Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998/01/14 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting January 14, 1998 Chairman Barker called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chamber at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, William Bethel, Rich Macias (arrived 7:15 p.m.), Larry McNiel (arrived 9:07 p.m.), Peter Tolstoy ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Michael Estrada, Deputy City Attorney; Nancy Fong, Senior Planner; Steve Hayes, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner; Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary, Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner ANNOUNCEMENTS Brad Buller, Ci~ Planner, introduced new staff member Associate Planner Rebecca Van Buren, and indicated she previously worked for the City of San Dimas. APPROVALOF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Bethel, carried 3-0-2 (Macias, McNiel absent), to approve the minutes of December 10, 1997. CONSENT CALENDAR A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-30 - CHOU AND LITTLE - A request to construct two industrial buildings (Building A - 18,196 square feet and Building B - 25,564 square feet) on 2.18 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 10838 and 10868 Bell Coud - APN: 209-491-37. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. B. A REQUEST TO SUMMARILY VACATE THE SOUTHERLY SEGMENT OF MILLER AVENUE WEST OF ETIWANDA AVENUE, 66 FEET WIDE, AS RELATED TO LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 412-APN: 227-171-12 and 14. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Bethel, carded 3-0-2 (Macias, McNiel absent) to adopt the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-30 - MICHAEL GALAZ (MVP SPORTS GRILL) - A request to establish and legalize a restaurant/sports grill including on-site indoor and outdoor consumption of alcoholic beverages within an existing 9,000 square foot lease space in the Regional Commercial designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan located within the Foothill Marketplace shopping center at 12809 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 229-031-33. Related File: Entedainment Permit 97-03. D. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 97-03 - MICHAEL GALAZ (MVP SPORTS GRILL) - A request to allow entertainment including, but not limited to, indoor and outdoor live entedainment, karaoke, DJ music, dancing, and amusement devices (arcade games, pool tables, dart boards, kids theatedplay area) within an existing 9,000 square foot lease space in the Regional Commercial designation (Subarea 4) of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan located within the Foothill Marketplace shopping center at 12809 Foothill Boulevard. APN: 229-031-33. Related File: Conditional Use Permit 97-30. Motion: Moved by Bethel, seconded by Tolstoy, to continue Conditional Use Permit 97-30 and Entedainment Permit 97-03 to February 11, 1998, at the request of the applicant. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS, MCNIEL - carried E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-33 - GOODYEAR RUBBER CO. - The addition of an 18,844 square foot metal building to an existing 33,820 square foot metal building on 3.64 acres of land in the General Industrial District (Subarea 3) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 8814 Industrial Lane - APN: 209-032-30,31 and 32. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker asked if the addition will be the same type of metal. Ms. Fong confirmed that it will. Chairman Barker asked if there have been any problems with the existing metal buildings, such as wind damage. Ms. Fong replied that there have not. She indicated they will not be matching the paint color. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Larry Sears, President, Goodyear Rubber Company, 8833 Industrial Lane, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they have been there since 1961. He indicated the addition will allow them to be more efficient because they will have room to add more equipment and more warehouse space. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tolstoy supported the expansion of the existing business and allowing metal. He said he does not normally like metal buildings, but acknowledged this is an older business which should benefit from the expansion. Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 14, 1998 Commissioner Bethel concurred. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Bethel, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 97-33. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MACIAS, MCNIEL - carried Commissioner Macias arrived. NEW BUSINESS F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 97-35 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to construct single family residences on 13 in-fill lots in the Low Residential Distdct (2-4 dwelling units per acre) within the Nor[htown area along Center Avenue, 24th Street, and 25th Street, east of Hermosa Avenue - APN: 209-101-04, 209-101-05, 209-102-08, 209-102-15, 209-102-38, 209-102-39, 209-103-24 through 26,209-103-29, 209-104-24, 209-122-15, and 209-123-09. Related files: Development Review 95-03, Tree Removal Permit 97-23, and Minor Exception 97-22. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Peter Pitassi, Architect, 8439 White Oak Avenue, #105, Rancho Cucamonga, introduced Nacho Gracia, Executive Director. He thanked staff for its cooperation. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the architect had done an excellent job in designing the houses. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Bethel to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Development Review 97-35. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL - carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS G. PATIO FURNITURE IN TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER ~RUBIO'S BAJA GRILL/LEWIS HOMES - A request to consider a corporate design, thatched (palapas) style, of outdoor patio umbrellas for a 2,200 square foot restaurant in a multi-tenant pad building, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, east of Aspen Drive and west of Montgomery Wards - APN: 1077-421-76. (Continued from December 10, 1997) Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Ted Frumkin, Director of Real Estate, Rubio's Restaurants, Inc., 5151 Shoreham Place, #260, San Diego, gave a brief history of Rubio's and indicated that the palapas umbrellas are part of their Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 14, 1998 signature and are meant to impad a feeling of Baja. He said they have the umbrellas at all of their " other 42 locations and the umbrellas are part of their logo. He stated the umbrellas are fire retardant and wear well with the oldest ones being 15 years old and still looking good. He requested approval of the umbrellas. 'l:here were no additional public comments. Commissioner Macias concurred with staff. He felt the proposal is inconsistent with the established cdteria and flavor of the development. He thought patrons would come if the food is good and the umbrellas are not needed to attract customers. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had visited the restaurant and felt the outdoor furniture is in good taste, but it is colorless. He said he does not favor striped awnings or garish things but felt palapas umbrellas would add interest. Commissioner Bethel concurred with Commissioner Macias. He felt approving the palapas umbrellas would open the door to other requests. Chairman Barker stated he understood the concerns voiced by staff but he agreed the standard patio furniture is bodng. He said he did not oppose palapas umbrellas and observed that it appeared there would be a tie vote. Michael Estrada, Deputy City Attorney, explained that a tie vote would be the same as a denial. He suggested the matter could be continued and Commissioner McNiel could listen to the tape. Brad Buller, City Planner, suggested the applicant may wish to wait to the end of the agenda to see if Commissioner McNiel had arrived. He observed that Commissioner McNiel had indicated he would arrive later in the evening. Chairman Barker asked if the applicant wished to wait to the end of the agenda and received affirmation. H. APPEAL OF MINOR EXCEPTION 97-19 - BELMAL - An appeal of the City Planner's decision regarding block wall placement for a Minor Exception to allow an 8-foot high block wall where a maximum height of 6 feet is allowed in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) located at 9218 La Grande Street- APN: 202-055-01. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Bethel observed there are several 5 foot and 6 foot high walls in the area and asked if graffiti has been a problem. Mr. Le Count said he had not observed any. Commissioner Bethel thought that one of staff's concerns had been regarding graffiti. Mr. Le Count responded that staff also has a concern regarding the stark appearance of an 8 foot high wall, even if graffiti is not a problem. Commissioner Macias asked the real issue. Mr. Le Count stated that staff's main concern is one of aesthetics. Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 14, 1998 Commissioner Macias asked why the applicant could not put the wall at the setback. Brad Bullet, City Planner, stated the applicant had indicated he did not wish to remove the two plum trees and also felt placing the wall 5 feet back would preclude construction of a swimming pool in the back yard. Joseph Belmal, 9218 La Grande, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he wants to put an 8-foot wall adjacent to the sidewalk because he does not have privacy in the back yard. He observed that adjacent homes are elevated. He pointed out that 12 neighbors had signed a petition indicating they did not object to his plans. He stated he would install lights on the wall to enhance the street lighting. He showed pictures of adjacent homes. He said he assured his neighbor he would remove any graffiti on the wall within 48 hours. Chairman Barker asked if there will be any greenscape between the wall and the street. Mr. Buller said it would be stucco wall, sidewalk, parkway, curb. Mr. Belmal stated that if he were to place the wall 5 feet from the property line, it would not line up with the neighbor's wall because his neighbor has a block wail adjacent to the sidewalk. Commissioner Tolstoy observed that the applicant objected to placing the wall at the setback line because he wanted to retain the two plum trees while providing room for a pool. He thought the applicant would want to remove the trees when he puts in a pool. Mr. Belmal said the trees will not have to be removed because they are close enough to the sidewalk so that there will be room for the pool behind the trees. Commissioner Macias asked if there is a code requirement regarding the distance between the lip of the pool and the wail. Mr. Le Count replied there is no separation requirement under the Development Code. