Loading...
06/04/2009 t i li Community and Economic Development Department ' I " (AMORNIA GRAND TERRACE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING June 4,2009 The regular meeting of the Grand Terrace Planninz Commission was called to order at the Grand Terrace Civic Center.22795 Barton Road. Grand Terrace, California.,on June 4. 2009. at 6:30 n.m., by Chairman Done Wilson. PRESENT: Doug Wilson, Chairman Matthew Addington, Vice Chairman Darcy McNaboe, Commissioner Tom Comstock, Commissioner Brian Phelps, Commissioner Joyce Powers, Community and Economic Development Director Sandra Molina, Senior Planner - Richard Shields, Building and Safety/Public Works Director Mari Montes, Secretary 6:30 P.M.: CONVENE SITE AND ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD/ PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Chairman Wilson convened the Site and Architectural Review Board/Planning Commission meeting. • Call to Order • Pledge of Allegiance • Roll Call • Public address to Commission shall be limited to three minutes unless extended by the Chairman. Should you desire to make a longer presentation, please make written request to be agendized to the Director of Community and Economic Development 22795 Barton Road • Grand Terrace, California 92313-5295 • 909/ 824-6621 1 . GENERAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Raylene English, 22600 Brentwood St. — I have heard through word of mouth and the Grand Terrace newspaper about an orange grove that is going to go at the corner of Grand Terrace Road and Mount. Vernon. I'd like to say that, if you put the orange grove there, you would take what's left of the view from the people that live on Brentwood Street. I had a 190 degree view before the Grand Terrace Villas was put up. I voted for a three story building, we ended up with a two story building, and half of my view is gone. I do not have the mountain views anymore. I only have the valley. If that orange grove is put on the corner where it is proposed I'll lose the rest of my view. Now I think I've paid additional amounts in my home for that view so I will no longer be able to see 41h of July fireworks or anything else across the Valley or Christmas decorations either. So if they want to put an orange grove despite the fact that lot of seniors are allergic to bee stings they should put it in front of the Senior Center. ITEMS: 1. SUBJECT: Blue Mountain Senior Villas— Status of South and West Boundary Walls Senior Planner Molina — Good evening to Mr. Chairman and Planning Commissioners. This is i a discussion of the status of the south and west boundary walls at the Senior Center. The applicant is requesting an alternative material design for the boundary walls, and an exhibit was included in the staff report. Commissioner Phelps also requested a copy of the landscape plans that had been approved for the site and those are on the dais this evening. Just to give some brief background, the Planning Commission had approved the Site and Architectural Review for the Senior Villas and Park back in 2007 and part of that discussion and approval was to have solid block and solid block walls with an insert up at the top. The City Council approved the design of the site with that condition. Since then the applicant has asked, because of construction considerations due to the existing walls along those boundaries and drainage considerations to go with wrought iron fencing. That's not what the Commission and Council had expected to see and I think that's not what was expected by the public who attended those meeting and so we felt it was necessary to bring this back to Planning Commission. For this meeting we provided public notice to the property owners along the south boundary and west boundaries. Additionally staff and the developer met with a few of the residents prior to this meeting to discuss some options also. But to go back to the presentation, the exhibit that is shown is basically a rendering of what was approved. This is the south wall and only where property owners wanted this open view fencing would that be provided. This design was proposed along this boundary and this boundary as well. What the applicant is proposing due to drainage and construction concerns is put in this tubular wrought iron fencing along those two boundaries. The slides (this information is in the packets) is the photographs that the applicant had provided to the City so that the Commission and the public can see the existing situation. I believe that this basically starts at the very south east corner and works it way west. There are some block walls and wood fencing. Some wood fencing is constructed sturdier than others. We also have the existing wall boundaries up here on 2 this corner with the wrought iron fencing. This is a site plan rendering of how the site lays out. These are some photographs that we took last week to give you a longer view of the wall. This is along the southeast portion and this is more