Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Out a green card and submit it to the secretary at the end of the dais. Thank you for your cooperations. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

Miss Anderson? Present. Miss Dedemar? Mister Gage?

Here.

Mister Hagman? Present. Mister Lampkin?

Present.

Mister Marks? Present. Chairman Ritchie?

Present.

All are present.

Very well. And now if you please stand and join us for the pledge of allegiance which will be led by commissioner Marx.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Now we'll move on to announcements. Director Ngo, I'll turn the attention to you for the introduction of our newest commissioner.

Thank you, Chairman. I do have a few announcements. First, item C and D, we will be taking together and will be presented together as well as items e and f. Those will be presented and action taken together at the same time. Lastly, as you mentioned, I would like to welcome our newest planning commissioner, commissioner Jonathan Hagman.

Commissioner Hagman lives within the Ontario Ranch area and received his bachelor's of political science and master's of public policy from UCLA. He works for the County Of San Bernardino in the land use services department as a land use coordinator, and he also serves in the Army Reserve as a captain. I wanted to have everyone welcome our newest planning commissioner, Jonathan Hagman. Welcome.

And for many people who've been here, we've been without that seventh seat being filled for what a year and a half. So Jonathan, would you like to say anything Commissioner Hegmann?

Is this working? Okay. Good evening everyone. I just want to thank first off the city council, my fellow planning commissioners and city staff for such a warm welcome so far. I'm very excited to serve the Ontario residents here and I look forward to the future growth of the city. So, thank you for having me.

Thank you, welcome. And so moving on, we'll move on to commissioner items. Do any commissioners have a general announcement not related to an item on the agenda? Mr. Chairman. Okay, Commissioner Gait.

Yes. Well, Sunday night I went to the brand new restaurant in Downtown Ontario, a tapas bar called El Balcon, means the balcony, it's aptly named. And I just want to congratulate that whole development. It was a restoration of the old Bank of Italy and the Bumstead Bicycles. A lot of people said it couldn't be done and that one restaurant wasn't enough room for one restaurant and we have three restaurants now that are open. So I applaud the success of that in our downtown.

Thank you, Commissioner Gage. Any other announcements from any commissioners? Okay, seeing none, we'll now move on. I believe staff has a presentation for us. Director Null.

Thank you, Chairman. So this presentation is for the 2025 Ontario Ranch Historic Context Statement and the Resource Survey and our Senior Planner, Ms. Ayala will introduce and provide some background and context on the presentation and our consultant Urbana Preservation and Planning that prepared these documents. Thank you.

Good evening members of the Planning Commission. The National Historic Preservation Act provided for the establishment of the certified local government program and this was to encourage direct participation of local government in the identification, evaluation, registration and the preservation of historic properties jurisdiction. It also was intended to promote the integration of local planning within local planning interest and concerns into local planning and decision making. In April 2001, the city became the state's forty sixth CLG. To date, there are 69.

As part of the program, the city is required to continuously engage in preparation and evaluation of historic resources through survey work. In 2004, the dairy industry context was developed in conjunction with a reconnaissance level survey of the former ag preserve to assist with understanding the built environment. The survey in historic context provided a framework for interpreting and preserving the area's history and established a foundation of integrating historic preservation into future land use planning efforts. Today, nearly half of the Ontario Ranch area has been planned and developed through the adoption of specific plans. With each subsequent development, intensive level historic surveys were prepared by the project applicants, then they were reviewed, analyzed, and approved by the city.

These surveys provided important opportunities for discovery and documentation contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of the area's history in the dairy farms, ranch style residences, and the individuals and families who lived and worked there. In 2004, the city commissioned Urban Preservation and Planning to prepare an intensive level survey of the Ontario ranch properties that had not yet been surveyed. Founding principal Wendy Tinsley Baker brings an expert background in American history, architecture, and urban planning with a particular emphasis of course on historic preservation. Her thirty years of experience includes extensive historical research survey work, design review, historic property research and documentation, and practice in municipal regulatory planning and cultural related issues. She meets the secretary of the interior standards for historic preservation, the Professional Qualification Standards in the disciplines of history and architectural history and is included in the California Council for the promotion of the history of history's register of professional historians and also maintains professional certification in the American Institute of Certified Planners.

It's my pleasure to hand it over now to Ms. Tinsley Baker who's going to present the survey findings.

Good evening. Now it's working. Hello. So Diane, is this going to work for us? Okay, very good. I was told that I would be presenting from the podium but I need to look this way so I apologize if my back ends up being turned to some of you. Good evening, I am Wendy Tinsley Becker, principal of Urbana Preservation and Planning and we're here tonight to give you an overview on the Ontario Ranch Historical Resource Survey and historic context statement. Next slide please. Next slide please. Thank you.

So our scope of work as Diane indicated was initiated in mid twenty twenty four and our final draft document is now available. I'm not sure if the commission has had an opportunity to read through the entire package here. It's pretty thick but essentially we completed an intensive level historic resource survey. So that means anything that was more than 50 years old and anything in particular that related to agriculture and agricultural history, dairy history, etc. In the Ontario Ranch neighborhood boundaries we picked up as part of the survey effort.

So in total there were roughly three eighty five parcels that were still unevaluated meaning no projects had been brought forward in some type of discretionary review process that would have necessitated a historical resource evaluation and we consolidated that through ownership and use history down into 150 recordations. So in the appendix to the survey report, you'll see there's 150 site records. They're called Department of Parks and Recreation, DPR five twenty three series forms for 153 properties. Each of those properties is composed of one or more parcels to arrive at that three eighty five parcel count. Sorry, it's a little awkward.

Normally I don't put my back to a commission when I'm presenting. So the implementation process. We had a kickoff with city staff on in August 2024. We initiated community outreach in September 2024. One major component of the outreach is posting to any available social media, city websites, etc.

And then an important component of a survey is a survey handout. That's something that we carry with us that we ask the city to disseminate out to any of its social media channels. What that does is give an introduction to any you know stakeholders, property owners, business owners, community members that we interface with out in the field. It gives them an introduction and it also provides contact information both for myself and my firm as well as for city staff for Diane Ayala who is our project manager and main point of contact for the survey. We completed our field work October 2024 through April 2025.

We had several major week long efforts for a field survey and what that means is that we went and photographed every property. So again that 300 plus number of parcels, we photographed all of those from the public right of way unless we were able to gain access with the owner's permission. We worked with city staff, we worked with historic preservation advocates and some development representatives, project applicants to reach out to property owners to gain access where it seemed appropriate to take additional photographs beyond the public right of way views. Our draft report was submitted to the city in May 2025. We received comments from the city in June and October 2025, and our revised package was submitted back to the city ultimately in January 2026 and that is the version that has been presented to the commission.

Next slide please. Thank you. So of the total evaluated properties what we found is that 25 are eligible for designation under either local register, California register, or national register criteria. This means that of all of those properties evaluated, 25 appear to meet the definition of a historical resource pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. The remaining 122 properties we determined were not significant and are ineligible, which means they do not meet the definition of a historical resource in a regulatory review process.

We also identified that as Diane alluded to, you know the city actually has a really solid historic preservation program. So the city maintains this CRID, the California Historical Resources Information Database. That ties in with the larger CRISP system, the California Historical Resources Information System. Some certified local governments maintain this database of historic properties. Those could be properties that are formally designated and registered at the local level, it can be properties that were previously surveyed, and the city has this grid.

It's a little bit buried I would say at this point on the city's website, but we did discover it during the course of our research and what we found is that there were a 115 properties within the Ontario Ranch area that were included in this database. A lot of that is attributed to the 2004 survey effort as well as a survey that was done a little prior to 2010 focused on milk parlors. So there was a really solid foundation for our research and our comprehensive survey effort. I think we can move to the next slide Diane. Thank you.

So this just gives a quick visual for you. So on the left side we have an example of the site records, the DPR forms from the 2003, 2004 effort and then of course we have updated versions of that from our 2025 effort. Those are all in the attachments of the survey document. Our recommendation to the city is that for the properties that are identified as significant that you know brief or excuse me small handful, we would take the site records for those forms and submit them to that CRIS system so that they have some type of you know place within the repository for site records. We're not recommending submission of all of the records because for the most part there's no further data to gain from those non significant properties.

Next slide, thank you. So the survey effort also included a context statement. A historic context is a theme under which something can be identified as significant. So a real baseline example is Spanish revival style architecture, know nineteen twenties through nineteen thirties. That would be an easy thing where you could look at it and say okay this is Spanish style, has stucco, meets these character defining features, it's within this period of significance that's been established, therefore it either is or is not eligible.

So for the Ontario ranch community we prepared six different themes. The first is early dairy farms in Ontario nineteen hundreds through circa 1929, and then depression era and wartime dairies nineteen thirties through 1945, postwar large capacity dairies 1945 to 1980, and then consolidation nineteen eighties through 1998, and then we switched over to more of the social history of the area. So important persons, families, and ethnic groups, and then lastly styles of architecture eighteen eighties through the nineteen eighties. So each of those themes establishes a framework for number one identification and number two evaluation of all of the properties and that was the work that we performed. So each of the properties were evaluated under the relevant themes.

