Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Mike? I pushed the button. Oh, there it goes. Good evening. It's now 06:30PM. Welcome to the 08/26/2025 meeting of the Ontario Planning and Historic Preservation Commission. Agendas for the meeting are in the back of the chambers and contain the procedures we will follow tonight. Please turn off all electronic communication devices or put them on a non audible mode. Please do not engage in private conversations during the meeting. If you wish to speak during public comment or on a particular matter, please fill out a green card and submit it to the secretary at the end of the dais. Thank you for your cooperation. Madam secretary, please call the roll.

Miss Anderson is absent. Miss Diedemire? Present. Mr. Gage? Here. Mr. Lampkin?

Present.

Mr. Marks?

Present.

Chairman Ritchie?

Present. Okay, thank you very much. And now for the Pledge of Allegiance, please join us and that which will be led by commissioner Gage.

Please join me

in a pledge to our flag.

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.

Thank you. Thank you Commissioner Gage. Announcements, agenda items. Director Ngoor, are there any changes to tonight's agenda?

Yes, I'd like to make an announcement for item C. An errata sheet has been provided to the Planning Commission and copies provided to the public to revise the resolution for this project on page 50 of the agenda packet paragraphs six and seven. And with that I'll turn it back to the chairman.

Thank you. Commissioner items do any commissioners have a general announcement not related to an item on the agenda? Okay. Seeing as there are none this is the time for anyone in the audience. We'll move on to public comments sorry.

This is the time for anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on any topic that is not on tonight's Planning Commission agenda. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on a non agenda item? Okay, seeing none we will now consider the consent calendar. All matters under the consent calendar will be enacted by one summary motion in 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.

Chairman, after I recuse myself.

Okay.

Commissioner Marks is going to recuse himself because he was not present for the last meeting and the consent calendar consists mostly it's just the minutes approval. So is there a motion to adopt the consent?

Mr. Chairman.

Commissioner Didemara.

I move adoption of the consent calendar as presented.

And I'm going to second. Okay.

We have a motion by Commissioner Dietermeier and a second by Commissioner Lamkin. Madam Secretary please call the roll.

Ms. Dietermeier. Yes. Mr. Gage?

Yes.

Mr. Lampkin?

Yes.

Mr. Marks Recused and Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

They are approved four to zero.

Thank you. All right. We will now hear and consider the public hearing items. The procedure for the public hearing is as follows. We will first hear a staff report on the matter followed by questions of the staff by the Planning Commission.

I will then open the hearing for comments from the public. I'll provide the applicant or their representative three minutes to make a presentation. After the applicant 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 purposes 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. Anyone is agreed by the decision of the Planning Commission, an appeal may be filed within ten days at the Ontario Planning Department. The appeal must be in writing. Item B, Director Null.

Thank you Chairman. Item B is environmental assessment, tentative track map and development plan review for file numbers PMTT 21Dash019 and PDV twenty one dash zero two two. It's an attractive track map and development plan to subdivide point four eight five acres of land into one lot for condominium purposes and construct 10 residential condominium units located at 962 East 6th Street 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 section fifteen three three two infill development. The applications were submitted by Sean G and our associate planner, Mr.

Morales will provide the presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Ngo. Good evening planning commissioners. So the project site on a regional scale is located just North of Interstate 10 Freeway. The major cost streets located it's West of East of one North Campus and West of North Grove and it's directly on 6th Street.

The project in itself is a single family resident that is abutted by other single family and multifamily residents. The project site is also looking near the central lot and is currently being used as a single family residence. The first portion of this project proposes a tenant track map for condominium purposes. The tenant track map will facilitate the construction of 10 dwelling units. The applicant is proposing $10 multiple dwelling units on a less than half acre lot.

It is zoned high density residential 45. The proposed development will post 10 units each were about one, two bedrooms and two or three bathrooms. The project is just South of 6th Street where its main point access will be directly from 6th Street. All 10 units space essential drive lane which will be used for egress and egress and also for emergency access. The project will also provide proposed amenities to the South and as well as this triangle portion of the lot Southeast of the project.

There's currently a sewer easement, a 15 foot easement to the South of the project as well. The applicant is proposing a Spanish colonial architecture design. Common elements for it will be the clay tile, clay tile, gable roofs with, let me see if I can zoom in, wooden paragolas to provide shade and relief, decorative iron works for the balcony, as well as recessed windows, shutters and under lintels for more technical elements. The second building would also propose the same, but they were also just half single garage entries. These elevations show the proposed view from 6th Street and the freeway view.

