Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002/11/13 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting November 13, 2002 Vice Chairman Macias called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:10 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,California. Vice Chairman Macias then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino, Pam Stewart ABSENT: Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Linda Daniels, Redevelopment Agency Director; Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney; Rick Fisher, Contract Planner; Larry Henderson, Principal Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Brent Le Count,Associate Planner; L. Dennis Michael, Fire Chief; Jan Reynolds, Redevelopment Agency Analyst; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary; Joe Stofa, Associate Engineer, Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that the project proponent had requested that Items C and H be continued to December 11, 2002. He indicated that the applicant for Item D had also requested that the item be continued to December 11, 2002. APPROVAL OF MINUTES No action was taken on the minutes of October 23, 2002. CONSENT CALENDAR A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00618-STONEBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT-The review of house plans for 22 single-family lots in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwellings per acre), located on the east side of Hermosa Avenue, north of Hillside Road-APN: 1074-241-01 and 03. Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16332. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00466 - MAGYAR HOMES, LLC-The review of detailed site plan and building elevations for 17 single- family homes on 4.9 acres of land in the Low Residential District(2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, approximately 145 feet north of Palo Alto Street- APN: 1077-021-17 and 18. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16344 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2002-00723. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00381—KB HOME- The review of detailed site plan and building elevations for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT15724, consisting of 78 single-family detached condominium dwellings on 9.05 acres of land in the Low- Medium Residential District(4-8 dwelling units per acre)of the Terra Vista Community Plan with an actual project density of 8.6 dwelling units per acre, located on the south side of Terra Vista Parkway between Milliken Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APN: 1077-831-32. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT15724 and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment DRC2002- 00533. Item B was pulled to be heard in conjunction with Item E and Item C was pulled to be considered with Item H. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart to adopt Item A on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried PUBLIC HEARINGS D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16274- DING -A request to subdivide 5.3 acres of land into 7 lots in the Very Low Residential District (.1-2 dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and Mayberry Avenue-APN: 1074-261-05. (Continued from October 23, 2002) Vice Chairman Macias indicated that the public hearing remained open from the previous meeting. There were no public comments. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart to continue Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16274 to December 11, 2002. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00381—KB HOME H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT15724-KB HOME- A proposed Tentative Tract Map consisting of 1 lot for condominium purposes and 1 lettered lot for ingress/egress on 9.05 acres of land within the Low-Medium Residential District(4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located on the south side of Terra Vista Parkway between Milliken Avenue and Spruce Avenue - APN: 1077-831-32. Related Files: Development Review DRC2001-00381 and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment DRC2002- 00533. Vice Chairman Macias observed that the applicant requested a continuance to December 11, 2002, in order to complete a traffic study. He noted the public hearing was open; however, there were no comments. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart to continue Tentative Tract Map SUBTT15724 and Development Review DRC2001-00381 to December 11, 2002. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -2- November 13, 2002 AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carded B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00466 - MAGYAR HOMES, LLC E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16344- MAGYAR HOMES, LLC-A request to subdivide a 4.9 acre parcel of land into 18 single family lots in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, approximately 145 feet north of Palo Alto Street-APN: 1077-021-17 and 18. Related file: Development Review DRC2002-00466 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2002-00723. Rick Fisher, Contract Planner, presented the staff report and indicted staff had received a letter from a resident on Malven Avenue expressing concerns about increased traffic and proposing that the Commission consider an alternate access to the project from Archibald Avenue or Base Line Road. He also stated that Engineering standard conditions contained in the resolution for Development Review DRC2002-00466 were also to be included in the Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16344 resolution. Vice Chairman Macias opened the public hearing. Joe Say, President, Magyar Homes, LLC, 5105 Equine Place, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they designed single story homes to minimize the impacts to the surrounding area. Yolanda Castellanos, 9738 Palo Alto, Rancho Cucamonga, expressed concerns about the traffic impacts and the proposed height of the block wall along her north property line. Nathan