Sometimes it was under more than one theme depending on the property's history, it's your built dates, the styles of architecture, the property types, and the families that owned and occupied the dairies. Next slide, thanks. So this was a really fun project for us and we found a lot of good data and that sort of ties into the dairy history documentary that's linked at the end of this presentation, but what we found is that the city established or excuse me the county established the San Bernardino County Ag Preserve And Dairy Preserve back in 1967, and through time that preserve sort of shrunk down. Next slide Diane. So we see then the boundaries in relation to the new model colony which is what it evolved into in 1998.

And then next slide, Diane. And then we see the boundaries of Ontario Ranch within that larger boundary. So it's okay, go back one please. Thanks Diane, the pressure's on. So the red properties are the properties that were identified as eligible in the survey effort and the green parcels are the properties that were found to be ineligible as part of the survey effort.

Okay you're good, thanks. So the next few slides just give you a sort of sample of the different themes and the properties that are associated with those themes throughout the Ontario ranch community. So this first one is early dairy farms, so these are the remaining farms that date to that first time frame nineteen hundreds through 1929. These are the oldest farms characterized by wood barns, less sort of permanent infrastructure, infrastructure that you know certainly would have needed to be upgraded through time to meet sanitary reform laws relating to you know zoning environmental concerns, etc. Next slide.

And then we get into the depression and wartime dairies 1930 and 1945. We see the emergence of sanitation at that time frame, and then it's okay Diane, you can keep going. And then we get into our postwar large capacity. So you can see that the bulk of the associated properties are identified with this postwar large capacity theme. So these are probably what what most people think of and what may be in your memory if you know you've been in Ontario for a long time are these large capacity dairies.

And then into the 1980s forward we see the consolidation period. So this is where much of these smaller properties end up being consolidated through you know sales, farmers acquiring their neighbors properties, sort of combining and consolidating, and that was really an effort to really save their dairies. So we think that's an important theme to recognize and you can see there's just a few of these consolidated dairy operations that were extant within the survey boundaries. And then of course styles of architecture. Everything's associated with this theme except for vacant parcels.

Next one please. Thanks. You know the one slide that I don't see on there Diane is our theme pertaining to social groups. So I'm just gonna take a moment if that's okay. So Ontario Ranch is historically associated with French, Basque, and Dutch, and Portuguese families.

And we went through and looked at census records. We looked, we obviously reached out to longtime dairy families in the area and connected with them as possible. We looked through newspapers, know library archive records, things like that, and put together a generalized history of each ethnic group in the area and identified you know as many of the names that we could that pertain to each place of origin, and I think that's something that you know certainly there's room for additional research in the future as it would come up pertaining to the significant properties. And I think staff may touch on that later as part of a different presentation. So I just we would be remiss if we didn't include that.

Okay, very good. So recommendations, so this ties into it. Number one, we feel it's important to, as Diane indicated, guide future land use decisions. So the historical resource survey gives the Planning Commission and the preservation interests that long range look ahead for decision making. It can guide future historic preservation projects.

It can guide project specific reviews. We think that this new updated historic context continues to provide the framework launching off of the 2,004 historic context effort to continuously evaluate properties. In this instance this is a conclusive survey where every parcel has been evaluated, so there really should not be a dairy property with an Ontario ranch that is not evaluated at this point. However, you know this will always be available to inform anything dairy related in the city's history. And then of course facilitate decision making, and I think we've touched on that one.

So Diane, I don't think that we're going to click the link for the dairy history documentary but I do want to just point that out in case the commissioners had not been able to view it. This is sort of a secondary and separate project but it's related. The city and a project applicant helped to produce a thirty two minute documentary on Ontario's dairy history. Obviously a big part of that relates to the lands that would become Ontario Ranch. So if the Commission has not viewed it, if you have about thirty two minutes to spare, I would encourage you to take a look at it.

We've heard a lot of positive feedback. The project applicant who helped to fund that project as part of mitigation for another project has also heard good things from the dairy farmers here in Ontario and I know it's received a lot of good attention online as well. So I'll open it up to questions from the commission.

Any questions from commission?

Just curious. Commissioner Lampkin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm just curious to know how many man hours went into this project and how many months had you guys been working on this?

Well, we kicked off roughly August 2024 and surveys, the way it works is you have focused blocks of time where you're really working on that only and then you kind of put it down for a little bit either because you're waiting on information or someone is processing photos and doing some of the behind the scenes administrative work that relates to it that's also very critical. So all in it was myself and our team. We had our senior historian Doug Kupol and our historic preservation planner and GIS lead, Alexandria Baker, Alexia Landa, one of our solid historians on our team, as well as a few other people on the team. But I would say Lexi, Doug, Alex, and myself less intensively but always providing oversight. I would say that they dedicated probably half their time each week to this project over the last year or so.

Of course then once we turn in our draft, we're waiting and getting it back into the city's queue. So that's where there are blocks where we're not focused on it and then we get back to it as soon as we receive comments. So it's a good amount of time and it's reflected in the information that's included. And ultimately what's important is that we feel that the findings are substantiated by the effort and by what's written in the document.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman?

Yes, Commissioner Diedermann.

Were there any surprises?

Well, I'll tell you. Although in historic preservation we like to say it, you know, it's cute, right? Does it pass the cute test? But that's technical threshold. There are several really great milk parlor buildings in Ontario Ranch.

I mean there's one in particular and I don't have the address offhand Diane, but I know we've discussed it. It is just a really charming building. So I think that's one of the like joyous surprises was finding some of these milk parlor buildings and how special they look and how unique they are and it's not something that you see in other jurisdictions. So we definitely found a few eligible and I know that one is, I don't know if you know which one that is. We a on the list. Yeah, so I think I think that's a good surprise to find.

And are the buildings largely still owned by the families so are being maintained and kept up?

Some are. Some are vacant. Some are in transition where perhaps the farmers have sold or are looking to sell or they've leased out the land for non dairy purposes as they sort of transition into their next phase of life. So we observed properties, dairy properties at all ranges of use and condition.

Okay, thank you. Any other questions or comments? I did have a chance to review the video. And one of the things I was intrigued by was the, as far as I understand, some of the buildings were relocated. They were able to actually like literally take the building and put it somewhere else. Is that my understanding of what

the Your process

understanding is correct. That is one of the stated goals of the city is to identify some representative significant examples of different property types like a milk parlor or like a milk parlor actually is not just the front kind of the cute facade with the circular driveway. There's the actual milking barn behind it that's attached to it. So the goal of the city is to find representative examples that are significant that can be relocated to the Great Park. And I don't know if that's part of any other presentation tonight, but that is a goal, yes.

I found that really interesting. Well thank you very much. I appreciate your time and this presentation was very enlightening. With that, any other comments, Director Ngo or? Mr. Chair. Oh, I'm sorry. One more.

Yeah, I don't have any more questions. I just wanted to take this time to say thank you to you, Wendy. I remember moving to South Ontario, to the Ontario Ranch area about seventeen or eighteen years ago and coming from South Central Los Angeles. And after buying my home, I decided one day to take my bike out for a ride and go past Riverside Drive. I remember this odd feeling.

There was this sudden abrupt transition and it felt like you were in a different world. A world that I had never experienced coming from a very urban. It was an area that was completely depleted of resources. And to know that I moved into an urban community and moved in and be able to go into an area that felt like there was resources in abundance, It played a huge, had a huge profound impact in my life to be exposed to the dairies and farms and especially growing up in an area where I didn't have that exposure. So, I want to thank you for the work that you and your team did.

We are in the season of historic preservation conference which is coming up, I believe, in a few weeks or if not sometime soon in March. And when we go to these conferences, we're often impressed by the ways in which cities are able to tell their story. I think that the work that you did not only allows for us to tell the story of the city of Ontario, which at some point started off as New Model Colony and that was Ontario Ranch. But it essentially allows us to tell the story of the region and all the people who came here, all the people who are no longer here and have since moved on. So I want to thank you for that. I think it's definitely worth mentioning its commendable work. That's all I have.

Thank you. Oh, sure. Yes.

There I am. I thank you too for doing all that work. Do you have, after doing all that documentation and learning all the history of that area, do you have any recommendations of what we can use that data for and to preserve the history of it? To preserve the buildings?

Yes, the roughly 20 plus properties that we identified as significant, those are really the properties that the city would safeguard. Number two, try to work with project applicants in the future on appropriate projects where feasible, right? To try to retain and rehabilitate, maybe adapt to a new use if that's possible with their project description. I would suggest that those 20 plus properties will be the source of potential relocation to the Great Park. It doesn't mean that every single one of them is going to make that cut.

But I think that would be the pool of potential candidates. So I do think that there is opportunity for future research relating to the different ethnic groups that are historically associated with Ontario Ranch. I think that you know we did a good first effort at it. I think history documentary touches on that a little bit more because it included interviews from some of the farming families. So for example, Mary Borba Parente was interviewed as well as others, that's just one name that I'm very familiar with and have communicated with her in the past.