The building is overall two and a half stories tall and will have a single window element and a shed roof design. The freeway portion will also show, it shows the decorative iron works and decorative paragola. This elevation shows the rear elevations of the project site shown as with the articulation of the roof, as well as the recess windows and the shed roof design. The rear Western building shows the same articulation, but with pop outs. This is a typical floor plan for the two room dwelling unit.

It shows that the 1st Floor will be mainly for the garage use. 2nd Floor will be for the common living space. And then the 3rd Floor will be where the residents and their bedrooms will be, have co habitat. Unit B shows the single garage point in the single room design, same as the unit A style. The applicant is proposing a landscape plan showing that the perimeter of project site will be landscape with decorative scrubbing, draw tolerant trees and draw tolerant ground cover.

It is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission approved file numbers PEMTT 21,019 and the development plan P DEF 21,022. That ends staff's report and I'm available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Morales. Are there any questions of the staff by the commissioners? Commissioner Gage.

Yes, I had a question about the land to the rear, that triangle space. Is there an idea what that would be used for?

Yeah, so because of the easement setting and the limitations of the project site that will be used for common open space. So as you can see, there will be a decorative seating and trees provide for relief for the residents to use as for them as part of the common open space requirement.

Okay. It looks to be really, is that just a narrow path that leads to it there at the, yeah.

Because of the easement, there is 15 feet available for residents to enter and exit the site as well. They can also use this six foot trail to enter that site.

And then what kind of lighting would there be there for nighttime?

So as part of the conditions of approval, the applicant is required to submit a photometric plan. So we will work with the applicant during the plan check process and work on lighting to make sure that there's no overspill on neighboring properties. And

yes. Yeah, we can work with the applicant as well as the police department just to make sure that it meets our development standards. I think it's probably about a foot candle within walking paths to make sure that there's a lighting for safety reasons.

Okay. And second question, the property east of it, is that single family residence?

It's a two plex design project, multifamily.

Oh, there's not a single family resident.

Single family is to the west.

To the west of it, okay. And have they been notified of the project?

Yes.

Okay, any answer or response from them?

As of this meeting we haven't received any correspondence from the public.

Okay, thank you.

Are there any other questions of staff?

Thank you Mr. Chair. Has any discussion been had with the developer regarding a security plan for the property to the rear, the triangular property that will be used for open space? I know we talked about lighting but has any discussion been had about maybe adding a call box?

No requirements for a call box. That wouldn't be part of our development code requirements.

And then for further clarification regarding the lighting, would this be potentially lighting that is located in the center and then I guess illuminating the entire property or is this is it being proposed that there will be like lighting on the sides? So within the if

you go back to the

Or on the perimeter, I'm sorry, lighting on the perimeter.

So there'll be coach lighting on the actual building themselves. But then along the trails and such, there will be a requirement for lighting, maybe like lighter bollards or other pedestrian friendly lighting that won't spill over onto the adjacent residential properties.

Okay. And then we get do we get clarification on how much space is between the well, along the perimeter where the path is. Did we get clarification on how much space is between those two areas?

15 feet. That's the width of the easement, the utility easement.

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Chairman? Commissioner Gates, go ahead. Go ahead, I'm sorry.

Another question?

Go ahead.

Yes. Is there parking on 6th Street allowed?

Parking on 6th Street is available for the project site but not immediately in the front due to ingress and ingress access.

Yes, there's public parking allowed on 6th Street.

There is public parking allowed of course not in front of driveways.

Yes, not in front of driveways but along 6th Street.

Yes. Okay. And then is there any parking management plan to assure because it looks like we're asked to approve just two cars per unit all in garages. Is there a management plan to manage the garages so they don't get filled up and aren't or number one, so they don't get filled up and can't be used for cars. And number two, any management plan to limit residents to a number of cars, say one or two, because of the limited spaces available?

So this one met the development code standards of having two parking spaces and then additionally the four guest parking spaces. So this one actually meets our development code. But in the conditions of approval, there is a requirement for CCNRs which will require the parking management plan for this project.

Okay, thank you.

Okay,

thank you. Are there any other questions of staff?