Hughes,7455 Malven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, said it was his understanding there will be an electric gate at the entrance and he questioned how far back the gate will be set from his property_ Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, indicated there will not be a gate. Mr. Hughes asked how far back the entry will be as he did not want cars lined up adjacent to his property. Hearing no further testimony, Vice Chairman Macias closed the public hearing. Mr. Fisher indicated there will be a 10-foot 8-inch block wall along the southern boundary of the proposed tract composed of a 5-foot high retaining wall with a garden wall on top. He said the height is higher than the Code allows and the applicant will have to apply for a Minor Exception prior to issuance of building permits. He explained the high wall is needed because the grade of the project is 5 feet higher than the adjacent residences. He indicated the wall is needed so that the drainage from the project will slope back toward the street instead of toward the existing residences. Vice Chairman Macias asked for an explanation of the Minor Exception process. Mr. Fisher replied the applicant would pay a fee with the application He said staff would review the request to determine the impacts on the surrounding area. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the City's policy requires that lots drain to the street rather than draining to the backyards of adjoining properties. He indicated staff would probably support the Planning Commission Minutes -3- November 13, 2002 Minor Exception for the 10 foot 8 inch wall because of the drainage issue. He believed the applicant showed sensitivity to the neighborhood by proposing single-story homes. Vice Chairman Macias asked for staff response on traffic issues. Dan James, Senior Engineer, stated the main access to the subdivision is from Archibald Avenue on Palo Alto to Malven Street. He indicated Palo Alto and Malven have approximately 15 homes and this subdivision will add another 18 to that route. He explained that total is far less than the acceptable design standards for subdivisions; therefore the access from Malven is recommended. He stated it is a public street and there will be no gate. Mr. Buller noted that the new subdivision street could not be pushed out to Archibald because of it's close proximity to other drives and the heavy traffic on Archibald. Commissioner Mannerino stated he understood the residents'concerns regarding traffic and loss of view; however, the loss of view is not a protected right. He believed the traffic is acceptable. He thought the developer had worked hard trying to be a good neighbor, as evidenced by the single- story homes. He supported the project. Commissioner Stewart concurred with Commissioner Mannerino. She believed traffic circulation appears appropriate. She noted the packet included letters from adjacent homeowners agreeing to the lot line adjustment and approving the 10-foot 8-inch block wall. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart,to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16344 and Development Review DRC2002-00466. Motion carded by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carded F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT16157 - LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES-A proposed subdivision of 10 lots on 60.17 acres in the Medium (8-14 dwelling units per acre), Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre), and High (24-30 dwelling units per acre) Residential Districts of the Terra Vista Community Plan, located at the northwest comer of Church Street and Terra Vista Parkway-APN: 227-151-30. Related files: Development Review DRC2001-00791 and Terra Vista Community Plan Amendment DRC2002- 00533. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2001-00791 -LEWIS APARTMENT COMMUNITIES-The Design Review of 677 dwelling units on 39.6 acres in the Medium (8-14 dwelling units per acre), Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre), and High (24-30 dwelling units per acre) Residential Districts of the Terra Vista Community Plan on Lots 1-9 of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16157, located at the northwest corner of Church Street and Terra Vista Parkway-APN: 227-151-30. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report and stated the developer conducted a second neighborhood meeting on Thursday, November 7, which was attended by three residents. He reported two people attended the first neighborhood meeting in August. He said the residents requested that on-site basketball courts be provided and there be an increase in the number of access points to the Terra Vista Greenway Trail abutting the northern boundary and the developer agreed to both of those requests. He noted there was also a question why apartments were proposed instead of"for-sale"condominiums and who would be the long-term property owner. He indicated Lewis stated they will own the apartments as with their existing apartment communities in Planning Commission Minutes -4 November 13, 2002 the Terra Vista Community. He said there were also concerns raised that apartments will cause an increase in crime in the neighborhood. He indicated that the residents did not present any evidence from the Police Department that crime would increase with apartments. He said that within the 25- year history of the City, staff was not aware of any Police study documenting that apartments bring higher crime rates to the community. He noted that Rancho Cucamonga is noted for a low crime rate in the region and within the United States. He observed that there are at least six apartment communities throughout the Terra Vista Planned Community and they have proven to be good neighbors since the Planned Community began in 1984. Commissioner Mannerino asked how the residents were noticed regarding the neighborhood meeting held following the last Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Coleman responded the developer mailed notices and the listing of residents