But we were able to glean additional insights relating to festivals and how all the farmers would get together and they would donate a cow for slaughter to feed all of the attendees and their families at all these festivals. So I think that there's probably a little bit more work that could be done on that front. Finding a way to maybe reach out to all of these families. But I think that's a focused effort. I think that's sort of beyond the context and beyond the evaluation of the properties.

Yes, know I grew up in the area and as a kid just going down Euclid Avenue, our families would see, point out the Borba Estate at Euclid Avenue and Riverside Drive on the right hand side as we're driving south. We just looked up at those people like wow, they're like kings. But Borba's did really well in the dairy industry as we all know too.

Right, yeah we've worked on a few evaluations through time that were owned by that family and so that's how we happened to have already kind of known about that family. But I think there's other families too and we do have some of those surnames referenced in the historic context statement relating to ethnic groups. So I would definitely encourage you to take a look and I think that if anyone from the Planning Commission, if any commissioners has any additional feedback, I'm sure Diane will share it with us. And we're happy to provide further support.

Well, sure is was a unique area. It's the most density, cow density of any place probably on earth.

Yeah, I don't know if people outside of Ontario realize how significant Ontario is to the dairy industry and to the history of dairy farming in California and really in The United States. All of us in California and then probably more Southern California, we're like, oh, dairy, cheese, Wisconsin, right? We see cows when we drive places and oh look kids, cows. But really this was where it was and I think it's really critical. So I think that's really important to emphasize is just this project and the dairy history documentary and the 2,004 effort that we built upon and the city's prior dairy parlor survey.

I think the city has clearly always understood history and has always invested in trying to identify that history around dairy farming in particular. But I think a lot of people outside of Ontario or the Inland Empire in general don't have that awareness. So that's something that I would hope can be conveyed more in the future.

Well, thank you for all you've done.

Yeah, and it's up to us and that's why we're historic preservation of this city and for us to make sure we maintain that going forward. I appreciate you. Thank you, Wendy.

You're welcome. Thank you.

With that, we can move on to public comments. This is the time for anyone in the audience to speak on any topic that's not on tonight's Planning Commission agenda. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on a non agenda item? Okay. As there is no one who wishes to speak, we'll now consider the consent calendar.

All matters listed on the consent calendar will be enacted by one summary motion in the order listed below. There will be no separate discussion on these items prior to the time the commission votes on them unless a member of the commission or the public requests a specific item be removed from the consent calendar for a separate vote. In that case, the balance of the items on the consent calendar will be voted on in summary motion, and then those items removed for a separate vote will be heard. The consent calendar consists of just minutes approval. And with that, I believe, are there any abstentions for the approval of the minutes?

I'd like to abstain for not being on the attending the meeting last time. Okay.

So we'll take that into consideration. Madam Secretary, could you, oh, I'm sorry. Is there a motion to approve the consent calendar as presented? Okay. We have a motion motion by commissioner Dedemar and a second by commissioner Anderson. Madam secretary, call the roll.

Miss Anderson? Yes. Miss Dedemar? Yes. Mr. Gage?

Yes.

Mr. Lamkin?

Yes.

Mr. Marks?

Yes.

Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

The minutes are approved six to zero.

Thank you. We will now move on to public hearing items. We'll now consider the public hearing items. The procedure for the public hearings will be as follows. We will first hear a staff report on the matter, followed by questions of staff by the Planning Commission. I will then open the hearing for comments from the public. I'll provide the applicant or the representative three minutes to make a presentation. After the applicant or their representative speaks, I will open the meeting to comments by anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on the matter. Each person will be given three minutes for this purpose. After all persons have spoken on the matter, the applicant will be given three minutes for the purpose of rebuttal or clarification if necessary.

Once all persons have spoken, I will close the public portion of the hearing and turn it over to the Planning Commission for discussion and final action. If anyone is aggrieved by the decision of the Commission, an appeal may be filed within ten days to with the Ontario Planning Department. The appeal must be in writing. And now director Ngo, item b.

Thank you, chairman. Item b is environmental assessment and tentative track map review for file number PMTT 24Dash006. A public hearing to consider a tentative track map for condominium purposes subdividing 1.17 acres of land into a single parcel of land located at 855 South Benson Avenue within the HDR 45 high density residential zoning district. The project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to 15,301 existing facilities. I did want to clarify that the staff report and the resolution for this item actually correctly referenced that the project is considered a categorical exemption pursuant to 15,332 infill development.

The application is submitted by Jason Chen and associate planner Ms. Torres will provide the presentation. Thank

Thank you and good evening members of the Planning Commission. The project site is located at 855 South Benton Avenue, which is South of Mission Boulevard and East Of Benton Avenue within the H C R 45 high density residential zoning district. The project site is a rectangular shaped lot with street frontage from Benson Avenue. On 08/25/2020, the Planning Commission approved a development plan for the construction of a 30 unit multifamily residential project, and the site is currently under construction. The site is surrounded by single family residential and an auto repair facility to the north, a vacant parcel to the east, and single family residential uses to the south and to the west.

Here we have existing site photographs. The picture on the left is a view looking east from Benson Avenue, and the image on the right is a view from the southwest corner of Benson Avenue. As we can see, the site is currently under construction, and they are currently framing the buildings. The proposed tentative track map will subdivide the 1.17 acre project sites into a single lot for the purposes of creating 30 condominium units with associated recreation, landscaping, and common common interest amenities. The project meets the development codes minimum one acre project site requirement for the H D R 45 zoning district.

The project will have one point of access from Benton Avenue via a 24 foot wide driveway centrally located along the western property line. Pedestrian pathways are provided along the northern and southern portions of the site providing pedestrian connectivity to the proposed amenities located at the rear of the site. And with that, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution approving file number PMTT-six for the tentative track maps. That concludes that presentation. We are available for any questions. And the applicant is also present. Thank you.

Thank you, miss Torres. Are there any questions of staff by the commissioners? Okay. As there are no questions, I'll now open the public hearing and ask the applicant to please step forward. And please state your name and address for the record.

Yeah. Hi. Good evening, commissioner. So my name is and my address is located at 1810 East 1st Street.

Okay. Do

you agree with the conditions of approval?

Yes.

That's okay. You have anything to add if you can't wish to add anything or

Oh, that's why I believe the planner has already present the project very well. So that's basically a communion project with 30 units. I believe all the zoning requirements and all the density requirement are meet and we don't do any like other than change it to condominium, we don't change anything with the original design.

Are there any questions of the applicant from the commission? Thank you, sir. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

All right. And I will now open the public hearing to the audience. Is there anyone wishing to speak on this item? I don't have any green cards, so we will move on. As there's no one who wishes to speak, I will close the public comment period and turn the matter over to the Planning Commission for discussion and action.

Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gage. Yes. Well, looks like the area is all higher density, so there's not much question if it's appropriate for the area.

And this is to change, be able to make condos in this tentative track map. So with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve the tentative track map file number PMTT24-six subject to the resolution and attached conditions of approval. Thank you. And do I have a second?

Mr. Chair, just for clarification, this has always been condos, it's switching over from rental to now individual ownership, correct? That's my understanding.

That's correct.

So with this, I'd like to second the motion.

Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner Gage and a second by Commissioner Lampkin. Madam secretary, call the roll.

Miss Dedemore? Yes. Mister Gage?

Yes.

Mister Hegman?

Yes.

Mister Lampkin?

Yes.

Mister Marks?

Yes.

Miss Anderson? Yes. Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

It is approved seven to zero.

Thank you. File number PMTT20Four-six. The tentative track map has been approved. With that item C, Director Null.

Thank you Chairman. Item C and D are environmental assessment, development agreement review, tentative parcel map, development plan and conditional use permits for file numbers PDA 20Five-five, PMTT 24Dash001, PDV 24Dash005, PCUP twenty four dash zero zero seven, PCUP24Dash008 and PCUP twenty five dash zero one seven. It's a public hearing to consider a development agreement between Legacy Land Partners LLC and Richland Ontario Developers LLC to establish terms and conditions associated with tentative parcel map 20792. The tentative parcel map proposes to subdivide 35.4 acres of land into nine numbered lots and five letter lots in conjunction with a development plan to facilitate the construction of four commercial buildings totaling 123,247 square feet and three conditional use permits that include a file number PCUP24Dash007 to establish a 104,634 square foot multi story self storage facility, a conditional use permit to establish a gas station and convenience store totaling 9,720 square feet, and another conditional use permit to establish a 5,060 square foot standalone car wash facility. The project site is located on the Southwest corner of Ontario Ranch Road and Mill Creek Avenue.

Within the planning area 5B of the Richhaven specific plan, the environmental impacts of the project were previously reviewed in conjunction with the Richhaven specific plan amendment for which an environmental impact report was adopted by the city council on 06/20/2023. This application these applications are submitted by Richland Ontario Developers LLC and city council action is required for the development agreement and our associate planner miss Torres will provide the presentation.

