HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/07/10 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting
July 10, 1996
Chairman Barker 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.
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: David Barker, Heinz Lumpp, Larry McNiel, Peter Tolstoy
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Tricia Ashby, Planning Division Secretary; Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan
Coleman, Principal Planner;, Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney; Dan James,
Senior Civil Engineer; Brent Le Count, Associate Planner
ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no announcements at this time.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, carried 4-0, to approve the minutes of May 22,
1996.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 96-12 - CUCAMONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT - Review of a
detailed site plan, elevations, and landscape plan for the first phase of a previously approved
Conditional Use Permit (CUP 94-39) and associated Master Plan consisting of a 26,500 square
foot administrative office building in Subarea 17 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan (Industrial
Park), located at 7900 Center Avenue- APN: 1077-401-09 through 16 and 23.
Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the applicant owns the full piece of property out to the street.
Mr. Le Count answered in the affirmative.
Chairman Barker opened the public hearing.
Max Willlares, 276 N. Second Avenue, Upland, stated he is the architect for the Cucamonga County
Water District. He informed the Commission that this project was designed in the context of the
master plan which was approved in January 1995. He asked that Planning Condition No. 5,
regarding the pedestrian gate be deleted because of the nature of the District's operation and the
need for security. He went on to say that the District had gone to great lengths to keep the public
areas public and the staff and District's areas private. He pointed out the location of the gate and
the entry as well as the private drive, secured parking, and public parking. He observed that the
entire frontage on the channel is secured with a concrete block wall as well as the dense
landscaping.
Commissioner Tolstoy commented that he was happy to see some innovative architecture. He
pointed out that there is a great change in elevation from the property under discussion to the water
basin to the north at Church Street and Haven Avenue. He then asked if Mr. Willlares had taken
future use into consideration with respect to drainage.
Mr. Willlares responded that the Water Distdct has a very good rappod with the Flood Control District
and he felt a certain coordination could be achieved in the future.
Tom Shollenberger, 9641 San Bernardino Road, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he is the General
Manager for Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD) and an appointee to the Zone I and Zone
2 Flood Control Advisory Board. He stated that the City is currently trying to undertake a project to
eliminate some of the flooding that takes place along the Hermosa/Turner Street, down to and
including the intersection at Foothill Boulevard. He further stated that the City is proposing to cut into
the channel itself and install a project that will go westerly on Foothill Boulevard, turning nodh at
Hermosa, and interconnecting somewhere in the area of Base Line Road, anticipating that project
will cost about 4 million dollars. Mr. Shollenberger informed the Commission that through a cost
shadrig with the Flood Control District they anticipate that they would acquire that particular parcel
in exchange for their podion of that Flood Control Project. He revealed that CCWD is working with
the City and that the whole site is looked upon as a community affair. They are looking at the fueling
station as a possible NCG station in connection with the City so that it may be utilized unilaterally.
He remarked that there had also been discussion with the City with regard to the possibility of a day
care center being offered on some of that unutilized land which could provide for an excellent
transition from the residential area to the west into the more industrial climate that has been
projected on the plans, with the acknowledgment that the City may very well acquire that entire
drainage parcel.
Hearing no public comment, Chairman Barker closed the hearing.
Mr. Buller informed the Commission that staff would not oppose a private, secured gate as a means
of pedestrian access to the channel. He said staff is not looking for a public access point, but rather,
in the future, an employee entrance.
Commissioner McNiel mentioned that he and Larry Henderson were both on the Design Review
Committee for this project. He admitted it is a trendy, contemporary, or even faddish design,
depending upon your perspective. He felt that it works in the isolated area in which it sits and stated
he likes the building. He understood staff's position regarding the gate issue, and felt that if a gate
is required, it must be absolutely secure because of the isolated area. He voiced his concern, and
agreed with Mr. Williams.
Commissioner Tolstoy felt the project is good. He went on to say that if it can be secured, there
should be a gate in an attempt to make the community "pedestrian friendly."
Commissioner Lumpp asked the status of a previous traffic study requested by the Commission.
Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, responded that the traffic study was complete and had been
reviewed by the City's traffic engineer. He went on to say that the results indicated that there was
no specific mitigation for this development. He reported that no traffic signal is required, but
requested that CCWD be open to addressing certain routes that would need to be taken by their
employees if problems do arise in the future.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- July 10, 1996
Commissioner Lumpp was concerned about the current lack of improvements along Church Street
and Center Street in relation to potential problems involving traffic and children transitioning back
. and forth at that intersection. He stated that he would abide by staff's recommendation. He
requested heavy landscaping on the northeast and southern sides of the project to provide some
aesthetic relief along Haven Avenue. He then went on to say, with respect to the gate issue, that
he was in agreement with Commissioner McNiel in that there would be a potential for
encouragement to access the property if there is a gate. He suggested that employees work with
CCWD officials if they want access to the trail. He stated that he would prefer not to put a gate in
at this facility because it is a secure type of operation. He supported the project.
Chairman Barker stated he would support the Design Review Committee's recommendation. He then
suggested that the Water Distdct reexamine its position regarding the gate when it becomes obvious
that there is some reason for that opening. He stated that he had reviewed the design and felt that
there was really no reason for pedestrian access at this time. He voiced his concern regarding the
criminal element taking advantage of a gate. He went on to say that he had never seen a gate that
is as secure as he would like. He concluded by recommending deletion of Planning Condition No.
5.
Commissioner McNiel reported that he had been to the site and noticed a lot of graf~ti in the area.
He stated that a temporary chain link fence is being allowed but he does not want it to be interpreted
that chain link is OK.
Chairman Barker tentatively suggested revisiting the location.