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

Commissioner Diedemeyer.

I'm looking now at the elevations and the color palette that's being offered for this development. It's rather bland by Ontario standards. Has there been any discussion with the applicant on doing a little more with the color palette on on the exterior.

So the applicant has been notified and he actually has ready for you a attachment for this planning commission to view to show that he's willing to work with us on color blocking. He's available for when you call him up to the dais or at the podium.

Thank you.

Okay. And if there are no further questions of staff, I'll now close, I'm sorry. We'll now open the public hearing and I ask the applicant to please step forward. Please state your name and address for the record.

My name is Xiang and this project manager and also the designer.

Hold on just a second. Let me get the microphone working here. Okay. Go ahead.

Okay. My name is Xiang Ji and I'm the project designer and also this project manager. So, I'll charge this project.

One question, do you agree with the conditions of approval contained in the staff report?

Yes.

Okay. So do you have anything to add if you want to make a statement?

Yes, I did. I had working under this elevation and division and so I bring here and share it if you want. I can. Sure.

Okay. Give it to the secretary and she'll distribute.

Well, the elevation is also being the revised elevation concept provided to the Planning Commission. I do wanna mention that the conditions of approval also has a condition that the applicant will work with staff for the final plan check plans for the construction plan. So the final details, whatever the commission is requesting we can continue to work with the applicant to make sure that provide some of these revisions as well. Okay.

Would you like to add anything else, sir?

I would like to continue to work with the staff there for the future revision plan.

Okay. Do any commissioners have any questions of the applicant? Commissioner Lemkin.

First let me acknowledge your efforts to work in a very difficult space. I understand that the space is very limited. This is a very oddly shaped property. So I can certainly appreciate your effort to try to work within the confines of this space without the ability to expand. I guess my only question is, well first, also thank you for the revisions with the paint palette. Why are we not continuing the same palette on the rear side of the building?

The rear side, I feel it's kind of covered with the fence, the property fence. So I don't think it's not necessary. It's with front.

You look at the East Building rearview, the East Building rearview, unlike the West Building rearview or the the frontages, the West Building front view or any other front views, this East Building rear view does not have the same color palette as the rest of the building where it rises to the 2nd Floor. However, it was done on the West Building.

Actually the East Building, the rear view, the 2nd Floor and the way is two windows panel. That's colors to match with West Building.

It's a recessed window.

Yeah. It's a window. The recessed actually is the color panel. It's just

a very narrow, isn't it?

Yeah. It's very difficult to see. So, what you're saying is you're going to go with that darker color in the recessed window areas? Correct. Okay. Yeah. It looks like it's covered by So it's very difficult to see. Thank you for that clarification. That's the only question I have.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions of the applicant from staff, I mean from commissioners? And thank you very much for providing this. It helps us a lot. I appreciate it. Thank you. I will now open the public hearing to the audience. And I don't have any green cards but does anyone wish to speak on this project? Okay.

Please state your name and address for the record.

Good evening commission. My name is Marta McBride. I live at 421 North Fern Avenue in Ontario. And my question is kind of a and it's gonna be an ongoing issue with me moving forward. My background is in affordable housing.

And when we have new developments, I had a conversation previously with Mr. Lamkin regarding the city's efforts to increase the number of affordable housing units in the city and to take every opportunity possible to do some kind of negotiation with developers to have inclusionary units in every development so that there would be mixed income units. So I don't know what the price point for these units is, but my question would be consideration in this development and will there be consideration in future developments to have affordable units as part of the agreement with the developer?

Thank you. We're not going to answer questions but we are open to hearing your statement. So we appreciate you coming forward and thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on this project or agenda item?

I'm sorry. With your permission, I'd like to see if we can get staff to maybe provide some clarification on the process and some concessions that were made.

Well, on this particular agenda item because we do have other projects where we are addressing that issue later on the agenda. But mister Noel, is there some way we can get staff to kind of address the questions from miss McBride?

Yes. There's two there's two avenues, I guess, that would allow for affordable housing. The first one is if a project requests for like a state density bonus law to increase the density, then they would provide a certain amount of affordable units as required by the law to then get some waivers and concessions for the project. And this project didn't request any of those state density bonus allotments. The other one is an inclusionary housing ordinance.