Thank you and good evening members of the Planning Commission. The project site is located at the Southwest corner of Ontario Ranch Road and to Mill Creek Avenue within planning Area five b regional commercial and open space lawn recreation land use district of the Ridge Haven specific plan. The site is currently vacant and surrounded by vacant lands and residential uses to the North and to the East, a dairy farm to the South, and single family residential and a vacant land to the West. Here we have a closer view of the sites. The tentative parcel map boundaries are outlined in red.

The proposed development plan is shown in teal, and the future residential is in yellow. There is an existing 255 foot wide SEE easement that runs diagonally north to south along western portion of the site as we can see in green. The proposed tentative parcel map will subdivide the project site into nine number lots and five letter lots and will serve as the project's AMAP. The AMAP will facilitate subsequent tentative maps referred to as B maps, will further subdivide the same parcel of land. The future residential lots parcels one, two and nine will be subject to future B maps and their lot size will be required to be consistent with associated product type.

Parcels three and four will be for the existing SE easement. The Richieven specific plan does not establish a minimum lot size requirements for the SE easements and the proposed commercial lots parcels five, six, seven and eight are shown in teal and these lots are required to be of a sufficient size in order to accommodate the proposed use. And overall, the tentative parcel map is consistent with the intent and the requirements of the Richhaven specific plan. There is also a development agreement associated with the project. The initial term for the development agreement is for ten years with a five year option to renew.

The development agreement will outline the requirements for infrastructure improvements such as street, sewer, water, storm drain, and fiber, the payment of development impact fees, the formation of community facilities district,

and

the payment of affordability in lieu fees. The development plan proposes the construction of four commercial buildings totaling a 123,247 square feet on four parcels, which will total 4.9 acres. Parcel 5 located at the northwest corner of the project site will include the construction of a 3,200 square foot fast food restaurant with an approximately 600 square foot patio located directly north of the building. Parcel six located at the Northwest corner of the project site will be developed with a 4,300 square foot convenience store and a gas station that is approximately 5,000 square feet in size. Parcel 7 will be developed with a 5,060 square foot car wash, which will be located

towards the Southeast corner of the project site. And lastly, we have

Thousand Parcel 8 located at the Southwest quadrant, which will be developed with a approximately a 104,000 square foot foot self storage facility. The overall project site has an FAR of point 50, which meets the requirements for the Richhaven specific plan. The project is required to provide a total of 75 spaces and a total of a 112 spaces have been provided. Access to the site will be taken from Ontario Ranch Road and Mill Creek Avenue via a 35 foot wide driveway as shown with the blue arrows, and internal circulation will be provided via twenty twenty six foot wide common drive aisles. Here we have the proposed lighting plan for the project.

Adequate lighting has been provided throughout the project site. And during the plan check process, we will review the lighting plan in more detail to make sure that there is no light spillage onto adjacent properties. The Richmond specific plan requires a minimum 15% landscape coverage for the regional commercial land use. The development plan has provided a total of 21.4% throughout the project site, exceeding the minimum landscaping requirements. The landscaping plan includes a combination of 24 inch, 36 inch and 48 inch box trees as well as a variety of tree shrubs, ground cover and accent trees.

An eight foot wide landscape buffer is proposed along the southern portion of the site to help screen the proposed commercial use with the future residential development to the south and will include the planting of some evergreen trees that can reach mature heights from anywhere from 30 to 80 feet. The project also includes right of way improvements, which, will consist of a 50 foot wide neighborhood edge along Ontario Ranch Road, which includes a parkway, sidewalk, landscaping, and an eight foot wide multipurpose trail. Along Mill Creek Avenue, we do have a 30 foot wide neighborhood edge, which will consist of a parkway, sidewalk, and landscaping. The project includes the construction of a four foot tall vinyl split face rail fence located north of the SE easement and west of the fast fast food restaurant. The self storage building, which is towards the southwest corner of the site, would will be enclosed with a six foot tall split faced macerated block wall with decorative pilasters and a six foot tall tubular steel Viegler gates at each entrance, which are circled in green.

In addition, an eight foot tall split face masonry block wall with decorative pilasters is proposed along the southern boundary of the site to provide separation from the proposed commercial development with the future residential development to the south. Parcel 5 located at the northwest corner of the project site will include the construction of a 3,200 square foot fast food restaurant with a drive through facility. Primary entrance to the building will face north towards Ontario Ranch Road with a secondary entrance will be provided facing east towards the internal drive aisles. The building also includes the construction of an approximately 600 square foot outdoor patio area with seating located directly north of the fast food restaurant, which is shown with the orange color. Customer and employee parking is located directly north of the building and within a portion of the SE easement.

And then we have the dual drive through lanes, which are located towards the northwest corner of the building, which circulate west before turning south and terminating towards the southeast corner of the building. The overall project has a contemporary architectural style. The buildings incorporate similar design features, colors, and materials to complement one another. The proposed fast food restaurant building will primarily consist of vertical and horizontal wood siding, decorative stone veneer, and metal siding. Architectural features include the decorative cornice treatments, the wood canopies for the windows, the storefront windows, and the door and wood trellises for the drive through canopies, which incorporate decorative stone veneer.

Parcel six located at the northeast corner of the project site will be developed with a 4,300 square foot convenience store and a gas station. The gas station and convenience store requires a conditional use permit. The convenience store is shown in pink with its primary entrance facing east towards the adjacent parking area and gas station. Parking for employees will be provided along the north, the east, the south, and the west portions of the building. And the gas station has been designed to be compatible with the surrounding uses, and no alcohol beverages are proposed as part of this UP request.

The proposed convenience store includes stone veneer, large aluminum storefront windows, vertical board and batten siding, a concrete base for the metal columns, and a flat and gable standing seam metal roof. A decorative wood trellis is proposed along the south and the west portion of the building to provide pedestrian connectivity to and from the building. The associated gas station incorporates decorative split faced masonry block columns, a cornice treatment, and a plaster finish consistent with architectural style of the convenience store. The overall canopy has an overall height of 20 feet with a 16 foot interior clear height. Parcel 7 will be developed with a 5,060 square foot car wash, which will be located at the southeast corner of the project site.

The proposed car wash requires a conditional use permit. The dual drive through lanes are located north of the building, then circulate south, and then turn west into the car wash tunnel. The car wash facility has been designed to ensure that the use does not create adverse impacts to the surrounding area. The complementary vacuum stations are proposed directly south of the building. However, to minimize any potential noise impacts, no vacuums are proposed along the southern row of the parking spaces, which is adjacent to the future residential development.

The car wash building features varied massing and roof heights, including a distinctive roof element at the entrance of the car wash tunnel. Exterior building features include a plaster finish, horizontal wood siding, a standing seam metal roof, metal canopies with a solid roof, aluminum storefront systems, and a decorative souvenir base along the north and southern portions of the elevations. A decorative trellis a decorative wood trellis is also proposed along the south side of the building to provide covered parking for the individuals who are use utilizing the complimentary vacuums. The proposed multi story self storage building will total approximately a 100 and a 104,000 square feet and will be located along the southwest quadrant of the project site. The self storage building requires a conditional use permit.

The proposed tenants for the self storage building will be extra space storage. The self storage facility will be gated with pedestrian and vehicular access provided along the north and east sides of the building. A one way drive aisle is proposed along the north side of the building and will circulate around the structure to provide access to the roll up storage units and to the three on-site parking spaces which are located along the north and south side of the building. The project or the self storage building also includes an office space, which is located towards the northeast corner of the building with the adjacent parking area located directly north of the office for employees and customers. Units will primarily be accessed from the interior of the building with limited number of perimeter units accessible via exterior roll up doors.

And overall, the project has been designed to provide adequate internal circulation and to minimize any potential traffic and circulation impacts. The self storage facility incorporates materials and colors that will complement the architectural style of the proposed commercial buildings. The upper portion of the building will feature vertical metal wave panels, a decorative horizontal with stained panel, accent bands, and spandrel glazing to help break up the massing of the building. The middle perimeter is treated with stucco while the base of the building and areas surrounding the roll up doors utilize split face masonry masonry block. Enhanced architectural treatment is provided at the office corners through the incorporation of additional spandrel glazing and decorative stone veneer to create a tower element.

Staff did work with applicants to incorporate additional design elements along the southern elevation that faces the proposed residential development, including adding additional wood stain panels to help break up the massing of the building and to provide additional visual interest. Notices were amount out to the adjacent properties regarding the proposed project. We did receive a total of two public comments in opposition of the project regarding the compatibility of the proposed use with the existing surrounding development. The proposed commercial developments will be located towards the northeast corner of the project site, which is consistent with existing and proposed commercial that is located along Ontario Ranch Road, which is shown in red. Directly south of the proposed commercial will be the future residential, which is shown in yellow, which will be reviewed under a separate application.

The future residential that is part of this project aligns with existing residential uses that are located East of Mill Creek Avenue. The proposed commercial uses that are part of this project are also neighborhood serving uses that will service the service needs of the nearby residents. Staff also worked with the applicant to ensure that the uses were appropriately placed to mitigate any potential impacts to adjacent properties. And with that, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution for file number PDA25Dash005 recommending that the city council approve the development plan and adopt a resolution approving file numbers PMTT24Dash001, Pdev 24 Dash zero zero five, PCUP 24Dash007, PCUP twenty four dash zero zero eight, and PCUP twenty five dash zero seventeen. For the tentative track map, the development plan, and the conditional use permits.

