Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000/03/08 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting March 8, 2000 Chairman McNiel called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia. Chairman McNiel then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Rich Macias, John Mannerino, Larry McNiel, Pam Stewart, Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Kid Coury, Associate Planner; Craig Fox, Deputy City Attorney; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Brent Le Count, Associate Planner; Debra Meier, Contract Planner, Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary; Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner; Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, City Planner, presented Census 2000 shirts to the Planning Commissioners and urged participation in the census. Mr. Buller introduced Kirt Coury, a recently hired Associate Planner. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, carried 4-0-0-1 (Tolstoy abstain), to approve the minutes of February 9, 2000. Motion: Moved by Stewart, seconded by Mannerino, carried 3-0-0-2 (Macias, Tolstoy abstain), to approve the minutes of February 23, 2000. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, carried 3-0-0-2 (Macias, Tolstoy abstain), to approve the minutes of the Adjoumed Meeting of February 23, 2000. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-63 - CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES —The development of a 70,620 square foot industrial building on 4.25 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southeast comer of Tacoma Drive and White Oak Avenue—APN: 209-461-11. Related file: Development Review 99-62. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Mannerino, to adopt the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried PUBLIC HEARINGS B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-17—AIRTOUCH CELLULAR —The development of a wireless communication facility consisting of a 65-foot stealth monopole on 3.34 acres of land in the Flood Control District, located at 8248 19th Street (CCWD Well No. 24)—APN: 201-201-40. Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked the size of the area to be fenced. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, replied that it is about 40 feet square. Chairman McNiel asked if there had been any discussion regarding using a type of fencing other than chain link. Mr. Morelion replied that the Design Review Committee had not objected to the chain link fencing but had denied the applicant's request for barbed wire on the top of the fence. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the surrounding land owned by Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD) is fenced with chain link fencing. Mr. Morelion confirmed that it is. Commissioner Stewart thought there had been discussion at the Design Review Committee regarding removal of the existing monopole. Mr. Coleman indicated that possibility had been explored with the applicant, but it was determined the new monopole would then have to be higher and the idea was rejected. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Joe Richards, Richards Mueting Wilkes Engineering, 6529 Riverside Avenue, #115, Riverside, stated he was representing the applicant. He thanked staff for its cooperation and patience. He indicated they worked closely with the surrounding residents including holding several meetings at Garden Court. He stated they reviewed several options with the residents of the four closest homes and the residents preferred the palm tree design. He felt planting the additional palm trees is a good idea and noted it will help screen the existing monopole as well. He did not feel there is a nexus between the project and the street light and sidewalk requested by the Engineering Division and he requested that the requirements be deleted. He noted they will not be generating any pedestrian traffic and said it will be a passive use. He observed that the requirement had been deferred when Pacific Bell installed its monopole. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, observed that the previous monopole was approved as Conditional Use Permit 95-34 and it was decided that the sidewalk and street light would wait until Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 8, 2000 further development but there was no determination as to the type of future development. He said staff felt it appropriate to require frontage improvements at this time. Chairman McNiel asked if Pacific Bell had been charged any in-lieu fees. Mr. James indicated they were not. Chairman McNiel thought some other type of fencing should be considered. Mr. Buller noted that there is flood control channel on one side. He said staff did not see a need to upgrade the fencing as it is surrounded with chain link on the exterior of the site. Chairman McNiel asked if the flood control channel will permanently be there. Mr. Buller replied that there is a possibility that CCWD may propose other uses for the site. Commissioner Mannerino asked if the CCWD site is manned. Mr. Buller replied negatively. Commissioner Macias asked for clarification as to the location of the street improvements. Mr. Buller pointed out the area to the south of the site on 19th Street. Commissioner Macias asked what is currently there. Mr. James replied that curb and gutter are in place. Commissioner Mannerino stated that cell poles are a necessary evil and they should be made to look as attractive as possible. Regarding the street light and sidewalk, he thought the street light may draw attention to the site. He noted that the applicant had proposed placing barbed wire on top of the chain link fence around the facility, and he questioned if there might be some fencing material other than chain link that would not be as easy to climb. • Commissioner Tolstoy favored installation of the street light and felt the sidewalk is appropriate because there are pedestrians in the area. Commissioner Macias agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy. Commissioner Stewart concurred with respect to the street light and sidewalk. She felt Commissioner Mannerino had raised an important issue regarding the fencing. Chairman McNiel noted that an access road is already in place, saving costs for the applicant and he felt it would be a reasonable trade-off to install the street light and sidewalk. He said it is unknown what future development will take place on the property. He thought wrought iron fencing may be a better choice and would be less easy to climb. He suggested they might consider tubular steel fencing in black or gray. Mr. Buller suggested a condition be added that the fencing be to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Chairman McNiel agreed that would be acceptable. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 99-17 with modification to require that fencing be installed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 8, 2000 AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT- 00-03 MCALAN'S PUB AND GRILLE -A request to establish a bar in conjunction with a restaurant that offers entertainment, in the Neighborhood • Commercial District of the Haven Village Center, located at 6321 Haven Avenue (formerly Willie & Pies Pizza) -APN - 201-271-69. Related file: Entertainment Permit 00-01. D. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 00-01- MCALAN'S PUB AND GRILLE- A request to offer entertainment consisting of a small acoustic trio and Karaoke in conjunction with a bar and restaurant within the Neighborhood Commercial District of the Haven Village Center, located at 6321 Haven Avenue (formerly Willie & Pies Pizza) — APN: 201-271-69. Related file: Conditional Use Permit 00-03. Emily Wimer, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and indicated staff had received one telephone call from a concerned resident, who stated he would be present this evening: Commissioner Stewart noted that the center has experienced excessive vandalism. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Mike Campera, 6191 Morning Place, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he and his wife have been planning the operation for the last three to four years. He said they plan an upscale environment with quiet music and they would like to make it a neighborhood meeting place. Commissioner Tolstoy asked about the broken windows. He said he hoped the landlord will help to spruce up the buildings. Mr. Campera said they have been having the same argument with the landlord for the last 30 days. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Mannerino felt it would be a good use. Commissioner Stewart thought it will be a welcome addition to the mall and may perhaps draw foot traffic which would benefit the rest of the center. Commissioner Mannerino felt it could not be louder than Willie & Pies. Commissioner Tolstoy felt there is sufficient buffering from the surrounding residences. He appreciated that there is a guard on duty but expressed concern for what would happen after 11 p.m. when the guard services end. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated staff would address problems with the applicant and/or refer the matter back to the Planning Commission if there are problems or an increase in the number of police calls to the area. He said additional lighting had been added to the center and the guard was hired to address previous problems with the center. Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Mannerino, to adopt the resolutions approving Conditional Use Permit 00-03 and Entertainment Permit 00-01. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 8, 2000 AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried NEW BUSINESS E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 99-62—CAPELLINO AND ASSOCIATES—The development of three industrial buildings totaling 82,376 square feet on 4.12 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the south side of Arrow Route, approximately 300 feet east of White Oak Avenue—APN: 209-461-02 and 209-471-03. Related file: Development Review 99-63. Rudy Zeledon, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Mark Capellino, Capellino and Associates, 2020 Del Amo Boulevard, #105, Torrance, thanked Mr. Zeledon for his efforts on the project. He said they have taken great care to be consistent with the balance of the park. There were no further public comments on this item. Chairman McNiel noted that the project has been on-going for quite a long time and he indicated it has been a pleasure to work with the applicant. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Tolstoy to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the ' resolution approving Development Review 99-62. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried F. POLICY WAIVER — BADDER - A request to waive the Planning Commission design policy requiring the use of tile roofing material, and proposing composition shake instead, for a new home located at 10336 Hidden Farm Road APN: 1074-121-07. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel invited public comment. Charles Gadder, 1015 West Orange Place, Santa Ana, presented a letter explaining why they changed their roof selection to a composition roof. Chairman McNiel asked for clarification that the structure was designed and constructed to support a tile roof. Mr. Badder confirmed that was correct. Chairman McNiel asked if the general contractor or roofing contractor had not looked at the plans. Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 8, 2000 Mr. Badder indicated he had decided the tile originally specified would not go with the architectural lines of the house. He stated they selected sculptured composition because they had made changes to the house design and wanted to achieve a Victorian style house. He said they did not know there was a requirement for tile roofs in the City. He thought the composition roof will form a tighter seal and be more efficient as well as be more wind resistant. He indicated the composition roof cost $11,000 whereas the tile roof cost $13,000. He expressed appreciation for staffs placing the item on the Planning Commission agenda so quickly. He felt the house will be an asset to the community. Commissioner Stewart asked the life on the roof. Mr. Badder replied it is a 40-year roof. He said the roof requires 15 pound felt and he upgraded to 30 pound. He stated his contractor's secretary had driven around the area and found that 85 percent of the roofs in Rancho Cucamonga are mixed roofing materials. Chairman McNiel said he found it unfathomable that the professionals in the business