towards the center and this is further west along south boundary again. If you go out to the site you may have noticed there is a big difference in the grade when you come from this west corner down to the southeast corner. The properties back here are leveled out and are pretty consist with what is out here, here it is a lot steeper as far as the difference in the grade elevations. So we will keep this slide up for discussion and what we had indicated in the staff report was that staff thought there were probably other options that are available to construct the block wall that was originally considered and still address the drainage issues. One of the things is that where there is existing block walls it may just make sense to leave them in place and not touch them. Where there is wood fencing it may make sense to work out some agreement with the property owner where is can be removed or where they can remove it and the wall would be put in place. We did notice in a lot of situations the new wall will overlap existing walls, which may be problematic and in some instances not so problematic. Staff feels that there are probably some other options to a double boundary wall or to having to have a wrought iron fence. Construction can be done within the block wall for drainage to continue pass through and other options we talked about and include an L footing or other mechanisms such as that. We met with some of the property owners this afternoon and there seemed to be some flexibility with some of the property owners as far being able to possibly remove existing fences and put up a solid block wall. That is an option that is being entertained but there has not been any resolution and so we are still wanting to discuss this with the Planning Commission as far as the Planning Commissions determination with respect to the request for the wrought iron fencing as opposed to the solid block wall. As far as the remaining details of construction and what agreements can be worked out with the property owners, is secondary to having direction from the Commission with respect to what type of wall should be constructed. In conclusion our Building Official is present and can speak the best with regard to construction techniques and different things that can be done. Justin Hardt with Corporation for Better Housing is also present and he represents the developer with respect to what they are proposing to do. Mr. Bryan Holland is present and he represents BLH, the general contactor. He can also speak to what he observed out in the field and then there are members of the public here to speak as well. With that, unless the Commission has any questions I'll conclude my presentation. Chairman Wilson—before we open this up to public hearing can we have discussion with staff, anybody have any questions? Unknown resident- Inaudible Chairman Wilson—Let's have the Corporation for Better Housing come forward and plead his case. Please state your name and address for the record. Justin Hardt, Corporation for Better Housing—I would like to take this moment first to thank the Planning Commission and City Staff, and also members of the community for the progress that I think that we've all made for this development for the last four and a half to five years. We are starting to have our first move-ins and we are very excited about it and so we wanted to thank everybody about that. 3 Moving forward with regard to the discussion of the south and west property line not to bore the Commission with the genesis of the development. We were conditioned by the City Council to contact all the homeowners on the adjoining property lines on both south and west to really get an understanding of what type of wall fencing they want, whether it would be a solid block wall or a block wall with wrought iron detail. We sent out letters at the direction of the City and over a period of several weeks, I received responses. Ultimately we came up with a design which was not as uniform and consistent as we would have hoped, but more of a hodge podge design of a few solid walls a few wrought iron details blended in with a few more solid block wall. As the development moved forward and we got to the current stage where we are right now, further due diligence was warranted because construction was going to take place. At the request of the developer, BLH, the contractor, had gone out to the sites to perform due diligence with regards to the construction of the block wall. The contractor informed us of some concerns that he, or the company had had. Those concerns were stated in the letter to City Manager, Mr. Steve Berry, addressing the concerns of BLH Construction of which some of those, I believe the Commission has,those issues pertain to both drainage issues and unrelated issues. Today the applicant, Corporation for Better Housing, proposes putting consistent wrought iron fencing on the south and west side of the development for a variable number of reasons. One, because