And with that, that concludes staff's presentation. We are available for any questions, and the applicant is also present. Thank you.

Thank you, miss Torres. Very comprehensive. Do we have any questions of staff by the Commission? Mr. Chair. Commissioner Lapkin.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to revisit the infrastructure improvements that are going to be required of the developer. Specifically, wanted to know if there was plans for lighting on the South Curve Line Of Ontario Ranch Road or is it a continuation of a design element that's already happening in that area?

Yes. So the development agreement does require the street improvements which would include the street lights to be constructed as part of the development project.

And so it will be reflected at some point in the plan as we go through the process to ensure that. I noticed on the map for the lighting plan, there was no lighting there.

No. Yeah. So the lighting that is shown is just for the project specific lighting, the infrastructure improvements, the street improvement plans that will be submitted and reviewed by our engineering department and various departments. They will verify that it meets our city street standards and our street lighting standards.

Thank you. That's all I have for now.

Okay, any other questions? Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gage.

Yes, I have a question. You had talked about these are commercial uses that service the neighborhoods. I'm curious how are those determined? Is there marketing survey or are the neighborhoods asked? How do you determine these four uses or what the neighborhoods need?

Yeah, so we work with the applicant. The applicant does their own reconnaissance and their analysis and they work with their real estate teams and such. We do work with them and just collaborate what would be best suited for various projects. And in this particular case, we worked a long time just to try to get the site plan and make sure that the uses were appropriate. It is a tight site and it is a unique shaped property.

So these types of uses in Ontario Ranch would be good complementary to the existing like New Haven marketplace and then soon to open wood development that's directly to the East as well. So the applicant is here to answer any further questions with regards to the market feasibility of those uses.

Okay, thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions of staff before we move on? Okay. As there are no further questions, I'll now open the public hearing and ask the applicant to please step forward.

And please state your name and address for the record.

Good evening Chairman Ritchie, members of the Planning Commission. I'm Craig Crustida with Richland applicant on this project. We're also the owner of the land and I'm happy to answer any questions that you guys may have. Some of the things I did hear though just right off the bat for Commissioner Lampkin, we are building all the infrastructure surrounding the entire 35 acres. So all of Ontario Ranch Road will be widened to its ultimate prior to any occupancy.

Mill Creek Avenue will also be widened to its ultimate too including all parkways, landscaping on both sides of the sidewalk, street lighting, etcetera. The only thing that we're not doing in the first phase is the residential. We do feel it's necessary to bring in the commercial first kind of seed planted with the commercial. So it isn't a surprise for our residents that come in afterwards say, hey I didn't know that there was a commercial that's going to be here. We also want to take extra care in the designing of the residential community to the south that we do have plans for.

We have submitted it, but we decided to hold that until we have really tenant selection done. And so we have a second chance really to look at buffering, sound mitigation, any of that on the residential side if we need to take a step back further from that. And then Commissioner Gage, I think those are good questions on the market feasibility of this. This is a five acre site within several thousand, around 8,000 acres of Vontaro Ranch. It's kind of a desert in terms of these type of uses.

So we have New Haven marketplace, grocery anchored, lots of good restaurants that I go to and Sander Brothers, Banks, Coffee. We have the wood development that's going to have a whole a completely different theme and uses a little bit complementary too. And on this five acres, we really wanted to fill a void that we saw in the market. Gas station, we don't have any gas stations right now where people are filling up locally. We go to other cities to fill up on gas.

Our housing is getting smaller and smaller as you guys know with this day of requirements and everything is getting more dense. So everyone does need storage that's just the fact of it. So our mini storage, we didn't want to have a large low dense or I should say a low rise sprawling facility. So we did want to put it down about an acre and a half and keep it tucked away. We do have the 200 foot transmission line.

So want to have it set back away from the streets, have other architecture and building kind of flanking that with all the landscaping to go in it too. So we feel that there's a strong need for that use in Ontario Ranch instead of driving to nearby cities for that. And then same with the gas station or I should say the car wash, another one of those items where again a lot of our neighborhoods don't have full driveways, a lot of attached units everyone wants to do it, does want to keep a nice car, keep it clean. Right down the street in Eastvale, the Quick Quack is essentially busting at the seams. They're extremely interested in doing getting onto our project site.

We know that there's a lot of interest there. And so we only want to do uses that we know will be occupied quickly and provide great revenue and business for the city and sales tax. And as far as the restaurant goes, we know with the wood development there are more restaurants going in there. We have very strong interest honestly for coffee, a primary coffee tenant in that restaurant building. And so we can't make any announcements until we get into contract with these different groups. But just want to give you a flavor of what we have in store, the reason why we're choosing the uses that we have and hopefully we can answer any questions you guys might have further.

Okay. First question. Do you agree with the conditions of approval that's been presented by staff?

Yes, I

do. Okay. Any other questions of the applicant? Mr. Chair. Commissioner Lampkin.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Are you involved in any way with the development of the Edison use easement area?

Yes.

And can you give us some insights of the discussions you might be having with them right now in terms of how it's going to look and whether they are interested in having some connectivity to the rest of the city by way of paths or nature trails?

Yeah. So the good news is we own the land. So Edison just has an easement over our property. It's about 300 feet wide. So the diagonal corridor that goes north and south or I should say Northeast and Southwest all extends through our properties as it goes even further to the Southwest. Yes, we are planning to do a trail system through development agreement. We'll be doing a landscape trail system and corridor that connects up to Ontario Ranch Road and then it goes to the South to Old Edison where the Brookfield's kind of Kansas Park South is. And then that we pick up on one of our other properties and we continue it further South to where it's going to join up with the extension on the Great Park.

Sorry, will there be any connectivity into this particular project or will it be fenced off?

Yeah. So on the commercial, the actual commercial project will have, just picture it as a fence that goes all the way around it from the west side and the south side. So the trail will come up from the Southeast or Southwest going up to Ontario Ranch Road. That'll join up with the trail system along the south side of Ontario Ranch Road that will draw, essentially bring it right into the commercial center. So if you are on the trail system, you don't have to cross the street to get to the commercial center.

Or go around to Ontario Ranch Road to get to the commercial center. Correct. So along the, I guess the west elevation, you will have some type of pedestrian access. Is that correct?

Or single access? We are

going to

Yeah, we will in the residential. So the residential community will have multiple access points to this joint use trail that will be through that as an easement. And then for getting to the commercial center, a resident, let's say within the development of the South and the West would either follow the trails that go, that basically connect to Ontario Ranch Road or Mill Creek and that brings it in. We just aren't planning on having any trails traverse the Edison easement that would go, let's call it straight into the commercial center that's not immediately adjacent to one of the major roads.

As you continue to develop the Edison use easement, do you know at this time, and maybe you don't, the lighting plan in terms of how it will look and feel or other lighting as possible because of the restrictions.

Yes, we do. Yeah, we have really it's the height restrictions. So we'll still have all the same like CPTED requirements for the lighting requirements at certain levels for pedestrian safety. We'll usually do those with bollards. I think we can go up to about a 14 foot maximum height.

All of our lighting has we've now converted to the extremely detailed and focused LED structures with zero light leakage. But we want to make sure that all of our paths are lit. That's a potential dangerous area if it's not lit. And so that's why on the trail if you look into our plans, it is adjusted to the West which is going be the entire residential edge. And we want a lot of kind of visibility from the residents onto the trail and vice versa. So it doesn't feel like it's out in middle of nowhere. Thank

you. That's all I have Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you, Ms. Casino.

Thank you. Mr. Casino.

Now, I'll now open the public hearing to the audience. I don't have any green cards. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item? Seeing none, we'll now close the public hearing and turn the matter over to the Planning Commission for discussion and action. Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gage. Yes.

Well, it looks like this project's been well thought over working applicant, working with the city. The, you know when I first heard the car wash on the South side where there's going to be residential, I was glad to hear that they made some mitigation measures to put the vacuums north of the perimeter instead of at the perimeter and also put an eight foot block wall and also evergreen trees. Sounds like a lot's gone into making this, doing it the right way. And hearing that the applicant is the one going to develop the residential south of there. So I think I'm Pretty confident that that's not gonna be a problem.

You know, as far as the, you know, there's some challenges with the Edison easement going through. And so there's just so many things that can make sense. But I was glad to hear the marketing feasibility study sounds like that was well thought out too. So I have no problem voting for this project. With that I'll leave it up to the other commissioners to speak.

Thank you Commissioner Gage. Any other comments or

Mr. Chairman.

Commissioner, mean Dedemore,

I'm sorry.

So used to saying that.

Like Mr. Gage, I'm impressed with what the applicant has, the amount of thought that the applicant has put into not just present but future uses of this parcel. And it seems as if all considerations have been duly addressed. And this it should be a very, very nice project. And I find it intriguing that the idea of putting the commercial in first and the residential second so that all the people who might potentially be interested in living there will have chance to really evaluate what's going on before they make their final decision.