was expanded to include the people who had mailed in letters. Vice Chairman Macias indicated the public hearing was open. John Young, Vice President, Lewis Apartment Communities, P. 0. Box 670, Upland, said they have spent a year on the project. He said they started with three separate architects on the project and plan for this to be the flagship project for them in the community. He noted they have a 14,000 square foot community center and approximately 80 percent of the units have attached garages,so it is much like single-family type residences. He noted they planned one story units along the trail at the northern end of their project to negate the impact to the adjacent residences. He said his company no longer sells their products and would face litigation if they sell. He commented they are a long-term apartment building holders. He reported Lewis sold only one apartment building in its history and they own and manage 6,000 to 7,000 units with some currently under construction. Commissioner Stewart commented that Medium, Medium-High, and High residential districts are being blended at the site. She asked if the density would have been higher at build-out if the zones had not been blended. Mr. Young replied the density with build-out will be less than what is allowed. The following residents spoke regarding the project. • Ricardo Sauyer, 11542 Barrett Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Fred Henderson, 11575 Claridge Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Hauman Amani, 11583 Claridge Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Karen Grace, 7633 Dickens Court, Rancho Cucamonga Shaunna Lee, 7529 Hardy Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, Miguel Aguilar, 7639 Byron Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga Richard Heath, 7528 Heathcliff Way, Rancho Cucamonga Jacqueline Gasca, 11800 Yorktown Court, Rancho Cucamonga Lisa Foss, 11572 Barrett Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Stacey Heath 7528 Heathcliff Way, Rancho Cucamonga Sharon Landa, 1134 St. Tropez Drive, Rancho Cucamonga Jonathan Loesch, 11535 Claridge Drive, Rancho Cucamonga George Hernandez, 7607 Waterbury Place, Rancho Cucamonga Concerns raised included the fear of an increase in crime, a decrease in surrounding property values, transiency of apartment dwellers and level of commitment of renters as opposed to owners, visitors to the apartments not caring about the neighborhood, confusion about the term"multi-family," increased pollution, an increase in rodent problems caused by grading and construction, impact on schools, and adequacy of notice regarding the neighborhood meeting and the public hearing. Several residents thought the notices should have been sent to more than a 300-foot radius and two • Planning Commission Minutes -5- November 13, 2002 people indicated they received notice from the developer regarding the neighborhood meeting the day after the meeting occurred. Several people commented that apartment living is not conducive to family living. It was pointed out that developers built single-family homes in several other areas that had been zoned for multi-family residential and several people asked that this land be sold so it could be developed with single-family houses. It was requested that apartments be built in other areas rather than in this location. Upon hearing that the land has been zoned for multi-family dwellings since 1983, several residents suggested the City reevaluate the zoning. Mr.Amani questioned why data was gathered regarding traffic at Milliken and Fourth Street,which is 3 miles away. He said he was not concemed about the traffic at Milliken and Fourth Street and the City should only be concerned with the impact of traffic on the immediate neighborhood. He also commented that the development was planned at the top of the respective density categories. Ms. Lee indicated Dan Waters of the Police Department told her that unit per unit the crime is the same for homes and apartments. Therefore, she concluded there would be twice as much crime for 677 apartments as opposed to approximately 350 single-family homes that could be built on the site. She also feared apartment managers take shortcuts if the economy takes a downturn. She presented a petition asking that apartments not be built. The petition was signed by 157 people, who Ms. Lee said live surrounding the project area. Ms. Grace thanked the developer for adding basketball courts and more connections to the trail. Hearing no further testimony, Vice Chairman Macias dosed the public hearing. He asked that staff address the following issues: 1)What was the notification process and what is required; 2)density and land use issue, i.e., and whether it is at the maximum; 3)developer fees and how they relate to schools; 4) crime issue with respect to apartments; and 5) due process for the residents if they happen to disagree with any decision made. He commented that with respect to crime,you cannot compare apartments in Rancho Cucamonga with apartments in Los Angeles; nor can you compare single-family neighborhoods in Rancho Cucamonga with those in Los Angeles as they are different socioeconomic strata. Commissioner Stewart also asked that staff address the difference between town homes and apartments. Mr. Buller reported that the City of Rancho Cucamonga goes beyond the state required mandates with respect to notification. He said the City publishes a notice in the newspaper, posts the property (including a 4 x 8 foot sign on this property identifying the number of units and the date of the hearing), and mails notices to all property owners within 300 feet of the perimeter of the project. He stated there are occasions where Planning staff extends the 300-foot radius. He commented staff is aware that some advocates got the word out well beyond the 300-foot area as was shown by the petition and the letters of opposition. He said the notification got out by both the City's efforts and by efforts of the community at large. He confirmed the City did more than what was legally required. He