it helps alleviate some of the issues, i.e. the drainage issues. Also, we believe it to be something that will add with the consistency and follow through with the development. One of the concerns that we or BLH, not to harp on the drainage issue, discussed with staff(inaudible) to alleviate that problem. Unfortunately we feel that it will elevate some problems that could lead to potential unknowns. It will ultimately affect some of the drainage patterns, other issues with i the solid block wall are safety issues. I have brought with me A.L.T.A. plans that I can pass out to the Commission, should the Commission like to see them. In these plans it details what types of fencing are currently at the sites continuous to the development that is in question today. As we notice there is a (inaudible) type of fencing whether it be block wall or (inaudible) other concerns (inaudible) is the gap between some of these developments or these walls. If we look specifically at the western side those three homes, there is a six foot easement along that side, where it's a PG&E easement. If we were to create a block wall there we would need to have it capped or it would a nuisance and items would collect. One of concerns of putting a block wall along that area would be that it would effectively create a cut out, it would be need to be capped and that would create a concern where at the end of the park people could get into and it would also be a maintenance issue. Another concern that we have with the block wall, a letter to the homeowners expressing our intent to proceed with the development of the block wall and had asked home owners to hold the contractor harmless of any potential unknown issues that could result due to the installation and the disruption of the soil and the potential disruption of the drainage issues. We had sent those letters out I believe in the first quarter of this year and received one letter back and several phone call from the residents unwilling to sign it. So at this stage the applicant does not feel it prudent to move forward with the block wall on the south and west sides because of the potential liabilities that could come up and the exposure that both the city could potentially have, and most certainly the developer and contractor, due to any potential issues that might arise. Chairman Wilson—Any questions for the applicant. 4 Commissioner Comstock—I have one. (Inaudible) Justin Hardt — The difference is a more of a safety issue. If anything were to get stuck back there we could see it through the wrought iron fence but if we have solid block wall there and something does get stuck potentially if would be a six foot wall, you won't know if there is something stuck there. I would hate to have something stuck back there and not know about it, a dead animal or what not. Again it is just a concern we have and we are here to express our concerns and look for guidance and again it's something that through moving forward in this process we just want to make sure that the City and the residents are all aware what our concerns are. Commissioner McNaboe—I have a question. You said that you, BLH and the homeowners are discussing the different styles of block wall, did you not go and talk to the home owners about your proposal for a wrought iron fence? Justin Hardt—We submitted our proposal to the City at the City's direction. City suggested we meet with a few of the homeowners which that meeting took place today prior to today's meeting. Commissioner McNaboe—(inaudible) over the block. Justin Hardt— In a different manner the block wall we had, we were directed by City Council that we would be installing a block wall as part of the Commission's verbal we were instructed to work with the homeowners which we did through letters. We sent out letters giving them the option of the solid block was or block wall with wrought iron detail as it was allowed. Commissioner Phelps—(inaudible) Justin Hardt—It's something that we could potentially explore. Chairman Wilson—Any other questions for the applicant. Vice Chairman Addington — The easement on along the west side for the utilities, is that easement on your property or the neighbor's property? Justin Hardt—I believe that easement is on our property. Vice Chairman Addington — So why do you want to give up that six feet plus of land with the fence of the east side of the easement? Justin Hardt—As opposed to? Vice Chairman Addington — Putting a wall at the property line and coordinating something with the property owners. 