So, Mr. Chairman, I would like to move to recommend the City Council approval of the development agreement, file Pda25Dash005 subject to the resolution.

Okay. We have a motion by commissioner Diedemeyer. I second that. Okay. We have a second by commissioner Marks. Madam secretary, call the roll.

Mister Gage?

Yes.

Mister Hagman?

Yes.

Mister Lampkin?

Yes.

Mister Marks?

Yes.

Miss Anderson?

Yes.

Miss Dedemark? Yes. Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

It is recommended to city council seven to zero.

Okay. Thank you very much. So file number PDA25Dash005. The development agreement has been recommended for approval. Now do we have a motion to approve file numbers PMTT20Four-onePmPDEV20Four-fivePCUP20Four-sevenPCUP24. Do we have an emotion? Mr. Chair. Mr. Cali, I'm just reading.

I'm going to echo some of the same words of my fellow commissioners here. I think this project does a very good job of, while this is not a historic site, honoring and acknowledging and kind of nodding to the history of the area. In terms of the architecture and the look and the feel of the idea of farm houses being in that area. So, with that said, I'd like to make a motion that we approve the tentative parcel map development plan and conditional use permits under file numbers PMTT 20 Four-one, PDEV 20 Four-five, PCUP 20Four-seven, PCUP 24 dash 008, and PCUP 25 dash 017 subject to the resolution and attached conditions of approval.

Well done. What he said.

Do we

have a second? Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Lampkin and a second by Commissioner Anderson. Madam Secretary?

Mr. Hagman?

Yes.

Mr. Lampkin? Yes. Mr. Marks?

Yes.

Ms. Anderson? Yes. Ms. Dietemer?

Yes.

Mr. Gage?

Yes.

Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

The items are approved seven to zero.

Okay. So all those items, they are approved. And the first item, like we said has been recommended to city councils. And now item E and F, Director Null.

Thank you Chairman. Items E and F are environmental assessment development agreement review for file numbers PDA 21 dash 009 and tentative track map review for file number PMTT 24 Dash003. A public hearing to consider a development agreement between the city of Ontario and West Haven twenty seven LLC to establish the terms and conditions associated with tentative track map two zero six nine six. The tentative track map for condominium purposes is proposing to subdivide 27.77 acres of land into seven numbered lots and eight lettered lots on property located at the Southwest corner of Riverside Drive and Haven Avenue within planning area one of the West Haven specific plan. The environmental impacts of this project were previously reviewed in conjunction with an addendum to the West Haven environmental impact report certified by the city council on 01/16/2007.

This application introduces no new significant environmental impacts. The applications are submitted by West Haven twenty seven LLC and City Council action is required for development agreement and our associate planner Ms. Aquilo will provide the presentation.

Thank you Mr. Neault. Good evening Chairman and members of the Planning Commission. The project site is located within the West Haven specific plan situated towards the Northeast portion of Ontario Ranch. West Haven specific plan is outlined in orange with the tentative track net project highlighted in red towards the north of the specific plan.

The project site is currently vacant and is bounded by Riverside Drive and a nursery to the North, an SCE easement to the West, vacant land and future residential to the East and residential to the South. The tentative track map will subdivide 27.77 acres of land into seven numbered lots and eight lettered lots to facilitate the future development of residential land uses and backbone infrastructure improvements. A SoCal gas easement bisects the project site diagonally. The lettered lots for the future open space areas have been strategically placed within the easement and therefore no habitable residential structures will be planned there. There will be two primary points of access along Riverside Drive and Haven Avenue.

A secondary access will be provided through the existing residential track to the south from Honeysuckle Avenue. The development agreement outlines the requirements for infrastructure improvements, diff, CFD and associated in lieu fees. All major backbone and interior site improvements will be constructed consistent with the proposed tentative track map and development agreement. The DAB recommended approval of the tentative track map with an eight to zero vote and with that staff recommends the approval that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the development agreement and they approve the tentative track map with conditions set forth. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Aguilo. Are there any questions of staff by the commissioners? Okay. Seeing none. As there are no questions, I'll now open the public hearing and ask the applicant to please step forward. As you know, Neiman

Mister Chairperson, members of the commission, Sage McCleave representing West Haven Twenty Seven and Lewis Management Company at 1156 North Mountain Avenue.

Okay. Do you agree with the conditions approval that were set forth by staff?

Yes.

Okay. You want to add anything on that?

Just appreciate all of Jeanne's hard work that went into the project and we look forward to building more successful communities in the City Of Ontario.

Okay. Any questions of Mr. McCleave by the commission? Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

And now I'll open the public hearing to the audience. I don't have any green cards, and it doesn't look like we have anybody that wishes to speak. So I will close the public hearing and turn the matter over to the Planning Commission for discussion and action. So is there a motion to recommend the city council the approval or denial? Mister chair, this

one looks pretty straightforward. I will start with item e. I like to make a motion that we recommend to council approval of the development agreement filed on the PDA 21 dash zero zero nine subject to resolution.

Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Lampkin. Do we have a second?

And

the first second by Commissioner Hagman. Well done. It took Commissioner Marks like two times, I think. Well done. All right. We have a motion by commissioner Lampkin and a second by commissioner Hagman. Madam secretary, call the roll.

Mister Lampkin?

Yes.

Mister Marks?

Yes.

Miss Anderson? Yes. Miss Dedemar? Yes. Mister Gage?

Yes.

Mister Hagman?

Yes.

Chairperson Richey?

Yes.

It is recommended to city council seven to zero.

Alright. Thank you. PDA21Dash009. The development agreement has been recommended. And now is there a motion to approve or deny?

Mister chairman.

Yes. Commissioner

I move to approve the tentative track map file number PMTT24Dash005 subject to the resolutions and conditions of approval. Okay.

You. Mister chair, there's gonna be a correction on the numbers. Says 005 is 003. Is that correct?

003. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for the clarification. So we have a motion by commissioner Diedemeyer. Do we okay. And second by commissioner Anderson. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

Mister Marks?

Yes.

Miss Anderson? Yes. Miss Diedemeyer? Yes. Mr. Gage?

Yes.

Mr. Hegmann?

Yes. Mr. Lampkin?

Yes. Chairman Ritchie? Yes. It is approved seven to zero.

Very well. So file number PMTT 20 four-three, the tentative track map has been approved. And now, Director Ngo, Item G. Thank you, Chairman.

This next and final item is actually pretty exciting. It's our first specific plan that will be presented to the planning commission and then hopefully the city council for the West Side Of The Ontario Ranch area. Probably it should be a catalyst for the development on the West Side Of The Ontario Ranch as we have that presentation on the historic preservation and the milk barns. There will be some mitigation measures associated with this particular project. So with that, item g is environmental assessment and specific plan review for file number PSP24Dash002.

A public hearing to consider certification of the focused environmental impact report including the adoption of a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and a statement of overriding considerations in conjunction with the Center Park specific plan to establish the land use districts, development standards, guidelines and infrastructure improvements for the potential development of up to 4,293 residential dwelling units, 115,809 square feet of retail land uses, 135,110 square feet of office uses, and 68 acres of open spacenon recreational uses on approximately two fifty eight acres of land generally bounded by the Southern California Edison easement roughly 500 feet North of Ontario Ranch Road, Walker Avenue to the East, Campus Avenue to the West, and the southern boundary roughly 1,300 feet north of Eucalyptus Avenue. This application is submitted by RCCD Incorporated. City Council action is required and our assistant planner, Mr. Torres will provide the presentation.

Good evening members of commission. Good evening everyone. As mentioned the project is located along the western portion of Ontario Ranch. It is bounded by Campus Avenue to the West, Walker Avenue to the East, approximately 1,300 feet from Eucalyptus Avenue to the South. And the Southern California Edison easement 500 feet north of Ontario Ranch Road.

This rectangular shaped project site is shown here on the vicinity map, close to on the western portion of Ontario Ranch. The project site is generally undeveloped and vacant with existing agricultural operations throughout such as dairy farms, nurseries, rural residential housing, farm buildings and ancillary facilities. The proposed, the proposal of this project is consisted of residential and mixed use development on approximately 258 acres of land. The maximum build out that is proposed is up to 4,293 dwelling units. Approximately 115,000 square feet of retail, and 135,000 approximately square feet of office space.

Approximately 68 acres of land will be dedicated for recreational and non recreational open space for this project. The project will also provide in support of infrastructure improvements such as roads, trails, parks, utilities and landscaping. This is the Ontario plan 2,050 land use plan illustrating the current land uses, land uses designated for the project area. As mentioned, the project is approximately two fifty eight acres of land. Involved with this project is the cancellation of William Act contracts, Williamson Act contracts, my apologies.

The project site is in conformance with the land uses of the Ontario Plan 2050. Along with this project, cultural and biological resources were analyzed in a draft focused environmental impact report. The proposed land uses are depicted here in color. The orange is designated for the medium density residential land use. The purple is depicting the mixed use land use.