observed the City also required the developer to host a neighborhood meeting and that is not required by law. He understood that a few residents stated they did not get notice mailed by the developer until after the neighborhood meeting and he apologized for that. With respect to the density land use issue, Mr. Buller said there is a total of 60 acres zoned with three distinct projects, each within the zoning density of that area. He stated the applicant intended • to present a larger project, mixing and blending the units of those various densities. So far as the mix, he said the applicant has provided a varied mix instead of one set of apartments or townhouse products. He stated it is a community networked with common open space and community use. He observed there had been a question as to why the City cannot amend a plan that was adopted in 1983. He reported the plan has been amended on several occasions both by the City and by the developer. He noted there was also a recent General Plan update with an exhaustive analysis of the City. He explained that under state law, the City is required to meet certain housing requirements in the City and we are considered to be a balanced community. He observed these densities and the composition of the General Plan have been evaluated numerous times. He said the Terra Vista Community Plan is a project that evaluated the streets, size of streets, number of schools and parks, Planning Commission Minutes -6- November 13, 2002 and amount of open space were all pre-determined based on a certain density of units previously approved for this area. He commented staff is also aware that Lewis Homes and now KB HOME give notification of surrounding land uses when selling homes. He acknowledged it was possible that someone buying a resale home may not have heard or checked the surrounding zoning, but these properties were zoned for this type of development since 1983 and there have been numerous reevaluations with the zoning determined to be appropriate. Mr. Buller stated that the laws have changed over the years with respect to schools. He noted that in previous years,the City required"will-serve"letters from the School Districts that they could house the students. However, he explained the laws have changed and the City has no authority to deny the project based on school impacts. He said the developer merely has to pay a school impact fee established by the State of Califomia. Vice Chairman Macias noted the City also has no authority over what the School District does with the money it receives. With respect to statements that apartments generate a level of crime different from single-family home tracts, Mr. Buller stated it is very difficult to make such an across-the-board statement. He said most of the City's statistics show that the crime rate for apartments is not on the same per unit level, but are below the level for single-family tracts. He stated he did not know if there is an analysis of crime within Terra Vista. He said there has not been any evidence that apartments within Rancho Cucamonga are a negative impact on the crime issues of a neighborhood. With respect to due process, Mr. Buller explained that any decision made by the Planning Commission can be appealed to the City Council within a 10-day appeal period by submitting a letter of appeal to the City Clerk along with the appropriate fee. He said the residents have an opportunity to be heard at neighborhood meetings and at the public hearing before the Planning Commission. He stated that if an item is appealed to the City Council,there would then be a public hearing before that body. Commissioner Stewart stated she sat on the Design Review Committee with Chairman McNiel and they reviewed this project several times and addressed a litany of questions and concerns and the developer responded to each of those with great improvement. She believed it is a nice project. She said it has a lot of open space and she noted that the developer had addressed concerns raised by the residents with respect to basketball courts and access points to the trail system. She felt it was interesting that there were so many people testifying this evening when there were only two people at the first community meeting and three at the next. She noted that very different issues were brought forward this evening as opposed to what was discussed at the neighborhood meetings. She believed sufficient and appropriate notice was given, as indicated by the number of letters and the petition that were submitted. She said staff addressed a lot of the issues that the public raised this evening. She felt that town homes do not necessarily have a transient population. She stated that she works in law enforcement and she concurred with Vice Chairman Macias that you cannot compare apartment communities in Rancho Cucamonga to Los Angeles or other areas. She said they are a different socioeconomic level and this is a very high-end project with a lot of nice amenities. She did not find any compelling reason why the proposed project cannot be developed at the proposed density of 17 per acre. Commissioner Mannerino observed that the residents feel very strongly about the project. He said that every time a higher density comes into an existing neighborhood, there is always the same reaction. He agreed it seems logical that there would be more crime where there are more people, but law enforcement people have said that is not necessarily the case. He noted the plan has existed since 1983 and the developer has a right to rely on the stated land use. He felt the proposed project meets all the requirements: He noted there have been numerous environmental impact studies and he was confident the developer will address the rodent issue. He stated that the Commission needs a legal basis for a decision in order to deny a project and a project cannot be Planning Commission Minutes -7- November 13, 2002 denied merely because the people around it don't like it. He said that if someone buys the land and complies with the law, they get to do what they want within