5 Justin Hardt— That is something we can explore, although, I believe that is something we can explore. Chairman Wilson—Any more questions for the applicant? Justin Hardt — If I may, if we were to put, at the Vice Chairman's suggestion, a block wall of fencing along the western portion, are we looking for a block wall or wrought iron fencing. Vice Chairman Addington — I'm just asking what (inaudible) on the east side of the easement (inaudible) or see through wrought iron fence, why would you put on the eastside of the easement and lose the ability to use the land for landscaping or anything else. It was just a question for you, I wasn't correcting to as the type of the wall. Chairman Wilson —Any other questions. Let's invite BLH Construction since they are here, if you would like to add a few things. You apparently wrote the letter and so I would like to hear any other things you would like to talk to us about. Brad Moore, BLH Construction — If you could put the picture the up with the walls, the cross section of the wall? When I, I should take responsibility of this, investigated everything to do with these walls prior to construction but at the time of the mass grading and the initial wall construction the retention portion of the project, the (inaudible) wall was not approved yet. At that point during the initial construction we hadn't had the approval of what was going there. I heard and I knew we were doing a process for a masonry wall but it wasn't on the plan or an agreement. Once I got the plan I took it out and looked at the conditions, if you are looking towards the back and you see that big masonry wall that's in the back, the 2:1 slope that goes up to that, if we were to put a wall continuous to that wall the footing would be basically three feet below the footing of the existing wall because of the surcharge of the wall and the slope. So that was the one concern that I had, the major concern I had was the surcharge was that masonry wall and as you come forward to the wood fences with the way the retaining wall is in front of it with the 2:1 slope again you are undermining the property with the installation of the footing with the masonry property line wall. That was my main concern in investigating the wall plan. Then as you go down, normally we could, you could try a (inaudible) a surcharge problem and then investigate (inaudible) you could raise this well up and take that surcharge out of this area and you could (inaudible) you can not because there is nothing in front of it, you would still have undermine and go down on the bottom of your footing would be about three feet to the bottom of the footing and so in front of that wall you would have a three foot vertical cut. Chairman Wilson—(inaudible) Brad Moore—That was never in the scope of work. The scope of work was to install a wall that was continuous to the wall in place. Chairman Wilson—How far (inaudible)? Brad Moore—It is an eighty foot wall. 6 Chairman Wilson—Any questions for BLH? Brad Moore—Did you want me to continue forward? So the surcharge: to get rid of it, you take out the standard six foot wall and raise up the retaining wall by the parking lot. (Inaudible) you have of masonry walls or (inaudible) to wood wall, so if we continue the masonry wall (inaudible) you would have a two foot gap between (inaudible) the back of my wall that faces that wall you might have a nine foot wall gap that anything can get into and anything can happen in there. It could be kids, it could be whatever, and could you cover it, sure. Would it be there forever? I don't know. That is something we have to think about. If we covered it with sheet metal, would that sheet metal cap always stay in place, that nothing would get between that gap. That's a question I had and if we keep going down, it just continues down the line you have these gaps in between this wall you are putting in all the way down, some of those wall have retention behind them, some of them are three feet, the grade is three feet higher than my wall so there is surcharge, (inaudible) but the main thing I was concerned about was a) the surcharge of the slope that had to be put in the wall and b) the safety that anything can happen with the gaps that are in between these walls. The six foot gap that is down on the west, if you have a solid it's not the matter of putting a gate, someone can take people back there. You have a situation, anybody can walk back there and do (inaudible) our concern is security and safety. That was my report to the developer. Chairman Wilson—Any questions to BLH before he takes off. (Inaudible) Mike Hoge, 22594 Brentwood — That is my beautiful temporary wood fence right there. It's l ; been holding up quite well. It's been two years and I spoke with one of you gentleman maybe two years ago when the Santa Ana winds blew down my previous wood fence I spoke with the developer, that I am going to rebuilding my fence, do I build something really nice or should I just do a temporary because they were getting ready to start. I was told something temporary. AWESOME, this is best gift my wife and I received in quite a while. Up to the current day, delay, after delay, my fence is on its last leg. It was only going to be temporary, the wall was eventually going in and unfortunately now I find out we are talking about wrought iron. One of my disappointments is really not being kept in the loop of things going on that are