The City Of Ontario doesn't have that in place right now and that would be a policy decision that would be provided direction from the city council. So, this time, we don't have an inclusionary housing ordinance. So, there isn't a requirement that is required of applicants for housing projects to provide affordable housing at this time.

Thank you Mr.

Chair for allowing

Okay. That So as there is no one else wishing to speak, I will close the public comment period and turn the matter over to the Planning Commission for discussion and action. Mr. Chair. Commissioner Lampkin.

I just want to just reiterate my earlier comments to the applicant about how difficult this project was to, I mean it's a very difficult space to work with. So along with that, we had some efforts that were made or I feel that were made to try to bring the articulation of the building up to a standard that somewhat meets our expectations in the city of Ontario. And I want to again thank the applicant for doing that. Know there was a lot of back and forth that happened between the staff and the applicant. With that said, I'm going to go ahead and with all of those things considered make a motion to approve the tentative track map for file number PMTT21-nineteen and the development plan file number PDEV21-twenty2 subject to resolutions and attached conditions.

Okay. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. So we have a motion by Commissioner Lamkin and a second by Commissioner Gage. Madam Secretary please call the roll.

Mr. Gage.

Yes.

Mr. Lampkin?

Yes.

Mr. Marks?

Yes.

Ms. Dedemar? Yes. Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

It is approved five to zero.

Thank you. So file numbers PMTT 20 one-nineteen and development plan PDEV 20 One-twenty two have been approved. Thank you. Item C, Commissioner Nel, I mean, Nel, sorry.

Thank you, Chairman. Item C is environmental assessment, planned unit development and development plan review for file numbers PUD 23Dash003 and PDV 23Dash019. A public hearing to consider a planned unit development to establish development standards and design guidelines for the project site in conjunction with a development plan for the construction of 50 multiple family dwellings on approximately 2.07 acres of land located at 1389 East Holt Boulevard within the MU6 East Holt mixed use zoning district. The project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section fifteen three thirty two infill development. The applications are submitted by JWDA dash MS architect and city council is action is required for file number PUD 20 three-three and associate planner, Mr.

Morales will provide the presentation.

Thank you again, Mr. Ngo. The project site is located on the Eastern side of the city. The major cross streets for it will be Grove Avenue and Holt Boulevard. The project is a corner lot located within the intersection of Holt Boulevard and Imperial Avenue.

The lot is currently vacant and is surrounded by different types of uses. You have your business park to the South, multifamily or manufacturing homes to the East, single family residents to the North and commercial and multifamily properties to the West. As part of this project, a PUD is required and the PUD establishes all the land use, landscaping, parking requirements and architecture character of the project site. The PUD will require city council approval. As part of this project, the applicant is proposing a state density bonus law.

State density bonus law allows additional density beyond what local codes allow and it only applies to multifamily units that will provide on-site affordable housing. As far as the density bonus, it allows incentives, concessions, waivers and reduced parking requirements that support the development of affordable housing. Project will provide three very low affordable units or 5% of the project and is required to work with the city to provide an affordable housing agreement for fifty five years. The project site is 2.07 acres in size and is located within the MU 6 East Holt mixed use zoning district. The project provides 50 units, all will have three bedrooms and two baths.

And as far as state density bonus law, the project requires two spaces per unit. The project is required to have 100 stalls and 100 stalls are provided. The project site inside will have two points of access off Holt Boulevard and Imperial Avenue and access will be for the residents and emergency vehicle access. The project site will also provide amenities in the center of the lot and a landscaping proposed trail for residents to enjoy. The project also will propose a Spanish colonial style.

This is a street perspective seen from Holt Boulevard as the project is a three storey tall building and has common features of Spanish colonial. It has your terracotta tile, gable roof lines, has a terracotta or the esque tile, the esque vents, recess windows, arch features, shed roofs and decorative banding. And as well we'll provide, I don't know if you can see it, but a veneer stone foundation. The project site will also provide courtyards for property owners or tenants to enjoy for the private open space. These exterior evolutions, so the articulation of the three plex, four plex and five plex units, As you can see with the vertical articulation on the roofline, the symmetrical fenestration and proportional massing on the project site.

I apologize for that. The floor plans are typical in size with your garage entry on the 1st Floor, your common living space on the 2nd Floor and your bedrooms on the 3rd Floor. Unit B will also be the same. A landscape site was provided for the project and the project meets our landscape requirements And the project site has heavily landscape on the perimeter site as well internal site components. Which leads us to our conclusion.