reason considering environmental,traffic and law enforcement concerns. He said they have addressed those concerns during the past year. He recalled when he was a young lawyer with a struggling practice and a young baby, he lived in an apartment because that was all he could afford. He commented he heard several speakers state that this is a family community and apartments are not family oriented. He said he raised his family in an apartment and he paid his rent and did not do any crime nor have loud parties. He said he paid his bills and moved out of the apartment. He felt it offensive to hear the suggestion that apartments are anti-familial and said there are tens of thousands of people in our community and surrounding communities who live in apartments because that is all they can afford. He noted there are single parents with children or married parents with children who can only afford an apartment at that time in their life and that did not make them bad people. He said he was offended that the inference was that we don't want that type of families or at least not in our neighborhood. He stated the people who cannot afford to buy a house need a place to live and one such place was defined in 1983. Vice Chairman Macias stated that numerous apartments and multi-density projects have come before the Commission during his five-year tenure on the Commission and the same issues have been addressed time and time again. He observed that the City worked very hard to update the General Plan for the City and that land use designation has been there for 20 years. He expressed frustration that the City gave ample public notice about the update process and there were no comments about the land use at that time. He said the City is required by federal and state law to provide housing for all socioeconomic levels within the community, from market rate down to low- income housing. He noted this is a market rate development. He said it would be difficult to change the land use designation to move it elsewhere and elsewhere would have the same issues that were raised tonight. He felt strongly the City has done everything possible to give full due process notice here and in the past and also with the General Plan update. He said the City is complying with the duty to provide housing at all levels. From a personal standpoint, Vice Chairman Macias stated he lives in Terra Vista directly behind Coyote Canyon Elementary School between the school and the old Coyote Canyon School site. He said he is completely surrounded by apartments and is within 500 feet of them. He said he has lived in his house for 15 years. He stated he also started his family when he lived in an apartment. He remarked he was becoming a planner when he moved to his house, so he studied the surrounding land uses and knew he would be surrounded by apartments and he still chose to move there because that was all he could afford within Rancho Cucamonga at that time. He stated his property values have steadily increased and he could have sold his home years ago at a profit but hasn't because it is a lovely neighborhood. He said they use every park and trail in the neighborhood. He indicated he feels comfortable and has never had a theft even though he parks his cars on the street. He stated that his mailbox was vandalized one year by children from the single-family homes. He believed he has grown with the neighborhood. He said his children attended the crowded schools in the area but his daughter did well enough to get a scholarship to the University of Southern California. He acknowledged it is getting denser, but said the crime rate is still low and it is still a safe community. He did not believe the project will be a detriment to the community. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16157 and Development Review DRC2001-00791. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried Mr. Buller stated that the City is working with other developers to address the rodent problem and staff would work with Lewis regarding that issue. Planning Commission Minutes -8- November 13, 2002 The Planning Commission recessed from 8:50 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00653 - RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT—A request to construct an 11,787 square foot fire station on 2.46 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and the Southern Pacific Rail Road Right of Way - APN: 1089-031-18. Related File: Conditional Use Permit 91-08. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. He indicated a neighborhood meeting was held on November 8, 2002, and concerns were raised regarding the impact of engines exiting onto Day Creek Boulevard. Vice Chairman Macias opened the public hearing. L. Dennis Michael, Fire Chief; stated that two residents from Aloe Court directly across from Day Creek Boulevard expressed concerns that the siren and the air horn would disturb them when the engines were exiting onto Day Creek Boulevard. Chief Michael said he assured them that they will not be leaving the station with lights and sirens blaring because they will be using an opticom system to control the traffic signal to be green for the emergency vehicles. He indicated the two residents at the meeting were satisfied with that answer. Vice Chairman Macias felt this is a public safety issue and the project had previously been approved. Vicente Bunyl, 7193 Aloe Court, Rancho Cucamonga, believed the state requires a Fire Department to sound sirens when exiting a station to respond to emergency calls. He was concerned the sirens and flashing lights will disturb the residents. He noted the plan calls for using Oak Creek Court for ingress and egress for the station and he felt that will be a safety problem because there is a vertical site problem. He thought that a driver going southbound on Day Creek Boulevard will not be able to see cars exiting Oak Creek Court. He said he did not know a traffic signal was planned at Oak Creek Court. He stated he bought his house two years ago and there had been a sign proposing residential houses on the