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, indicated the Uniform Building Code may have a requirement for access around the sides of the pool. Commissioner Macias asked if the applicant could reduce the size of the yard. Mr. Belmal said the pool is already rather small. Commissioner Macias asked if the size of the pool is the reason the applicant wishes to build the wall at the back of the sidewalk. Mr. Belmal said the primary concern is lack of privacy and safety for his family. Commissioner Macias felt a wall could be built which would provide privacy and also meet the requirements. Mr. Belmal said that would eliminate his pool. Commissioner Tolstoy observed that there are other wa[is in the area which are adjacent to the sidewalk. He thought a 6-foot high wall adjacent to the sidewalk would be compatible with the neighborhood whereas an 8-foot high wall would be out of scale. He felt a 6-foot wall adjacent to the sidewalk would provide the privacy requested and still allow for a pool. He thought the applicant would probably want to get dd of the trees once a pool is installed. He felt an 8-foot high wall would have to be back from the sidewalk a sufficient distance to provide landscaping. Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 14, 1998 Mr. Belmal said he would be willing to have a 6-foot high wall adjacent to the sidewalk. Chuck Horton, 7097 Lion Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he owns the properly directly east of the applicant. He showed photographs of Mr. Belmal's property and the open view from his own h9use. He said he understood the applicant's concerns regarding privacy and said he supported the application but had some concerns. He indicated he had previously voiced his concerns regarding graffiti. He commented that when the City approved the 8-foot wall with a 5-foot setback, Mr. Belmal had asked him if he requested the setback. He indicated Mr. Belmal ied him to believe that the 5- foot setback had been required because of the concerns he had raised about graffiti. He said he had wdtten the letter included with the staff report which supported the wall without a setback because he thought he had been responsible for the 5-foot setback requirement, but he had since learned that it is a City Code requirement. He observed the wall will be 60 feet long directly across the street from his property and felt an 8-foot high wall would be too large and indicated he would like to withdraw his letter of support. He stated he was not opposed to the applicant's improving his property so long as it meets City Codes and felt a 6-foot wall will provide adequate privacy. He showed pictures of the plum trees and noted that one is not well maintained. Cheryll Byars, 9208 La Grande, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she is the neighbor to the west. She said the applicant will have no yard if the wall has to be set back and he installs a pool. She indicated there is no privacy because of the corner lot. She commented that several neighbors support the wall so long as he makes it attractive and takes care of graffiti problems. She felt the plans to add lights will benefit the neighborhood. There were no additional public comments. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the yard would not be usable with a pool if the wall had to be set back 5 feet. He favored a 6-foot high wall adjacent to the sidewalk and thought that would be compatible with the neighborhood. He commented that he had not observed any graffiti in the neighborhood. Commissioner Bethel concurred with Commissioner Tolstoy. Mr. Buller stated that a Minor Exception would not be required for a 6-foot wall. He said staff raised the setback issue because the Commission has consistently required a 5-foot setback to provide a landscape buffer. He asked if staff should no longer require a setback on applications coming in over the counter. Chairman Barker said the setback is normally required in order to allow room for landscaping. He recommended that staff not consider this decision a change in the policy. Mr. Buller said it will be difficult for staff to require the setback once the word gets out that the Commission supported a 6-foot wall adjacent to the sidewalk. He suggested the applicant may be requested to plant vines on the inside of the wall with weep holes so that the vines will grow on the outside of the wall to soften the appearance. He thought that may help staff to justify the placement of the wall. He acknowledged that there are a lot of sidewalk adjacent walls, particularly in older neighborhoods. He was concerned there will be more applications without landscaping. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that in the past, the Commission has always asked for landscaping and he felt it is a good requirement. He said he supported the sidewalk adjacent wall because he felt an exception could be made when a homeowner wants to put in a pool and there would not be enough room if the wall were placed at the normal setback. He did not think the City should take away the option for a pool if there is an alternate solution. He felt staff should continue processing as they have in the past and have applicants with problems appear before the Commission so that the Commission can make the ruling. He supported requiring vines and weep holes. Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 14, 1998 It was the consensus of the Commission (4-0-1, McNiel absent) to deny the appeal of Minor Exception 97-19 and direct staff to work with the applicant and issue a permit for a 6-foot high wall adjacent to the sidewalk with a condition for vine pockets along the inside for eventually growing on the outside. I. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS 97-03 - MASI COMMERCE PARTNERS - A request to consider amending the definition of Auto Service Court in Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker asked the location of the Commercial Recreation zoning. Ms. Fong replied that it covers the area north and east of Sebastian Way and Masi Drive. Chairman Barker commented there are no commercial recreational uses in the area. Commissioner Macias asked what is located between the applicant's property and the stadium. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated a maintenance building and some landscaping. He observed that the purpose of tonight's meeting was to determine if the Commission wished to allow the applicant to submit an application to amend the Industrial Area Specific Plan, not necessarily lending support nor stating opposition to the project. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Mike Scandiffio, Masi Commerce Partners, 1510 Riverside Ddve, Burbank, thanked Ms. Fong for her assistance in processing the application. Chairman Barker remarked he had asked staff to prepare a report on outstanding issues with regard to Masi Plaza and some of those items were quite far behind schedule. He said he expected those items to be completed and said he was reluctant to give anything when the applicant had not completed what was proposed. Commissioner Tolstoy observed that a long time ago the Commission had been asked to consider reclassifying the site to Recreation Commercial and so far the City had not seen any of it. He said he had supported the concept of Recreation Commercial because of the close proximity to the stadium. He was very disappointed that nothing has been developed. Commissioner Macias did not object to allowing the applicant to submit an application but said he did not want that action to be construed as potential approval of the request. He said he was concerned regarding some of the proposed uses. Commissioner Bethel felt allowing the applicant to proceed with an application would constitute further erosion of the original plan. He felt the City is losing the flavor of what it was trying to do in the area. He did not think the applicant should be able to submit an application until past issues have been completely resolved. Commissioner Tolstoy said he liked the concept of a sports related commercial area. He did not want to entertain other uses at this time. Commissioner Macias said he liked what Commissioner Bethel said about not having demonstrated an ability to successfully meet conditions. He stated he did not conceptually object to the request. He suggested waiting three weeks to allow the applicant to complete the other requirements. Planning Commission Minutes -7- January 14, 1998 Commissioner Tolstoy stated a plan had been submitted with a clear idea of what the City would get. He thought the development is now being dictated by piecemeal planning and he preferred to have the original concept carried out. He felt auto related uses are needed in this part of town but he thought the previous plan was being diluted inch by inch. (~hairman Barker said he heard Commissioner Tolstoy say he was not interested in considering an amendment because of dilution of the previous plan and Commissioner Bethel say he did not feel the amendment should be considered. Mr. Buller observed that there has been a long history on the site. He stated the applicant wanted straight Commercial but staff and the Commission had moved the applicant to Recreational Commercial with the south side of Sebastian Way being more industrial. He commented the applicant had shown a plan with elements which the Commission supported, such as theaters and a proposed ice rink on the south side. He explained that the applicant had been unsuccessful in secudng such users and has found that auto rerated uses are successful and now wants to process an amendment to allow for expansion of those uses. Commissioner Bethel did not think it would be fair to the applicant to support initiation of an application if he did not feel he could support the amendment. Chairman Barker observed that several of the Commissioners wanted to see a good faith effort so far as meeting existing conditions. He recommended staff not process an amendment until the old issues are resolved. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the applicant should be given an opportunity to submit an amendment but asked that staff indicate what auto related uses are already arlowed in the industrial area. It was the consensus of the Commission (3-1-1, Bethel no, McNiel absent) that the applicant be permitted to submit an Industrial Area Specific Plan amendment with the accompanying fee. J. APPEAL OF INCOMPLETENESS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-40 - ME.C.C.A. - An appeal of the City Planner's determination of incompleteness for an application to use two existing buildings totaling 2,058 square feet as a church facility, located on a 2.86 acre parcel within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 9212 Base Line Road - APN: 202-242-09. Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Dr. Nadir Kahn, 6149 Amberwood Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, stated M.E.C.C.A. is a non-profit religious organization. He gave a brief history of the property and said they have been in the community for six years without any complaints from the neighbors. He said the only thing they are building is a parking lot and there is already a patio there which they only want to repair. Jacob Shakhshir, 770 San Rafael, Pomona, stated he knows several people who would like to move close to the area. He said the City would benefit if the fees were waived because other projects would come into the area. There were no additional public comments. Commissioner Macias asked what kind of infrastructure requirements a parking lot would necessitate. Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 14, 1998 Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that a parking lot requires a building permit and any building permits require full frontage improvements. He said that curb, gutter, and sidewalks exist so they would need to complete if there are missing street trees or lights. He stated the traffic section has indicated it would like to see an attempt made to align the driveway with the driveway across the street. He observed that the applicant would have to pay in-lieu fees for undergrounding if it were determined that a construction conditional use permit is required whereas a non- construction conditional use permit would be exempt from the requirement. Commissioner Bethel stated that staff will have to put in the same effort to process the application whether it is called construction or non-construction. He felt the parking lot constitutes construction and the proper fees should be collected. Mr. Buller observed that when the City adopted its undergrounding policy it exempted uses categorized as non-construction which simply meant that if the occupancy of an existing industrial building changes and a conditional use permit is needed, it would not trigger the undergrounding requirement. He said the discussion of undergrounding is the result of the decision of whether the application is deemed to be construction or non-construction. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if building parking lot constitutes construction. Mr. Bullet said that was staffs interpretation. He said that in most of the codes, a parking lot is considered a project. Commissioner Bethel commented that it did not seem the applicant was disputing the fact that there will be construction, but rather was indicating the fees are too high for its group to pay. He felt that the construction fees are applicable and reasonable. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the City Council sets fees and the Planning Commission does not have the right to waive them. Mr. Bullet confirmed that only the City Council can waive fees. He stated that the applicant chose to appeal the finding that the application is a construction rather than a non-construction conditional use permit; thereby possibly addressing the fee issue. Chairman Barker stated that the decision before the Commission was whether the application should be a construction or non-construction conditional use permit. Chairman Barker and Commissioner Tolstoy concurred with staff that the application is a construction conditional use permit. Chairman Barker indicated the applicant could go to City Council to request a waiver of fees. It was the consensus of the Commission (4-0, McNiel absent) to deny the appeal and find that the application is a construction conditional use permit. Commissioner McNiel arrived. K. USE DETERMINATION 97-02 - OPTIONS FOR YOUTH - A request to determine that a youth counseling/educational service is similar to an administrative office and is a permitted use within the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Planning Commission Minutes -9- Januaw 14, 1998 Chairman Barker invited public comment. Bryant Swenson, Options for Youth, 199 South Los Robles, Suite 700, Pasadena, gave a brief history of the company and described the operation of the business. Chairman Barker asked the age and number of students. Mr. Swenson replied they are generally high school students and there would generally be one to five but the number could be up to eight. Chairman Barker asked what type of counseling the school provides and if the employees are cedified. Mr. Swenson replied they provide counseling on careers, academic goals, and setting and achieving goals. He indicated they have certified teachers, not counselors. Chairman Barker asked if the school gives credits for units. Mr. Swenson responded the students receive the same credit as in high school. Chairman Barker questioned the parking. Mr. Swenson remarked that very few of the students drive and they generally use public transportation or are dropped off. Chairman Barker asked who would have the responsibility for the students when they are outside of the building. Mr. Swenson responded that they are responsible and they address that with the students. Commissioner McNiel asked if there have been loitering problems at any of their other locations. Mr. Swenson replied that there had been problems when they opened their first center because they hadn't worked with the students. He said their program is voluntary for students who have dropped out and wish to return to school. He indicated the students are motivated and there is generally no problem when guidelines are set down. Commissioner Bethel asked if the program is one of independent study for students who have not made it in high school or continuation school. Mr. Swenson confirmed that was correct. Commissioner Bethel was concerned that only one staff member would be in charge of all students there at one time and would have to proctor tests, counsel students, and handle paperwork. He did not feel it is an administrative function. He