had not advised Mr. Badder that he had to get the City's approval for changes. Mr. Badder said he shared Chairman McNiel's frustration. Alan Smith, Southwest Design, 7201 Haven Avenue, Suite E-309, Rancho Cucamonga, stated Mr. Gadder has tried hard to comply with each and every step. Mr. Smith indicated he has designed many homes in Rancho Cucamonga but he had always proposed tile roofs; therefore, he was unaware of the city's policy and had no reason to advise Mr. Gadder that he needed a tile roof. He said it was unfortunate that the roof was already on by the time they found out they must use tile. He reported this is the first custom home the general contractor has done and said he has done a fine job. Commissioner Mannerino asked if Mr. Smith had examined the information from the roofing manufacturer. Mr. Smith confirmed he had and said he believes their claims. He stated the composition roofing selected is thick. There were no additional public comments at this time. Chairman McNiel observed the Planning Commission was dealing with a policy issue that requires new structures be built with tile roofs. He said the policy was adopted because there was greater success with the tile roofs than with any other roofing material. He noted his neighbor's composition roof sheets constantly blow into his yard. He stated the house is attractive and impressive and dominates the intersection. He said the roof is not unattractive but there is a policy in effect that the City has stringently enforced. He observed that all other houses on the immediate street and in the general area have tile roofs. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had gone to see the house and he felt it looks nice and the roof looks nice. He observed that one of the responsibilities of the Planning Commission is to consider public health and safety. He noted the tile roofs are required because of fire hazard and said this house is just south of the brush shed. He said he has had buming embers on his property several times. He stated that if there is a fire in the mountains and the wind is blowing, there will be hot embers blown onto the roof. He reported he had lost a house in a fire recently and he had been informed the composition roof was fireproof, but it had lost its fireproofing in just 10 years. He felt it is important to adhere to the tile roof policy. Commissioner Stewart observed that it has been a policy since 1987 to require tile roofs. She felt a change in the policy may open the door for other changes. She believed the policy was partially Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 8, 2000 for aesthetic reasons and she appreciated the style of the house and the applicant's desire to have the roof he selected. She favored allowing the roof to remain. Commissioner Macias observed that he has gone on record in the past in support of upholding policies. He felt the policy should be upheld and the roof should be replaced. Commissioner Mannerino felt there is a difference between a policy and a commandment. He believed the policy was adopted for three reasons: to have roofs which are windproof, fireproof, and aesthetically pleasing. He stated he looked at the manufacturer's specifications and the composition roof appears wind resistant, and he thought the roof is acceptable from the standpoint of cosmetics; however, he did not see anything with respect to its being fireproof. He noted Celotex is a major manufacturer and 40 years is a long time; however, he said he did not have enough information to determine if Chairman McNiel again invited additional public comment: Mr. Badder reported he is a Los Angeles County firefighter captain with over 21 years of fire fighting experience. He stated that roofs are rated as Class A, B, or C with C being a wood shingle. He said his roof is a Class A roof. With respect to the comment made by Chairman McNiel regarding composition shingles coming off his neighbor's roof, he said that cheap composition roofing will come off. He explained that he had fought in the Oakland, Malibu, and Laguna fires and he saw tiles being lifted off roofs and houses with tile roofs bum. Chairman McNiel asked if, in his professional opinion, it made any difference what kind of roof was on houses during fire storms such as he had mentioned. • Mr. Badder acknowledged it would not. There were no additional public comments. Commissioner Mannerino did not believe the applicant had intentionally disregarded the policy. He said that if the City's Engineering staff is convinced it is fire resistant, he would support retaining the roof; however, he felt he did not have sufficient information at this time. Mr. Badder gave a sheet of paper to Mr. Mannerino with a notation that Celotex composition roof is a Class A roof. Commissioner Mannerino said that he saw no compelling reason to make them replace the roof. Commissioner McNiel stated that although he did not feel the roof is unattractive, he didn't feel it is as attractive as other tile roofs. He reiterated that the City's policy has been to require tile roofs and the City has consistently enforced that policy because it serves the community well. He felt the policy should be retained. He noted the structure was designed and approved for a tile roof. Commissioner Macias asked what action was necessary. Craig Fox, Deputy City Attomey, indicated the homeowner had requested that the policy be waived and a vote should be taken on that request. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Macias, to deny the waiver of the policy. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MACIAS, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: MANNERINO, STEWART ABSENT: NONE - carried Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 8, 2000 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. COMMISSION BUSINESS G. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROGRESS Brad Buller, City Planner, announced that there was nothing new to report. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Mannerino, seconded by Stewart, to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:26 p.m. to a workshop regarding Pre-Application Review 00-03. The workshop adjourned at 9:15 p.m. and those minutes appear separately. Respectfully submitted, rjer Lary Se etary ' • 1 Planning Commission Minutes -8- March 8, 2000