It's our recommendation that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council approve the PUD 23,003 and adopt the resolution approving file number P. Dev 20. That ends that presentation.

Thank you Mr. Morales. 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. Good evening chair and members of the Planning Commission. I'm Mike Cushone with Integrity Property Group. My address is 25129 The Old Road in Santa Clarita. It's always a pleasure working with the City of Ontario and staff and this project is a direct result of that great collaboration. And I'm here to answer any questions. Just greatly appreciate opportunity. Do you agree to the conditions approval? Yes we do. Are

there any questions of the applicant from commissioners?

Commissioner Gage. Yes. Are you planning on managing the project? Yes. And do you have a parking management plan in place considering you're asking for less parking than we normally allow?

Yes. So it will be within the lease agreements that the garages will be need to be maintained for two car parking.

Okay. And do you have a plan where visitors are going to park?

So this was a state density bonus project. So the parking requirement for the state law was actually 75 parking spaces. So it's essentially 1.5 parking spaces per unit. So we're providing an additional 25 parking spaces than what's typically required under the state density bonus. So we believe that by providing more parking and adequate garage access that we will have enough parking for guests and on-site.

I mean we wouldn't build a project and keep it if we didn't believe it will be functional. Because from an economic standpoint, tenants aren't going to lease a project if they could go somewhere else and find a place for their guests to park. So it's just not feasible to even build and hold something to where long term you wouldn't be able to have it function. So we've looked at all that and it definitely works for us.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other questions of the applicant from

the

Planning Commission? Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you.

I'll now open the public hearing to the audience. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak on this board.

Thank Thank evening again. It's my name is Marty McBride, 421 North Fern Avenue in Ontario. I wanna commend the Ontario Planning and Historic Preservation Commission and the City Of Ontario on creating affordable housing in the city. The only the only recommendation I I would like you to consider would be to please consider the disparate impact between having affordable units that are above the typical density allowed for for traditional units. There is a disparate impact on families who can afford these units that there is the risk of overcrowding.

So moving forward, again, I would just like the commission and the planning department to take that into be mindful of that when they approve these projects that just because these people don't have the same income level as a conventional buyer, they should not be punished with overcrowding. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this agenda item? Okay. Seeing that there are none, will now close the public comment period and turn the matter over to the Planning Commission for discussion and action.

Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gage. Yes. I understand that why developers would rather follow the state mandates for parking instead of our city requirements.

And of course the state has these new rules because they want more units built in the state and so it would help the affordability of housing in our state. So it's a trade off as much as I want adequate parking and really the history of parking and developments is that there usually isn't enough. And there's usually a problem no matter what anybody says before the project's done. But there's a trade off. State's trying to get more units to help the affordability in our state and supply is what is going to help that.

And at least that's the state's thinking. And I hope it works because the trade off is there's going to be a lot of places that don't have enough parking or really inconvenient parking or no parking for visitors and so on and so forth, which could of course make things inconvenient and make the turnover rate. One of the things we try to do is limit turnover, make projects that people will stay in and not turnover because that hurts. And so that's the trade off. So anyway unless there's other comments, I'm okay to approve this.

To recommend approval on this plan unit development plan number PUD23-three subject to the resolution and attached conditions of approval. So before the motion, just want

to make sure that we'd read into the record that there were revising the reso for this item as we mentioned at the beginning of the public hearing tonight.

Okay, yeah. So the motion is to include that as well. Yes, that's fine. Do we have a second?

Mr. Chair I'll go ahead and second echoing the same comments. You know these affordable housing projects as the density increases I agree with my fellow commissioner that it does put a strain on infrastructure. It's not to say that it's not possible, nobody's necessarily in a disagreement with it. But it does, it puts a strain on infrastructure.

So I'd like echo those same sentiments that we just need to be continuously mindful of that. Some of these communities were initially built to be single family dwellings and with the inclusion of ADUs and affordable housing, it does put a strain infrastructure. And then also too with the change with the errata sheet, I was really happy to see that the portion that stated in eliminate guest parking stalls was taken out. I thought that was very odd but it's nice to see that the revised text took that portion out. We don't want to see any parking taking out.

We need as much as we can as these developments go in. And so with that said, would like to go ahead and second the motion.