And the green portion of the project site would be for the open space parkland. The project does not propose any land use designation changes to the land use plan of the TOP and will be in conformance with the Ontario plan 2,050 land use designations as mentioned earlier. The land use, I'm excuse me, the Center Park land use map consists of 22 planning areas that will accommodate for residential mixed use retail and office development and parkland open space. The project establishes a density of up to 22 dwelling units per the acre for medium density residential and a density of 35 dwelling units per the acre for the mixed use residential planning areas. These proposed densities will be below the maximum density allowed in the Ontario plan 2,050.

A variety of residential products types are proposed for the project. The products are designed and are designed from attached and detached conventional single family conventional products, Courtyard Green Court and Row Towns that range from floor plans to home sizes for all potential home buyers. The commercial and mixed use buildings for Center Park will focus on the orientation around primary intersections and the Grand Park, which is located south of the project site. Strong design guidelines will address the scale, massing and compatibility with the surrounding residential areas creating opportunities for shopping, for dining and for employment. A variety of parks and facilities will be incorporated integrated for the project site through the residential areas and anchored by a segment of the city's Grand Park located to the south of the project site.

These are the architectural influences proposed for the project. The Center Park specific plan architectural styles range from Spanish, modern, traditional, transitional, architectural influences just to name a few. These architectural styles will be utilized to complement the various building types and detached single family residential dwellings, attached residential dwellings, clusters, road towns, multi family buildings and the mixed use developments. The circulation plan is designed with the street system that concentrates on vehicle and pedestrian accessibility throughout the project site. The project organizes residential, office, retail uses around the grid pattern of streets with a focal point of the 400 acre regional grand park located to the south of the project site.

Street traffic signals, neighborhood parks, traffic calming devices will be featured at various locations throughout the project site. The project will implement a pedestrian circulation system that provides safe and convenient connectivity among the residential neighborhoods of the Center Park and the Grand Park. At the completion of the project's initial study, staff determined that a focus environmental impact report was required in evaluating potential environmental impacts associated with historical, cultural and biological resources. A statement of overriding consideration was included for the potential impacts that are unavoidable and could not be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant. Staff also prepared a sequel one five one eight three exemption analysis documenting that the proposed project supports and is consistent with the Ontario plan 2050.

The analysis included all environmental topic area except for biological and historical cultural resources. The analysis determined that there were no new significant impacts associated with the project. All necessary notices were sent out to the property owners located 600 feet from the project site. To conclude, the proposed land use of Center Park will be in conformance with the TOP 2,050. The proposed project is consistent with the principles goals and policies contained within the vision, governance, policy, plan and the city's council priority components of the Ontario Plan 2050.

Staff believes that the benefit of the proposed project outweigh the potential impacts associated with the project. Therefore staff is recommending the planning commission to adopt a resolution for file number PSP24Dash002 recommending that the to the city council to adopt and certify the Center Park specific plan EIR including the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and statement of overriding considerations. Also adopt a resolution, a resolution for file number PSP24Dash002 recommending that to the city council to approve the Center Park specific plan file number PSP24002. That concludes my presentation. Myself and the applicant are available for any questions.

Thank you.

Thank you sir. So are there any questions of staff by the commissioners?

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Commissioner Lemkin.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My question for the staff is how tall do you foresee buildings being or how many floors do you potentially see buildings able to rise to in the retail commercial areas?

The specific plan does propose for the mixed use commercial retail office to be up to 58 feet in height.

58 feet, so two or two and a half stories or three stories?

Well the maximum that's being proposed on the document of this plan is for five story multi families that would include for mixed use products. So it can be a variety of different type of uses But the height would be restricted to 58 feet in height. And that would include the 58 feet, my apologies, would include the tower elements to these buildings. So essentially the maximum for the height is proposed at a 48 foot height restriction.

48 foot height restriction with additional 10 feet for tower elements.

Correct.

Okay, thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? Commissioner Gage. Mr. Chairman, thank you.

Reading that it says including mitigation monitoring. Can you give an example of what mitigation is gonna be monitored and how that works?

Yeah, I can answer that. So for any environmental impact report or a mitigated negative declaration, mitigation measures are required. An example of that would be such as like the burrowing owl. So one of the mitigation measures within the biological section of the environmental impact report requires that the applicant prior to land disturbing activities do a pre construction biological survey which would include the burrowing owls. And if the survey finds that there are burrowing owls there, then there would be some monitoring of biologists that are required and that we would have to report that to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Okay, and secondly, second question, you talked about it didn't include cultural resources and two slides back, I believe. Can you address that, what that means?

So this project is kind of unique when it came to the sequel approach. So it has two approaches. One that Mr. Torres had mentioned is the consistency, the fifteen thousand one eighty three which determines that the proposed project as proposed is consistent with the TOP, our general plan did a 2050 that did a supplemental environmental impact report back in 2022. And with the adoption of the mitigation measures that will be part of this project, they would have to meet those mitigation measures.

It is consistent with those sections. The two sections that Mr. Torres mentioned that couldn't find compliance with the supplemental environmental impact report for the TOP general plan 2050 were the biological and the cultural resources. So, we had to do a focused environmental impact report, address any impacts to the biological components of it as well as the cultural and historical components of that. So, with regards to the historic component, losses of historic structures potentially, one of the mitigation measures that is part of this project is a barn that will be potentially relocated to our Grand Park and will be implemented and have some type of like a barn reuse within our Ontario Ranch Grand Park.

Now when you're talking about a cultural resource like that being relocated, is that something that the Planning Commission, you know, slash historic preservation commission, we'll see or be briefed on or get to vote on or make input on?

Yes. So when the actual project comes forward and when they want to actually move forward, will be a certificate of appropriateness that needs to be processed and it will be brought before the historic preservation commission as well as the planning commission with the relocation of this barn and the adaptive reuse of that barn to use within our Grand Park.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you. Any other questions of staff? Nope, okay, well now as there are no further questions, I'll now open the public hearing and ask the applicant to please step forward.

Good evening, chairman, commissioners. My name is Jason Lee with RCCD. I'm the applicant for the project, 8101 Kaiser Avenue, Anaheim Hills. I'd just like to start off by saying I really appreciate all of staff's work and the presentation. I think they did a great job answering our questions. This is a very large project in the city of Ontario and Ontario Ranch. And it is the first project on the West Side for residential. So we're very excited to present this one to you and sort of seed the area for the vision of what's happening on the West Side. I think that's part of the key to this project is that it is consistent with the vision. This project, the land uses are shown are consistent with what the City Planning Commission and City Council had approved as part of their general plan.

We're following with that. It does build a large portion of the park. It constructs a large portion of Edison Avenue which will help a lot with the transition of all the existing traffic currently on the East Side Of Ontario Ranch to Euclid Avenue. So we're excited about getting this project done. It's a big undertaking for us. I will hopefully be in front of you again in a month or two with the tentative maps for the first phase as we start to move this project forward. I did want to answer a couple of your questions. I know you might have had on Commissioner Gage on your question about the cultural resources and what was up on the screen there. The CEQA and the environmental analysis was done sort of in two pieces. So we did an EIR, a focused EIR on the bio and the cultural historical component, which really focused on those areas.

And we did a fifteen thousand one eighty three for all the other items, traffic, noise, all the other items. Technical reports were done for both, but it was really was really little bit misleading when it said no culture was done. It was no culture was done within the fifteen-one hundred eighty three because it was done in the EIR was the reason why we focused on that. Chairman Ricci, it was an interesting note when we had the presentation from Wendy and Diane, and you asked the question about potential relocation of buildings and the dairy video. We were actually the ones that created that video and worked with the staff to do that video as part of our mitigation.

I saw you on the video.

Yeah. I'm actually in that video.

I was watching it.

And interestingly enough, one of the 25 buildings that they've identified to be relocated is one of the main buildings in this project. So we've been working with Diane and with Wendy on relocating that milking barn as it is, literally picking it up, preserving it, moving it to the city's first phase of the Grand Park which is just East of Archibald. We're sort of determining where that location is gonna be. But that's kind of one of our mitigations and one of the examples in the mitigation monitoring measures that we had. So I think I answered everything that you had at staff, but I'm here to answer any other questions you may have for me.

Thank you. And just one question from me is do you agree with the conditions of approval, of course?

Yes, do. Thank you very All right.

Any other questions of the applicant, of Mr. Lee? Yes, Mr. Chair. Commissioner Lampkin.

We're looking at pictures of architectural influences for both residential and office and retail. Can you tell us a little bit more about your vision for any architectural influences, the types of materials that you think would be appropriate for a project like this and what is kind of inspiring you to utilize these different materials?

Yeah, think most important, the way to describe this project,

this is

almost 300 acres of project and 60 acres of it is the park. So almost 200 acres of residential and mixed use. And across those 200 acres we've got 4,000 units which is a lot. There are currently 4,000 units in Ontario Ranch East built. So I mean that's how much is we're looking at on this project.

When we look at it that massing, what we're trying to do is create as much of a menu as possible to have as many different types. What we don't want to have when we're designing a project like this or designing a specific plan like this is have just a few options where everything starts to look the same. And I think that's why we've created the list and the variety of projects here. Some of these projects are actually built in Ontario already. So we've pulled from a project that's already in Ontario because that's good examples of what's there.

