - Dave Long DIRECTOR REVIEW No. 79-32 - PLUESS-STAUFER - Review of landscape and berming requirements for the limestone grinding and processing plant located on 80 acres of land in the M-2 zone on the north side of Sixth Street, 1,200' west of Rochester. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the Staff Report. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the conceptual landscape plans as submitted by the applicant with the additional berms as described within the Staff Report and require that detailed landscape and irrigation plans be submitted to the Planning Division Staff for final review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 9, 1980 Chairman Rempel. asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. Chairman Rempel stated he didn't believe the Design Review Committee was that critical as far as ber "ng on the north property boundary due to the fact that there really is no development in that area, and the property is owned b F'luess®Staufer. Ile stated it is necessary however that mounding come back around the corner and the remaining area be densely landscaped. He stated it is also important that wind fences be installed around the plant especially in the vineyard area to keep dust from blowing,. i Commissioner Tolstoy stated the berm should be wrapped around to at least 300' so that the berm could tame up to the building line of the adjacent project. He further stated in regard to the type of plants approved for this development it is very important that they be looked at very carefully to insure that the plants selected are compatible with our local conditions. A motion'was made by Commissioner Tolstoy and seconded by Commissioner ,tones to approve the landscape and berming requirements for Director Review No. 79-32 1 subject to the following conditions; 1. A detailed wind fence plan.: shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits for this project. - 2. A detailed :Landscape and irrigation 'plan shall, be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. . Six ( foot earth berms shall be installed on the north side of the material <piles. . The earth berm along 6th Street shall be carried around the west property line to a depth of 300' from bath Street. AYES: TOLSTOY, ,MINES, DAHL, GARCIA, REMPEL NOES: NONE .ABSENT. NONE APPEAL OF DIRECTOR REVIEW NO. 79-70 FOR DIVERSIFIED INVESTMENT CO - Appeal, by Ed 'young of the minor site plan revision for; the shopping center located on the southeast corner of Base Line and Archibald. Michael Vairin, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report in detail, this being on file in the planning Division Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the options available and decide whether or not to affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Director of Community Development for Director Review No. 79-70. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the City is placed in an awkward position,here since. the County reviewed and approved this project. He asked if there is any ingress and egress to building "E" ,proposed to the rear of the buildings. Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 9, 1980 Mr. Vairin stated there is pedestrian access for deliveries only. He added the City Planning Division required that the developer continue the roof around the building which would improve the project® Therefore, the develop- ment has been improved over and above what was required by the. County.. Chairman>Rempel asked for comments: from the audience. r. ] d Young stated the existing block wal.lN terminates approi.amtely 8 feet to the south of where the building is located. There is a concrete gutter that runs along the block wall. There was supposedly some grading changes approved several months ago to drop the grade of the building down some three feet over what was originally proposed. He stated he was at the County Board of Supervisors meeting when this item was reviewed in August of 1977. At that time a r quir ent stipulation was placed that there be'a block wall encompassing that enure sopping center from any residential property. Although this is not shown on the papers the Planning Staff received from the County, it is logical to assume if that requirement had not been made Diversified would not have constructed the wall on the south and eastern. boundary. Be spoke to Mr. .lack Tarr of Diversified regarding the block wall and he indicated that the wall would e continued when the new building is constructed. He had assumed that the block wall would be erected when that future building was developed. There is also a drainage problem with Water draining onto lather properties. Mr. lack Tarr of Diversified Investment, stated Mr. Young is in error regarding a future wall on that particular stretch of property. The particular drainage that Mr. Young is talking about is something which has been studied and doers drain into the system approved by the County. Ile requested that the Commission deny the 'appeal requested by Mr. Young. They have dame what they believe is good planning with rational, sensible changes. Mr. Ralph Strain, property owner to the south of this project, stated at the original County meeting, several people were present and voiced the concert that a block wall was needed around the entire property and they were assured at that time that the block: wall would be requited. Mr. Vairin stated staff died .Look into Mr. Young's concern about original approval of the block. wall. We have a certified copy of the action of the Board of Super- visors and there is no documentation in the files which states the block wall was a requirement. Mr. Bob Marts 7332 Lemon, stated the back of his property sets against the back of the shopping center. The wall does not extend across his property. Me stated water runoff goes from the shopping center property onto his property. Chairman Rempel stated if Diversified is diverting water on to this property this needs to be corrected, but as far as the requirement for the wall, it is not going to change drainage one way or the other. Due to the fact there is no record that the Board of Supervisors required the block wall around the entire property, he does not see any way which the Commission can now make;this requirement. Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 9, 1980 { Commissioner Dahl stated the County approved the project. Mr. "Tarr can build the projects the County approved originally. If he does go with that original approval he does not have to do a thing but have a driveway in the back for cars to go in and out. The problem is that Mr. young may have been told some- thing by the County leading him to believe that a> block. wall was required along the entire property line, however,'' the County never asked for that in writing in any way, shape or form. Therefore, there is no legal way this Commission can now require that black gall.. If the Commission should ask that Mr. Tarr complete the block wall,' all Mr. Tarr would have to do is go back to the original County approved plan and develop according to that plan. That may be to Mr. Young's personal interest; however, this is something this Commission has to determine whether the now plan is more aesthetically pleasing. Be assured that our Engineering Division will review the drainage plan to insure that water is carried to the drain gutter. Mr. Ted young stated if this Commission grants a change; they have every right to make any ether stipulations they so desire. Mr. 