vacant lot on Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard. He said he knew the land was zoned for residential and commercial, but said he presumed it would be a residential area. He commented the existing fire station on Base Line Road does not currently affect the residents. He asked that the City look at other criteria for site location for the fire station for safety. He feared that fire sirens will alarm any horses using the trail. He expressed concern that the surrounding area will be built as commercial because no one will want to build a house close to the fire station. Keith Morlock, 7235 Aloe Court, Rancho Cucamonga, indicated there are only 20 homes on each side of the cul-de-sac. He stated that as you drive north on Day Creek Boulevard, there is a 15-second period where a driver loses site of any vehicles going south because of a drop in the road. He said there were several accidents and it is now coned off so you can't make a u-turn at Dew Drop and now you have to go up to Sugar Gum Street to make a u-turn. He reported that when going south on Day Creek Boulevard, they must go south to Base Line Road and make a u-turn to get into their street. He said the neighborhood meeting regarding the fire station was held at 6:00 p.m. and a lot of the residents could not get to the meeting. He supported the Fire Department and felt it gives great service. He said their main concern was the noise and that seems to have been addressed. He stated they hear the sirens from the current station on Base Line Road sometimes late into the evening and he hoped the sirens at night can be reduced. He felt it would benefit the residents inside of Aloe Court if the signal could be moved down to Sugar Gum Street rather than having the residents of Aloe Court have to deal with one more traffic signal when going south to Base Line Road in order to make a u-turn to get back to their street. He was concerned that the Planning Commission Minutes -9- November 13, 2002 corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road will be developed as commercial rather than residential. He said when he purchased his home, the paperwork from KB HOME depicted the area as an eventual park and there was no disclosure of the fire station move. Hearing no further testimony, Vice Chairman Macias dosed the public hearing. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that when the subdivision to the east was built, the City was aware of the possibility that Oak Creek Court would be constructed and installed a left-turn pocket in the median island in Day Creek Boulevard to go into a possible future fire station. He said the Traffic Engineer was fully aware that there were no left turn movements from Day Creek Boulevard into the residential development. He noted the only addition to improvements that the fire station is providing is the traffic signal. In regards to the vertical site line distance concern, Mr. James said the City put up cones to stop the u-turn movements and may mitigate the u-turn concern with the design of the traffic signal. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart,to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00653 with modification to direct the City Engineer to further investigate the construction of the traffic signal to improve turning movements. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried NEW BUSINESS J. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2002-00690 — VICTORIA GARDENS-C, LLC - A request to construct approximately 725,000 square feet of retail and commercial buildings and conceptual site plan approval for 3 department stores, 2 multiple level parking structures, a cinema, a Cultural Arts Center, 2 pad buildings, and 14 buildings in the Route 66 Area on 147 acres of land in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria Community Plan located within the limits of the Victoria Community Plan generally bounded by the future Church Street to the north, the 1-15 Freeway to the east, Day Creek Boulevard to the west, and Foothill Boulevard to the south within the Mixed Use district of the Victoria Community Plan - APN: 227-161-35, 36, and 38; 227-171-22 and 23; 227-201-30, 33, 35, and 36; and 227-211-24, 39, and 40 thru 43. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Vice Chairman Macias invited public comment. Ronald Altoon, Altoon-Porter, 444 South Flower Street, Los Angeles, stated he is the architect and has been designing retail centers since 1973. He gave a power point presentation regarding the project. Steve Wesson, Forrest City Development, Inc., 949 South Hope Street, Suite 110, Los Angeles, introduced the development team: Architects Jim Auld and Fred Kurtz; landscape architect David Berkson,SWA Landscape Architects; and graphics consultant Martin Swartz. Mr.Wesson thanked the Design Review Committee for its time and action and stated he felt it will be a much better project because of the Committee's input. Vice Chairman Macias expressed appreciation for the hard work the team has done. He thought the project is exciting and will benefit the community. There were no additional public comments. Planning Commission Minutes -10- November 13, 2002 Commissioner Mannerino stated that he and Commissioner Stewart sat on the Design Review Committee and they dealt with many issues. He indicated the development team had been very responsive. He felt there will be nothing else like this center in the Inland Empire. Commissioner Stewart indicated she felt privileged to be on the Design Review Committee for this project. She said it was a great design team to work with and noted they were working with staff on a daily basis. She believed it will be a great project for Rancho Cucamonga. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart,to adopt the resolution approving Development Review DRC2002-00690. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, carried 3-0-2 (McNiel, Tolstoy absent), to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Bra ler Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -11,- November 13, 2002