Thank you. So we have a motion by commissioner Gage and a second by commissioner Lampkin. Madam secretary please call the roll.

Mr. Lampkin?

Yes.

Mr. Marks?

Yes.

Ms. Dedemar? Yes. Mr. Gage?

Yes.

Chairman Ritchie?

Yes.

Is recommended to City Council five to zero.

Thank you. So file number PUD 20 three-three, the plan unit development has been recommended for approval to City Council. And now is there a motion to approve the development plan?

Yes Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gage. Motion to approve development plan file number PDEV23Dash019 subject to the resolution and attached conditions of approval. Okay.

I second the motion.

All right. We have a motion by Commissioner Gage and a second by Commissioner Dedemeyer. Madam Secretary please call the roll.

Mr. Marks.

Yes.

Ms. Dedemeyer. Yes. Mister Gage?

Yes.

Mister Lamkin?

Yes.

Chairman Ritti?

Yes.

It is approved five to zero.

Alright. Thank you. So file number PDEB 23Dash019. The development plan has been approved. Thank you very much. And now we'll move on to matters from the Planning Historic Preservation Commission. Old business reports from subcommittee, the historic preservation did not meet. Any other committees did, I don't believe, met. New business is there any commissioners that have any new business or any other comments? Nope. Okay nominations for special recognitions. Nope. Moving right along. Director Ngo do you have the monthly activity report?

Yes a copy has been provided to the Planning Commission and attached to the agenda packet.

Perfect. You Director Ngo. And the next Planning Historic Preservation commission. Didn't write down the date but it's next month. You planning staff. Thank you commissioners. The public hearing is now adjourned. Have a good night everyone. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Cortez, supervising librarian for the adult services department here at the Ovid Family Community Library. Today we are here in our community maker space, Lightspeed. We do have two locations here at the Ovid and at the Lewis Family Branch. And here in our maker space, we have a variety of equipment available to you all for free for Ontario residents. We have the laser cutter. We have three d prints available. We have a sewing machine. We also have electronic and robotics section that you can, build your skills on. We also have machines available such as the Cricut. We do have staff available to you to assist you with your project.

Over here, have the BOSS laser l s one six three zero laser cutter and engraver. And with this machine, here in Lightspeed, we teach you how to use RDWorks, which is the program that is compatible with this machine. And you can do projects whether it is on wood, acrylic, and paper. And the great thing about Lightspeed is that we provide the materials. So anything that you would like to make, we can help you out.

Hi. My name is John Encarnacion. I'm one of the adult services librarians for the Ontario City Library, and I assist with the management and operation of the Lightspeed Makerspace. One of the things I love about working in Lightspeed is seeing all the different creative that our patrons are working on. And so one of the things I love seeing was we had a family come in, and they were trying to make a little figurine of a character Sonic headshot for their son, and they were trying to find a model for it. And they were able to find one, but I think it was really cool that, you know, this family was making toys for their, you know, for their kid, you know, without having to go to the store or anything like that. The family used our Prusa three d printer to make the Sonic the Hedgehog toy.

All you need is an Ontario City Library card to access these resources for free. For more information, please visit our website at donterraca.gov/lightspeed.

Come visit us at Lightspeed and make your next creative project.

Yeah. I eat here every day, and the banana pancake and its specialty really, really tastes really good.

Everything here is probably 95% made in house. I think the country fried steak is probably the most popular, and then also the Ontario Airport, which is kinda like a breakfast sampler, you get a little bit of everything.

It's a breakfast here. The creator of the menu, it's the couple from Georgia, and then they create this menu back in 1997 in southern style and then all from scratch.

It is a locals place. Anybody that lives in Ontario has probably been here more than a handful of times.

I landed in Ontario one day and I came into a restaurant because I was hungry. I met a friend that I used to know in when I used to live in Alaska, there was a previous owner who kinda talked. He wanted to sell a restaurant, and I wanted to buy a new restaurant. So that was perfect timing.

As big as Ontario is, it's really small town, so everybody knows everybody, basically. I love mainly all the customers. Irregulars just keep you wanting to come to work, and you just after so long, you develop a really good relationship with them.

We're just consistently serving a good food and that good quality of service and that customer really, you know, the tend to come back and enjoy it. You know, that's makes me keep on going. Iron Skillet is proud to be made in Ontario.