Mr. Buller stated that there is no trail to view at this time, only a right of way for maintenance
vehicles. He went on the say that a public transportation corridor would require a lot of coordination
and financing. He pointed out that it is a private, gated parking lot and it has been the position of
the Commission in the past to support openings in both private and public projects. He continued
by saying that to take this action tonight could set a precedent by stating that there is no gate
requirement for a pdvate, gated parking lot used only for that business. He suggested that, through
minute action, the Commission simply ask the applicant to seriously consider this as an option in the
future.
Chairman Barker agreed, saying that security needs to be taken into consideration. He suggested
that, by minute action, the Commission advise CCWD that the gate issue be looked at when the trail
opens.
Mr. Buller summarized by suggesting staff delete the condition at this time, with the minute action,
and to revisit the issue at a later date.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Tolstoy, to adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use
Permit 94-39, with modification to request that the applicant consider a gated access to its trail in
the future. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE -carried
NEW BUSINESS
B. USE DETERMINATION 96-02 - A request to determine if a beauty college can be classified as
a beauty shop.
Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- July 10, 1996
Commissioner Lumpp asked if staff was requesting a change in the Community Commercial Zone
Subarea 3 to permit vocational or business trade schools.
Mr. Buller responded in the negative.
Commissioner Lumpp asked if staff wanted to forget the college pad and just call it a beauty shop.
Mr. Buller responded that it is staff's opinion that this padicular use is not in the category of what was
felt to be a vocational school of the type not appropriate for Foothill Boulevard and it is simply a
determination for a specific use, not a precedent for any and all vocational schools.
Chairman Barker invited public comment.
Brad Umanski, 7269 Fermo Place, Rancho Cucamonga, from Lean & Associates, stated that he
represented the applicant and was available to answer questions.
Commissioner McNiel asked if students will be required to park behind the building.
Mr. Umanski replied that as a part of the lease, the landlord has mandated that if parking becomes
an issue, the applicant will instruct the students to park in the rear.
Commissioner McNiel strongly suggested he do so.
Commissioner Tolstoy concurred.
There was no further public comment.
Chairman Barker asked if a condition regarding parking could be included in the Use Determination.
Mr. Buller responded by saying that there was no action to condition but the minutes will reflect the
Commission's position.
Chairman Barker then suggested that the Commission make the strongest possible recommendation
to mandate student parking in the rear of the building.
Commissioner Lumpp agreed and felt a letter should be sent to the applicant stating this
recommendation.
Chairman Barker then instructed staff to prepare such a letter.
Mr. Buller agreed.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, to adopt the resolution approving Use Determination
96-02. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE -carried
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Chairman Barker requested that John Melcher be invited by formal letter to attend the Planning
Commission Meeting of July 24, 1996 to receive a Resolution of Commendation.
Planning Commission Minutes -4° July 10, 1996
Mr. Buller agreed to provide a letter.
Commissioner Tolstoy asked for the status of the McDonalds.
Mr. Buller informed the Commission that McDonalds had entered into a contract with a new
landscape contractor and Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, had requested that they not proceed
with any of the work until he returned from vacation on July 8. Mr. Buller said that Mr. Hayes is now
in the process of working with McDonalds to have the work done, but that no date had been set. He
concluded by saying that the City had been successful in having McDonalds remove some illegal
signage.
Commissioner Lumpp requested that McDonalds provide a schedule stating start and completion
dates for this project by the next Planning Commission Meeting.
Commissioner Lumpp asked if the landscaping that goes down Masi Drive was in an assessment
district and who is maintaining it
Mr. Buller informed the Commission that it is all on private property, maintained by Masi.
Mr. James stated that even after the public improvements are accepted, the grass area will be
privately maintained. He went on to say that the trees are designated as street trees and under the
City's jurisdiction, but it's all maintained by the developer under Commercial Shopping Centers.
Commissioner Lumpp then asked if the trailer on Haven and Church was owned by the County Flood
Control District.
Mr. Buller responded in the affirmative. He explained that it is the construction trailer for
undergrounding the drainage ditch on the west side of Haven Avenue.
Commissioner Lumpp asked if there is going to be some improvement from Church Street onto
Haven Avenue going south.
Mr. James replied that the channel will be replaced by storm drain pipe, completing the Haven
Avenue street improvements.
Commissioner McNiel brought up the fact that the Edwards Theater on Haven Avenue and Foothill
Boulevard is badly in need of maintenance. He wondered what could be done about it.
Chairman Barker felt the lack of maintenance has spread throughout the entire center.
Mr. Buller suggested staff address the issue by initiating a letter to the owner under the signature
of the Chairman that would indicate that the Commission felt the property has reached a level where
it needs some attention.
Mr. Buller pointed out that each Commissioner had been given a copy of the new Development Code
as well as the Mission Land EIR. He asked that the Commission take some time to look over the
Planning Commission Minutes -5- July 10, 1996
EIR. He further stated that the Griffin EIR would be forthcoming. He mentioned the possibility that
both EIR's may be heard the same agenda night, possibly in September.
Chairman Barker then mentioned his concern regarding the current increase in graffiti.
Mr. Buller stated that the fastest way to eradicate the problem was through the Graffiti Hotline at the
City Yard.
Chairman Barker felt that the City has an obligation to do something about graffiti located on private
property.
Mr. Buller responded by saying there has been a practice over the last couple years as the City has
been dealing with graffiti, to define where the line is regarding the dsk the City is willing to take by
going onto pdvate property to remove graffiti versus those which need go through pdvate means of
trying to secure the removal. He offered to provide the City's current policy regarding graffiti removal
at a future meeting. He agreed to bring this to the attention of the Building and Safety Department
and Code Enforcement.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Lumpp, carried 4-0, to adjourn.
8:07 p.m. - The Planning Commission adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
Secretary
Planning Commission Minutes -6- July 10, 1996