observed the students who are there have failed in traditional schools and need counseling. Mr. Swenson stated that much of the time no students are there and they have a very Iow ratio of students to teacher. He said the number of students fluctuates and they are very motivated. Commissioner McNiel asked if the students are financed by the state. Mr. Swenson confirmed that was correct. Commissioner McNiel asked the average age and the success rate. Planning Commission Minutes -10- January 14, 1998 Mr. Swenson replied they are mostly sophomores and juniors and approximately 40 percent return to ~igh school. He said he had worked in the Upland center for two years and he only had two disciplinary problems. Chairman Barker asked what businesses are adjacent. Mr. Swenson replied they are located next to a resource center and a gym. Karen Sears, property manager for center, 4200 Chino Hills Parkway, Chino Hills, stated the other tenants are a resource center, a property management firm, and a billiard hall. There were no additional public comments. Commissioner Bethel agreed the use is not a traditional school but he did not feel it is a clear cut administrative function. He thought it is a good program but was concerned about the student/teacher ratio. Commissioner Tolstoy suppoded the use. Commissioner McNiel felt the use should be a condifionally permitted use rather than a permitted use. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that staff felt it would be acceptable to have the use identified as permitted because of the small size. He thought it would become more of a school if they enlarge the square footage. Chairman Barker feared there would be no way to regulate the business if it becomes a problem. Mr. Bullet indicated there is a conditional use permit for the entire center. He said the entire permit could come back and it may pinpoint this use as a problem. Commissioner Bethel said that may be possible but it was not probable. Commissioner Tolstoy recalled there had been a dance studio upstairs. Mr. Buller indicated many uses have been there and it is a difficult area to lease. Chairman Barker said he had concerns because of his past history of working with students. Commissioner Macias complimented the applicant and believed the program is a good one. He felt most of their work is administrative in nature and the use would be compatible within the established threshold of the center. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the resolution approving Use Determination 97-02. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, MACIAS, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: BETHEL ABSENT: NC)NE - carried PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments at this time. Planning Commission Minutes -11- January 14, 1998 COMMISSION BUSINESS !~, REVIEW OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TASK FORCE DRAFT POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS Brad Buller, City Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy felt the Task Force had done a good job. Chairman Barker asked if the railroad bridge over Foothill Boulevard will be reconstructed so that the street can be widened. Mr. Buller confirmed that it will. Commissioner Tolstoy asked who will pay for the trail construction. Mr. Buller indicated the City is trying to identify funding sources and lack of funds is why it has not been done. It was the consensus of the Commission (4:0-1, McNiel absent) to support the recommendations. Chairman Barker indicated he would like to discuss the zoning along Etiwanda Boulevard at a future meeting. He was particularly concerned with the small lot areas. Mr. Bullet indicated the matter would be placed on a future agenda. G. PATIO FURNITURE IN TERRA VISTA TOWN CENTER -RUBIO'S BAJA GRILL/LEWIS HOMES Brad Buller, City Planner, gave a brief summary of what had been presented earlier in the evening. Ted Frumkin, Director of Real Estate, Rubio's Restaurants, Inc., 5151 Shoreham Place, #260, San Diego, stated that in Long Beach they had entered into an agreement with the City that indicated that if the City receives complaints or a plethora of applications, Rubio's would remove the umbrellas. He said they have had no problems and he would be wiling to enter into such an agreement with Rancho Cucamonga. Mr. Buller suggested addressing wind tolerance. Cad Gadick, Rubio's described the construction of the umbrellas. He indicated they have four such umbrellas in Ontario and they are holding up well. Mr. Frumkin stated they wear very well. Commissioner McNiel asked the gross weight. Mr. Gadick replied it is approximately 150 pounds. Commissioner McNiel felt the umbrellas are attractive and acknowledged they are part of the corporate image. He stated that corporate identifications and corporate names have taken on a new P~anning Commission Minutes -12- January 14, 1998 function to totally identify even/thing a business sells. He said the City has made an effort to en'c0urage nice, clean, comfortable, appealing pedestrian centers while keeping out clutter. He observed that is the function of the furniture plans. He thought approving the use of the umbrellas would come back to haunt the City and he did not suppod request. Ir'was the consensus of the Commission (Bethel, Macias, and McNiel - deny; Barker and Totstoy - approve) to deny the use of palapas. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Moved by Bethel, seconded by Macias, carried 5-0, to adjourn. 9:51 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -13- January 14, 1998