|
Mr. Aguilera continued the area north of downtown is not being proposed
<br />for major changes, however, in response to Planning Commission comments,
<br />Staff will propose an historic preservation ordinance in the near future.
<br />The Planning Commission and the majority of affected property owners now
<br />agree with the General Plan designations in the proposal before the City
<br />Council. The Planning Commission held three long public hearings re-
<br />cently, April 14, 20, 28, 1987, in order to receive feedback from af-
<br />fected property owners. Throughout the three meetings, the Planning
<br />Commission heard from only 16 property owners representing properties.
<br />For the most part, the Planning Commission agreed or compromised with
<br />the property owners' requests.
<br />Mr. Aguilera concluded the Planning Commission recommended approval of
<br />File Index Numbers A-2-86 and G-2-86, and recommended acceptance of the
<br />Environmental Impact Report, and, if Council concurs, Staff would recom-
<br />mend motions be made to pass First Reading of Ordinance No. 0-5-87, ac-
<br />cept the Environmental Impact Report, and continue File Index No. G-2-86
<br />to the next regular Council Meeting, May 19, 1987.
<br />Mayor Gonzales stated several people have requested to speak on this
<br />matter, and asked that each speaker give their name and address for
<br />the record, and limit their presentation to five minutes.
<br />Mr. Richard Dawson, Manager, Colton Chamber of Commerce, commended the
<br />Staff Members on the excellent job they did on the General Plan update,
<br />stating he was very impressed with the work they had done and the way
<br />in which the public hearings were handled.
<br />Mr. Olin A. Schneyer, Attorney, South Pasadena, California, stated he
<br />was representing his clients and the owners of parcel 163-391-04, lo-
<br />cated at 240 East Congress Street. Mr. Schneyer said they were object-
<br />ing to the SDA designation being attached to the M-1 zone for that
<br />property as they felt it was not needed. Mr. Schneyer stated they are
<br />not opposed to the industrial zoning of the property, to M-1, however,
<br />they do not feel the SDA designation is necessary and requested the City
<br />Council remove that from the M-1 zone.
<br />Mr. Epigmenio Roman, 945 Flores Street, spoke about the property located
<br />at 242 East Congress Street and the proposed M-1 zoning, stating the
<br />residents are not in favor of industrial zoning, and the original Gen-
<br />eral Plan and new General Plan, adopted in 1981, designated the zoning
<br />as R-3. Mr. Roman said a buffer is needed between the residential and
<br />industrial zoning, and the residents are tired of having industrial and
<br />commercial zoning pushed onto them. Mr. Roman also referred to a land
<br />fill and dumping operation that is being carried on at the end of Fer-
<br />nando and Flores Streets, that has been in existence since 1977, and
<br />the violations created by this business.
<br />Mr. Leon V. Keding, 5469 Alto Drive, San Bernardino, stated he was
<br />speaking on behalf of the owner of parcel 163-351-13, William West,
<br />they are not opposed to the change from R-1 to R -E zoning, and their
<br />proposed project would not be inconsistent with this zoning.
<br />4
<br />
|