But there's also new product out there, new product, new elevations that are being built in adjacent cities that we've included in this package. I think the blend of the quote unquote traditional architectural elevations like Spanish and craftsman and things like that are included. But we've also got the transitional projects where you've got more of the modern look with more glass, more of the flat roofs, kind of the newer style, the different types of materials being used, the metal. And I think those are kind of the product types that we're looking at using in the mixed use area. I think they're more suited there, but they're also not restricted.

Mean if the residential units that are in the residential component, the medium density area, with that product type can be used in that area as well.

Good? He's good. Question? Mr. Gage.

Did you have any consideration for the part of it that's adjacent to the Great Park as far as building height and the views from the park of the mountain, of our beautiful mountains that have been out gorgeously the last week As after the far as view from the park and height of the buildings adjacent.

We have. And we're in a little bit of an unusual situation here because what we have in front of you is, I'm sorry the conversation, is consistent with today's general plan. There is also a general plan amendment being proposed by staff and working through the process where we're actually adjusting the park and actually coming to you I think over the next few months through you and then through city council that adjusts a portion of this area where we actually pushed the park north and kind of changed the area that was mixed use and really encouraged that extension of the park up into the commercial mixed use area. So I think that's, in our minds, part of the discussions we had with staff during the creation of the future general plan amendment will allow for the reduction of some of those larger mixed use products against the main portion of the park and push that park a little bit further north, creating a focal point there, and push those mixed use uses pretty much to the corner, the intersection, which is where we really feel Grove And Ontario Ranch Road is gonna be the new main.

It's gonna be the new Arch Vault on Ontario Ranch Road. It's gonna be a major intersection for the West Side. And so we really felt like focusing the mixed use uses, whether it be commercial or mixed use residential in that corner would be ideal. And I think that's really why we felt like, yes, it's not the ideal the way it has shown today. But with the new general plan amendment and then ultimately we'd be coming right in with the new specific plan amendment to match that general plan amendment. We'll make that a lot more cleaner look along that edge. So yeah, as it is today, yeah, we wouldn't design it the way it is and that's why we had input with staff about kind of the new upcoming general plan amendment.

Yeah, Okay, thank you.

Yeah, that's clear. That's a good point. It was something that we were focused on.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions? Okay, thank you Mr. Lee.

Thank you.

And with that, I'll now open the public hearing to the audience. I don't have any green cards and it doesn't look like we have anybody in the audience. So I will close the public comment period and turn the matter over to the Planning Commission for discussion and action. Mister chair. Commissioner Lampkin.

This week after the rain, I think we were all reminded of what makes our city truly special in terms of the visuals, the views. One of the things that I noted once again for another year, we've had mountain ranges that were visible from three sides of our city, two of which were snow capped. Absolutely beautiful. It's encouraging to know that the applicant is taking that into consideration and had an opportunity to see that as we get ready to vote on this particular project. I also like the idea of pushing the park north.

One of the visions that I have is many cities take pride in having beachfront properties, commercial areas that are beachfront. They're iconic in that way. Some cities we think about are like Santa Monica, Venice Beach. Some of them are modern cities like Long Beach, the city of Long Beach being beachfront. And it's nice to know that you're thinking about having parkfront properties.

And one of the reasons why I was asking about the heights of the buildings and specifically the architectural, the inspiration for some of these projects, I forgot what the term was that was used, the architectural influences is because I see in a lot of these influences a lot of glass. And that means that you're actually thinking about, with the exception of the merge, think that's in Eastville so we're not going to count that one. But I think you're truly thinking about how people can truly enjoy the space, whether they're at home or they're at work or they're shopping or they're playing. And I think that is going to be what is going to make this area iconic. So I really appreciate that.

So with that said, I'd like to make a motion that we recommend the Council approval of the focused EIR, including a mitigation monitoring and reporting program and a statement of overriding considerations and the specific plan under file number PSP 20 four-two subject to the resolutions and conditions of approval.

Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Lapien. Do we have a second?

I'll second.

Second by Commissioner Cage. Madam secretary, call the roll.

Miss Anderson? Yes. Miss Diedemaher? Yes. Mister Gage?

Yes.

Mister Hegman?

Yes.

Mister Lampkin?

Yes.

Mister Marks?

Yes.

Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

It is recommended to City Council seven to zero.

Very good.

File number PSPA, I'm sorry, PSP 20 four-two. The specific plan has been recommended. And that's it. Thank you very much, everyone. Matters from the Planning and Historic Preservation Commission hold business.

We didn't Historic Committee didn't meet.

Did not meet. Okay. New business. Is there any commissioners that have any other new business or comments they'd like to make? Comment, mister Scherer. Sure.

Last week I had the, I guess the, I would say fortunate opportunity to join many Ontario residents in the celebration of life for our local florist out of Ralph's in South Ontario. That went by the name of Ina. She passed away, unfortunately, in January. And I was truly, truly inspired by the number of Ontario residents that came out to join all of those employees from Ralph's. It truly felt like Ina was a pillar in our community.

And it's something that I had rarely seen ever at a service or a going home ceremony for one of our, not only residents, but someone who simply just worked in the city of Ontario. She was a florist and as I noted with the family, the residents, all the Rouse employees, as a florist, flowers do many things for us. It's an opportunity for us to say we're sorry, it's an opportunity to say I love you, it's also an opportunity for us to say goodbye and it also fills voids where words cannot express how we truly feel. And so, Enoch brought that kind of joy to a lot of spaces where just words weren't enough to create a sense of emotion and a sense of feel. So, I just want to just make a comment that to thank all those residents that attended that service.

Also to acknowledge the absence that we're feeling in South Ontario, now that Ina is no longer with us here on earth.

Thank you Commissioner Lamkin. Any other commissioners have any other comments?

I have a one please. I'm sorry that everyone's left the chamber.

Because They're watching on TV. Just say,

Henry, listen to this.

I would like to encourage everyone to visit the current exhibit at the Chaffee Community Museum of Art. It is the five members of the Spensen family, including John Edward Spensen, who many of you may know was a particular fan of George Shaffey, the founder of Ontario. John sculpted the bronze that's in front of Upland City Hall and the portrait bust that is in front of Ontario City Hall. And the current exhibit is a chance to see work by John Edward Svensson, his son John Junior, and John Junior's wife Sharon, and his son David, and David's wife, Kuzumi, five different artists. The entire museum, every single gallery is filled with a wonderful, wonderful exhibit that everyone should come see.

Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman? Sure. Commissioner Gage.

Yes. I wanted to shout out three great alumni to our three great high schools. Now we know about Anthony Munoz, Hall of Famer, Cincinnati Bengals, USC from Ontario and Chaffey High School. Just last month, I don't know if you've heard of a guy named Bobby Wagner. He just got the Man of the year.

Philanthropist of the Year from the NFL, which is a very, Walter Payton Award, which is a very prestigious award for what he's done in his community. He's, it shows what a great person he is. And he's from Ontario High School, and he also went to the Super Bowl twice as a, as a captain of the defense of the Seattle Seahawks. So you know that's from on Colony High School. And then we have next month, an Ontario high school alum, Victor Glover, who's gonna be a pilot of the Artemis that's going to go around the moon and scheduled to launch in March next month.

So here we have three great alumni's from our three different schools. Great individuals, Anthony Munoz, have a park named after already and these other two guys, I hope we do something real special for them because they're they're really a great example of what Ontario high schools, Colony Ontario and Chaffee put out. Yay Ontario. All right.

Okay, so and if there's no other comments, are there any nominations for special recognition? Nope? Oh, yes. Nominations.

I wanna I wanna, after going to El Belcon restaurant, I thought that came out really nice and I'd I'd like to nominate it. I mean it's it's a upscale tapas bar in a historic property. The windows turned out great, there's views of the mountains we talked about and and the city and and even Yangtze restaurant sign on on their wall. And it really turned out nice and I think we ought to applaud that.

Yeah, I agree.

And I

encourage everybody to go there.

Of course, Mr. Chairman, you agree.

I agree.

I know this is not an agenda item, so it's not a voting issue, but I'm going to just say absolutely agree. If you have not been there, please attend and I also feel like there should be some type of nomination for recognition. That balcony, it at every angle captures everything that we wanted residents to see about our city in every way. It's framed perfectly off of that balcony. It's beautiful.

Yeah, I can't wait till the summer concerts in the park being able to have an observation deck and hear the music. I know there was challenges with the windows and we saw the treatments they did on the inside and trying to get that so that everything worked out perfectly. It was really nice place. Yeah, I'd like to see that recognized The as

food was great and the service was outstanding. They have some good servers there too.

Yeah, very good. So we'll see about that nomination. All right, directors report monthly activity report. Director Ngo.

Thank you, chairman. The copy of the monthly activity report has been provided in the agenda. That's it.

All

right. Thank you, director Ngo. Thank you, planning staff and commissioners. The meeting, I guess that's it. We're adjourned. Thank