going to affect my property line. My situation, I'm not going to have retaining wall there, I am just going to have a straight block wall. So I was looking forward to gaining 2 to 3 feet which is actually were the property line is for myself. The other concerns I have is in regards to the letter that we got about the wall. It scared more of us than helped us, whenever you put on the letter that we don't want any liability in case something happens that's really going to make people shy away. What I was going to suggests if we have more of a pictorial type detail that shows exactly what we intend to do. I think people would will be a little more assured that it is going to be a mutually beneficial situation for everybody.Now as you get further east you've some major concerns with retaining issues, I understand that. I'm going to speak for myself, I am ecstatic about a block wall. I think that will be the best thing and kind of bouncing of your concerns about safety and stuff like that. If you build a continuous wall from one end to the other and out to the other road then you don't have any safety issues and everybody on their own property that's our own responsibility to take care of that. I'm hopeful that we can come to a good compromise on this or find something we can do. As to the 7 easement, that's an Edison easement, six feet that's what you said on the west side. There is an easement right there too so what will need to happen there we can still have a wall built, Edison will need access to get in with bucket truck. You can't completely close that off, I don't believe, unless you checked with an appropriate Edison representative. On the west end the last thing you want to do is build a wall and leave a six foot opening. You would be better to build your wall and then Edison can maintain, if a transformer blows or pole goes down whatever they have to so they have the adequate equipment to access that. The only other thing that I would like to voice to the City and to you, I have spoken to you off and on, but when we are having a project we don't have a project very often. There are only a handful of residents, I myself would like to be a little more involved in what is going to affect my property. For the record my wife and I look forward to having the Senior Center get going. We would like to see it get completed but along the process I have actually heard from my neighbor more than I have from the City in regards to the process of this project. Not very comfortable with that, if we can improve that it would be a step in the right direction. Chairman Wilson—Mr. Comstock has a question (inaudible) Commission Comstock—(inaudible) per notes, asked if preference of wall block or wrought iron Mike Hoge—Unfortunately we talked about four feet of a block wall and then 18 inches to two feet of wrought iron, I'm all for that. I just don't want all wrought iron all the way. Commissioner Comstock—(inaudible) Per notes, consensus of the residents Mike Hoge — Most of were pretty much for the block and the wrought iron on top because we get the block wall safety of the enclosure and then the wrought iron we got a view. That would be the best for me and some of the other residents. Chairman Wilson—Barbara Berliner Barbara Berliner, 22624 Brentwood — This is what I use to see, beautiful mountain. This is what I get to see now, a building, most of my view is gone. (Inaudible) Per notes, indicates loss of view, noise of cars, parking lot lights lit up all night, disappointed in the project. Cathy Kidd, 22636 Brentwood—We have been here 10 years when this project first started we did discuss this with the planners and they said a brick, we said fine. In the meantime when we had wind we put up another fence but a wrought iron fence is not going to work for me. I have pool in the backyard and I don't want people looking through my back yard. I don't care if it is this wall or this wall. This is not what we agreed on. The bottom line is this, when you say you are going to do something and you get the consensus of the people (inaudible) Per notes, noise and lights affects home property, consensus was for a block wall. 8 Pamela Plasco, 22614 Brentwood — I'm the newest kid on the block. When I purchased my home in 2005, if had known construction was going to go on I would never have purchased that house. (Inaudible) now it is worth two hundred and something. So I am honestly not pleased but with everything that is going on with the construction this has been (inaudible). We received a letter surveying what type of block wall we wanted on the back. Either with the wrought iron adornment or just a solid brick wall. We sent our responses in and we never heard anything further from the construction people or builders. We never knew what the final decision was, which way we were going to go. About a year later or so, I get a letter telling me, blah, blah, blah, hold harmless liability, and let me tell you I'm not going to hold anybody hold