'Tarr has requested to make some changes to the plan which was originally approved. This Commission does have the opportunity now to correct that error. Mr. Tarr stated their Construction Coordinator has been working with the Engineering Department to resolve the drainage problem on the site. '.This, will be corrected. r. Tolstoy stated if there is a change in grade, them could perhaps be some type of retainer required if needed. He is not talking about requiring the full block, wall but whatever may be needed to correct any drainage problems. Mr. Paul Rougeau, Associate Civil engineer, stated a new grading;plan has been submitted to the Engineering Division for review and approval. This plan will need to be checked to insure that grater runoff does not drain onto other pro- perties. Chairman Rempel stated it is his opinion the two parties involved should work together amongst themselves. Mr. Rogan stated the reason this is before the Commission is because the parties involved have not been able to word out a compromise. Staff does not want to act as referee between two disputing people. He stated if there is a concern with the buffering, dense landscaping has been required behind the building. The only area left open is from where the wall exists now to the south building. If the block wall were extended approximately 30' that would buffer traffic and noise and additional: landscaping that we have required behind the building and should provide for an adequate aesthetics. This could be a compromise solution. Co issioner T°olstoy stated he personally feels that everybody is better off, the City, the developer, and the neighbors with this modification. A;driveway next to a school or residential area is not a goad idea.. Closing off that driveway ,and increasing the parking as proposed and the way that this building is proposed now offers a lot of protection to the school. Planning Commission Minutes - - January 9, 1980 A motion was made by Commissioner Tolstoy and seconded by Commissioner Rempel to deny the Appeal by Mr'. Ed Young, and to affirm the decision of the Director of Community Development` for Director Review No. -70 subject to the following additional conditions; 1. A detailed plan of the ten foot strip between the proposed building and the east property line shall be prepared snowing all improvements, landscaping, grading, sidewalks, and drainage. Such plan shall be; submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to issuance f building permits. The review of the plans shall ;insure that dense landscaping; will be provided, utilities protected, grading appropriate, and adequate drainage. 2. The northern termination of the existing wall shall'be extended to the southern wall of the proposed building. AYES. TOLSTOY, REMPEL, GARCIA, JONES, DAHL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Recess called at :ail p.m. Meeting reconvened at 9,00 p.m. ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 7 -0 - CITY OF RANCHO CV O A - An {ordinance establishing standards and review procedures for ]Manned Community Developments. Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, :reviewed the staff report. He stated the. Cite Council has referred this matter back to the planning Co ission as they felt additional changes were necessary to the Ordinance. Staff recommends if the changes made coincide with the Commission's interpretation that the Commission reconmend approval of the changes in the Planned Commnity Ordinance to the City Council. Chairman Rempel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. Commissioner Garcia questioned the: fact that in Section 4, items "D" and "" " are the same and whether something has been left out of the Ordinance. Mr. Hogan indicated an item was inadvertently left out and will be placed back into the Ordinance. He further stated that the word "consideration" should be added to the last sentence of Section 4, Item, "G" as fallow : Consideration of other forms of access, such as ;pedestrian ways, courts, plazas, driveways, horse trails, bike trails, or open parking lots offered for dedication may be made at the time of the Development Plan. and Text consideration as a means of meeting requirements for open space or park dedication requirements. A motion was wade by Commissioner Dahl and seconded by Commissioner Janes to recommend approval of the changes as proposed with the additional changes as indicated above in the Planned Community Ordinance and that such;recommendation be forwarded to the City Council Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 9, 1980 r AYES: DAHL, JOKES, GARCIA, TOLS'TOY, REMPEL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE a STANDARD CONDITIONS Barry Hogan, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report. He indicated if the Commission has any questions on any of the conditions listed or suggestions, we would be happy to hear them and make: appropriate changes. Chairman R.empel asked for questions from the Commission of the staff. Chaa n Rempel stated under Section A (Site Development), Item #7 should be corrected to indicate the area designated by the foothill Fire District instead of the Fire District Chief, Mr. Hogan agreed that this should be changed' as indicated by Chairman Hempel. He stated if the Commission finds any gather condition which- is not worded correctly or if an additional item should be added that staff be notified so that the changes can be made. There being no further comments, it was the toncensus of the Commission to accept and file the report subject to the change as noted above to Section A, Item #7, Commissioner Tolstoy stated with the City growing as rapidly as it is we need to take a look at the, naming of streets and the numbering of streets. He asked of the Engineering Division is preparing some guidelines in regard to this matter. Paul Rougeau Mated normally a City has a system of naming and numbering streets. This needs to, be developed however. A motion was made by Commissioner Tolstoy, seconded by Commissioner Janes and unanimously carried that the Council be requested to appoint a Committee to develop a street naming program. Commissioner Dahl stated some cities have a system of awards that are given to various builders or developers in the City of commercial., industrial and residential developments for outstanding achievements. He asked if this could be implemented in this City. Commissioner Garcia indicated the Architectural, Conmittee is looking into this t the present time. Planning; Commission Minutes -7- January 9, 1980 I Upon motion by Commissioner Dahl, seconded by Commissioner Garcia and unanimously carried', it was voted to adjourn the ]Planning Commission meeting of January 9, 1980 to the text regular meeting of January 23,' 1980. Respectfully sub' itted, JACK LAM, Director of Community Development Planning Commission Minutes - - January 9, 1980