harmless (inaudible) that doesn't even have a return address at the top. You're lucky I even opened it. Very poor way of conducting business especially on a construction project this size with so much different opinions, view points and how it affects the people who purchased their properties. The communication has just been poor. Now I understand your concerns regarding having these gaps between the fences. I'm the lucky one who has half block, half wood. I don't know how this is going to turn out. I was going to pay to have the block, but again construction comes in and says we are going to put in this block wall. So I hold up, however to me if you are going out to this parcel of land and you (inaudible) this whole project from beginning to end, now this fence is about to go up these are our concerns. The easements, the slope and the gaps, to me why did you not discover these things before. Why is this all of a sudden a concern now that we are ready to move people in and not put the wall in? For the (inaudible) wrought iron fence because there is nobody directly in front of this north part of this property, so your wrought iron is looks fine. But from behind most of my neighbors have pools, (inaudible) and then half of the people with the residents who will be able to look into my property. (Inaudible) Chairman Wilson—Inaudible Ann Hornsby,22656 Brentwood St. —(Inaudible) Per notes, only house with existing block wall and does not want it torn down. Believes all residents desire block wall. Raymond and Angie Perez, 11691 Mount Vernon Avenue — We live on the west boundary line, we were wondering why we have never received any information about the block wall. None whatsoever the only letter we have received is about me to sign liability statement. That's the only thing that we have received. Chairman Wilson—What type of wall would like? (Inaudible) Raymond and Angie Perez— We have an eight foot wall and if you are going to build another wall, are you going to take that one down? There would be two block walls, a block wall here and a block wall next to it. We do want a block wall. Chairman Wilson—(Inaudible) Enrique Cesena, 22540 Brentwood Sreet— Originally we got the letter asking us what kind of block wall we would like whether it would be solid or with a little bit of the wrought iron across the top and that's the wall we picked. I own the third house on Brentwood, I think if you flip the 9 slide forward, that is my fence right there. It's half masonry with a little bit of chain link, that's my lot right there. I was under the understanding that my rear fence was going to be torn down and a block wall put up but I may have been wrong. I would love to have a block wall and not wrought iron because I do have a pool (inaudible). In response to animals getting stuck back there with the wrought iron, I have two one hundred pound retrievers (inaudible). My pleasure is the block wall. Raynell English, 22600 Brentwood Street — You can see just the beginning of my back wall. My wall and my pool and inside landscaping is all built together. You can not take my fence down and put another one. Probably my property is one of the one's that has cause BLH some concern because the whole backyard would fall in and the pool would too if they even try to put a fence back there. I mean I probably stand to lose the most, (inaudible) two feet from my property line but I believe and I don't believe there is an easement with Edison either, I was told that last year. We were told last year they would just build another wall and block it right up next to our. I am concerned now since he said the footing may take the whole wall away. Chairman Wilson—Closes public comment Director Richard Shields—(Inaudible) Per notes, gave his comments with the block wall construction, easement and concerns. Chairman Wilson—any other questions for staff. Commissioner Phelps—(Inaudible) Commissioner Comstock—(Inaudible) Per notes, asked for the number of masonry walls. Sandra Molina, Senior Planner — The attachment would provide the number, looks like there are 9 masonry walls existing. Commissioner Comstock—(Inaudible) Per notes, asking if the residents were contacted and asked to work with the City, no one asked about wrought iron fencing. Senior Planner Molina—(Inaudible). Per notes, have not contacted owners. Chairman Wilson—(Inaudible) Per notes, would like for staff to work with homeowners and contractor to finish consistent project. Would like a motion. 10 MOTION PC 16-2009 Commissioner Comstock made a motion for the applicant to construct a consistent wall pursuant to the approved conditions of approval and to work out the details with staff. Second by McNaboe. Motion carries 5-0. • Information to Commissioners Update on the Commercial Improvement Program Joyce Powers, Community and Economic Development Director—(Inaudible) Per notes, gives update on commercial improvement program. Chairman Wilson—(Inaudible) tom' Per notes, asks about the light blue color and the consensus of color. Vice Chairman Addington—(Inaudible) Per notes, does not like the color. Commissioner Comstock—(Inaudible) Per notes, not preferred color Commissioner Phelps—(Inaudible) Per notes, does not like color Vice Chairman Addington—(Inaudible) Per notes, color does not reflect well on the pictures shown. Chairman Wilson—(Inaudible) Per notes, asks Director Powers to finish project. Commissioner Comstock—Inaudible Per notes, asks about the condition of the roof. Chairman Wilson—(Inaudible) Per notes, gives his thoughts on the overall project and would like to get the public input. 11 Vice Chairman Addington—(Inaudible) Per notes, concurs with Chairman Wilson about getting the input of the public. Chairman Wilson—(Inaudible) Per notes, gives thanks to Director Powers for all the hard work on this project. • Information from Commissioners Vice Chairman Addington — Has a question on the Town Center Project we still have a lot of holes and debris out there, is that moving forward at all? Director Powers—You are talking about the Barton Square Project, first I don't have best news. The developer has stopped the grading, the debris was going to be broken up and grounded into the site. He does not have signed leases from Walgreens or Fresh & Easy and has stopped the work. Very disappointing. If I could ask on question please about the CIP project we are speaking of? (Inaudible) my question would be what is (inaudible) or do we want go back to something more, in my opinion blase, more tan and white? Vice Chairman Addington—(Inaudible) Per notes, like color palette on paper r t i Commissioner Comstock—I actually don't (inaudible) stick with the tan colors for that project. That's what most are indicative as being Grand Terrace. Commissioner MaNaboe — I like these colors and I think (inaudible) if they were to change them to something else there would be people (inaudible). Commissioner Comstock—(Inaudible) Per notes, refers to other color buildings, does not look well after time. Prefers earth tone colors. Vice Chairman Addington—I guess going back original questions is, do you want us to hold up this project moving forward and bring back to Commission or do you want a consensus to move forward? Director Powers—I would like to move forward, that's my preference. Vice Chairman Addington—I will make a motion L Li 12 MOTION PC 17-2009 Vice Chairman Addington made a motion for the project discussed about the Food Connection center, that it move forward with the color palette as presented tonight on the paper. Second by McNaboe. Commissioner Comstock— I want to make sure we are legal on this, what we're fixing to do here. Director Powers—Yes, we have consider other(inaudible) Motion carries 2-2,with 1 Commissioner abstaining. Director Powers—Chairman(inaudible) in two weeks. Commissioner Phelps — (Inaudible) from all the construction that has four cars parked. (Inaudible), I didn't know if she responded to it or not. Director Powers—Yes and actually we already have a grant application from that parry. Vice Chairman Addington — Mr. Shields, the property we just discussed with the debris, was this project large enough for a grading bond? Richard Shields—No. Vice Chairman Addington—So there is no way to go after and getting those piles? Richard Shields—It's going to be tough because the pile is really his fill. I'm still going to try to talk to Dr. Ha and see if he'll move forward and at least grind it up and place it in piles. But to kind of take off the blight from it, I'm hoping he does it. But we don't have a grading bond for such a small job like that. Vice Chairman Addington—Maybe the City can choose what value they want to set a bond at. There is just a question, one of things they have a concern with is that the Fresh & Easy stores, that it's a new concept, it's not a proven concept. (Inaudible) and I know in the community I work with (City of Rancho Cucamonga) they have four proposed, one sitting empty and another one under construction that may or may not open. Richard Shields—I will get on this and work on it right away. Commissioner Phelps — On that note what alternatives we do have if we can't get piles removed. 13 Richard Shield — (Inaudible) then would have to introduce citation and then go to court. (Inaudible) I could go get an (inaudible) then grind it. Of course it would be a cost to the City, it would take a lot of time to go that route,but it is doable. Chairman Wilson— (Inaudible) Per notes, disappointed that the lease has not gone through. Commissioner Comstock— (Inaudible) Per notes, likes landscaping along Mount Vernon Avenue, would like to encourage continued infill landscape project using Lantana plant material. CHAIR WILSON ADJOURNED THE SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO THE NEXT MEETING TO BE HELD ON JUNE 18,2009. Respectfully Submitted, Approved By, JoycOPokers Doug Wilson, Chairman Community and Economic Planning Commission Development Director 14