The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-05-08 - Agenda Packet Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS May 08, 2024 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 PM A. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: Chairman Morales Vice Chairman Boling Commissioner Dopp Commissioner Daniels Commissioner Diaz B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Planning/Historic Commission (“Planning Commission”) on any Consent Calendar item or any item not listed on the agenda that is within the Commission’s subject matter jurisdiction. The Planning Commission may not discuss any issue not included on the agenda, but may set the matter for discussion during a subsequent meeting. C. CONSENT CALENDAR C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of April 24, 2024. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS D1. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A request to re-subdivide the properties commonly known as Central Park, consisting of approximately 103 acres, from the current 11 parcels into 12 parcels consistent with the Central Park Master Plan Phasing Map. APNs: 1076- 591-01, -02, -03, -04, -05, -06, -07, -08, -09, -10, and -11. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on April 7, 2021 for the Central Park Master Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project (SUBTT20680). D2. DESIGN REVIEW – FOOTHILL LOFTS, LLC – A request to construct a mixed-use development comprising 385 residential units and approximately 6,216 square feet of commercial lease area on approximately 8.41 acres of land at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue. The project area has a General Plan land use designation of City Corridor – High. APN: 0208-961-05, -06, and -07 (DRC2022-00162). E. GENERAL BUSINESS F. DIRECTOR ANNOUNCEMENTS G. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS H. ADJOURNMENT TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please complete a speaker card located next to the speaker’s podium. It is important to list your name, address (optional) and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 3 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under “Public Communications.” As an alternative to participating in the meeting you may submit comments in writing to Elizabeth.Thornhill@cityofrc.us by 12:00 PM on the date of the meeting. Written comments will be distributed to the Commissioners and included in the record. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are available at www.CityofRC.us. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission’s decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk’s Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $3,526 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cell phones while the meeting is in session. I, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted Seventy-Two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California and on the City's website. HPC/PC MINUTES –April 24, 2024 Page 1 of 4 Draft 2 8 3 1 Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda April 24, 2024 Draft Minutes Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 p.m. The regular Joint meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission was held on April 24, 2024. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Morales at 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Planning Commission present: Chairman Morales, Vice Chairman Boling, Commissioner Dopp, Commissioner Daniels and Commissioner Diaz. Staff Present: Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney; Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning; Sean McPherson, Principal Planner; Bond Mendez, Associate Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant. B. Public Communications Chairman Morales opened the public communications. Mike Villarreal Jr., Resident, expressed concerns about the condition of his street (Effen Street, north of the fire station). The road has large sections of loose gravel on the street. He stated someone recently slid off their motorcycle and is concerned about safety. He requested something be done soon to eliminate accidents or liabilities. With no other comments, Chairman Morales closed public communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of March 13, 2024. Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Dopp, to approve Minutes as presented. Motion carried 3-0-2, with Commissioners Daniels and Diaz abstain. D. Public Hearings D1. Consideration of a Municipal Code Amendment to amend Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Establishing Battery Energy Storage Facilities as a Use Permitted with a Conditional Use Permit for Properties Located in the Neo-Industrial (NI) and Industrial Employment (IE) Zones. This Item is Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(C)(2) And 15061(B)(3). This Item Will be Forwarded to City Council for Final Action. Page 3 HPC/PC MINUTES –April 24, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Draft 2 8 3 1 Associate Planner Bond Mendez requested item be continued to June 12, 2024, due to staff receiving multiple comment letters from interested parties, which Commissioners have copies of on the dais, requesting continuance. It will allow staff enough time to review and revisit the proposed amendments. Chairman Morales opened the public hearing. Director of Development Matt Gilliland with Gridstor, stated he submitted a comment letter requesting item be continued. He looks forward to working with staff on the development of the ordinance. With no other comments, Chairman Morales mentioned this item will remain open to June 12, 2024, HPC/PC meeting. Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Diaz. Motion carried 5-0. E. General Business E1. Request to Review Options for the Potential Development of a Mixed-Use Project at the Northeast Corner of Foothill Boulevard and Milliken Avenue. APN: 1090-121-37. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura introduced the Lewis Development Team - Randall Lewis, John Young, and their architect (name unintelligible). The Lewis team presented a PowerPoint presentation on various topics. The purpose and goal of this workshop is to collaborate and consider site layouts that would be good for the city and make sense for their customers. Commissioners asked questions and provided feedback for each topic as follows: TOPIC 1. OVERALL RETAIL/COMMERCIAL REQUIRED – Comments: •Commissioner Diaz asked what their vision of commercial space they would like to see there. o Randall Lewis responded they would like a nice restaurant and or rooftop bar. He mentioned subterrain parking would be expensive. His concern is new tenants would be coming here and would like it to be profitable. It needs to be at a price tenants can afford and subterrain parking would be expensive. •Vice Chairman Boling stated10,000 sq. ft. of retail is inadequate, due to the magnitude of this project. He felt that 200,000 sq. ft. of horizonal retail seems excessive. A more appropriate amount would be somewhere in between. He suggested to consider subterranean parking to provide close, convenient parking for ground level retail. •Commissioner Dopp stated our goal is to activate spaces/corridors and create opportunities for groups of residents to meet and congregate and 10,000 sq. ft. will not accomplish that goal. Flexible office space or grocery stores can be successful in a more urban setting, if done correctly. •Commissioner Daniels stated100,000 sq. ft. is not achievable, 50,000 sq. ft. sounds more realistic. •Commissioner Diaz suggested they invest in parking at that corner it is a high traffic corridor, and it would be worth it in the long term. •Chairman Morales Stated a Restaurant would be good. Not so sure about live/work, due to it being a key corridor. He suggested to look at it again and see what else can be done. TOPIC 2. TWO BLOCKS OR THREE – Comments: •Commissioner Dopp expressed concern with walkability if the project is designed with 2 blocks. He was further concerned with having an intersection, turning left into project. •Commissioner Daniels felt the two block development makes sense. He wants to make sure it will Page 4 HPC/PC MINUTES –April 24, 2024 Page 3 of 4 Draft 2 8 3 1 be long enough to support traffic flow. •Vice Chairman Boling felt the two-block option made more sense than the three-block option. His primary concern would be the architectural style as it faces Foothill. Cautions against the buildings looking like a huge monolithic block. He had concerns with on street parking, adjacent to Foothill, with the three-building option. He felt with the frontage road it could be difficult to get vehicles flowing. •Commissioner Diaz stated she shares same thoughts as fellow Commissioners. •Chairman Morales felt the three-block option provided more walkability and may be better for traffic. He does not want something similar to the apartment buildings in Ontario, located off Archibald as it is very overwhelming. TOPIC 3. TWO OR THREE BUILDING TYPOLOGIES – Comments: •Commissioner Daniels stated he prefers compatibility, with buildings being the same type. •Vice Chairman Boling reiterates that it should not look monolithic. He suggests utilizing color, varying heights, and setbacks. TOPIC 4. STOOP HEIGHT AVERAGE OF 30” VERSUS 30” MINIMUM REQUIRED – Comments: •Commissioner Daniels understands flexibility is needed based on the physical constraints on the property. •Commissioner Dopp agrees. •Commissioner Diaz likes that the stoops will be varied. •Commissioner Morales agreed with flexibility in stoop height. •Vice Chairman Boling stated stoops are associated with the front door of units and are often a secondary entry to homes. He agrees there are opportunities for variation in the number of steps and landscape architecture could help frame it. •Chairman Morales Agrees it should have flexibility. TOPIC 5. RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES PROPOSED FOR FOOTHILL – Comments: •Commissioner Dopp encouraged the applicant to avoid using Foothill as an amenity component of the complex. •Vice Chairman Boling stated fitness space being elevated above ground level on that corner, would be an awesome experience. •Chairman Morales Wants to make sure Foothill Boulevard becomes more walkable and in alignment with the General Plan. Closing Comments: •Vice Chairman Boling – Thanked Lewis Group for bringing this forward and the opportunity to provide general comments. He asked about the vacant triangle piece of land that is owned by the Hospital and if there is any desire to try and corporate into their project. o Randall Lewis answered they are trying to do something. It’s on the list to see if want to do some sort of trade. •Commissioner Daniels appreciated these discussions, feels they are beneficial and helpful and wishes to have more. •Commissioner Dopp appreciates the Lewis Group being open and putting their project on the table and taking in comments. Looking forward to seeing what they do in the future. •Commissioner Diaz appreciates all the information that was provided. It will be an important project for the community. •Chairman Morales – Appreciates the Lewis Group working collaboratively with staff. Projects like these set precedence for future development along Foothill. As they work with staff, he asked to compare the density for three blocks vs. two blocks, which is more walkable, and how many units can be placed there. Looking for alignment with the General Plan. Page 5 HPC/PC MINUTES –April 24, 2024 Page 4 of 4 Draft 2 8 3 1 F. Director Announcements – None G. Commission Announcements Vice Chairman Boling requested a report at a future meeting to discuss where the key Historic assets that exist are located within the city. Commissioner Daniels requested at a future meeting if information can be provided from Economic Development on market conditions, vacancy rates in our key sectors and how will future projects with retail be absorbed into the market. H. Adjournment Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling, seconded by Commissioner Dopp to adjoin the meeting. Hearing no objections, Chairman Morales adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant Planning and Economic Development Department Approved: Page 6 DATE:May 8, 2024 TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM:Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development INITIATED BY:Jared Knight, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A request to re- subdivide the properties commonly known as Central Park, consisting of approximately 103 acres, from the current 11 parcels into 12 parcels consistent with the Central Park Master Plan Phasing Map. APNs: 1076-591-01, -02, -03, -04, -05, - 06, -07, -08, -09, -10, and -11. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on April 7, 2021 for the Central Park Master Plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. (SUBTT20680) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution to approve a Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT20680) to subdivide Central Park into 12 lots consistent with the Central Park Master Plan Phasing Map. BACKGROUND: The 103.4-acre project site constitutes the area designated for the Central Park Master Plan (CPMP) (the “Master Plan”), which was adopted by the City Council in 1987 and most recently updated on December 21st, 2017. The Master Plan extends from the area north of Baseline Road to the Pacific Electric Trail and includes property between Milliken Avenue and the Deer Creek Channel, east of the Terra Vista Village Shopping Center. In accordance with the Master Plan, the easternmost portion of the site has been developed. This area includes 29 acres of parkland, parking, and a 57,000 square foot senior and community center (Goldy S. Lewis Center). In the early 2000s, economic impacts caused by the great recession and the loss of the Redevelopment Agency led the city to reevaluate long-term plans for the completion of Central Park, and to update the Master Plan accordingly. As of the 2017 Central Park Master Plan Update, the approximately 70 acres of remaining land on the site have been divided into conceptual areas for proposed improvement as part of a long-term phasing plan, with each 5–10 acre area roughly corresponding to a planned improvement or amenity to be implemented. These phased improvements are intended to be implemented over time as funding becomes available. Currently, a portion of the southwestern corner of the site has been developed into the Bark at Central Park, in accordance with the phasing plan. The most current version of the Central Park Master Plan Update can be found on the City of Rancho Cucamonga Website here. Page 7 Page 2 The existing land uses, General Plan, and zoning designations for the project site and surrounding properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Park/Vacant General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) Pacific Electric Trail General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) North Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M) South Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Low Medium Residential – Terra Vista (LM-TV) East Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M) Deer Creek Channel General Open Space and Facilities Flood Control/Utility Corridor (FC/UC)West Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Low Medium Residential – Terra Vista (LM-TV) ANALYSIS: The application is a request to subdivide the site defined by the Central Park Master Plan into 12 irregularly shaped lots roughly corresponding to the proposed improvement areas defined in the phasing plan. In addition to better accommodating the improvements proposed in the Phasing Plan, this would also better accommodate future public/private partnerships. As indicated in the Master Plan, public/private partnerships are expected to play a key role in funding the implementation of the Master Plan, as well as long-term maintenance of Central Park. Subdivision of the property to be more consistent with the phasing plan, which is itself roughly consistent with the planned amenities for the park, would improve the city’s ability to establish lease agreements and facilitate partnerships with private entities. Further, this subdivision would also improve the city’s ability to apply for grants in order to fund future improvements, programs, and maintenance for Central Park. This change does not include any development or change in phases or uses shown in the approved Master Plan. Environmental Review On April 7th, 2021, the City Council certified the Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Central Park Master Plan Update through Resolution No. 2021- 017. The proposed subdivision does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report or Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or Supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project as long as there have been a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new more severe environmental impacts; c) no new important information that shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and d) no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Correspondence This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, and 852 notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on April 23, 2024. We have responded to a few calls and emails seeking clarification on the proposed subdivision. Page 8 Page 3 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact directly related to the request for the subdivision. The proposed subdivision will facilitate the seeking of future grant opportunities and/or the development of public/private partnerships for the continued implementation of the Central Park Master Plan. COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED: The development of the project achieves the City Council’s Core Value of “Intentionally embracing and anticipating the future”. By subdividing this property to more accurately represent the long-term phasing plan set forth by the Master Plan, this project will increase the city’s ability facilitate the development of public/private partnerships and make it easier to apply for grants for the implementation of the Master Plan. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Location Map with existing parcels Exhibit B – Tentative Tract Map Exhibit C – Resolution with Conditions of Approval Page 9 Site Map and Exis�ng Parcels Exhibit A Page 10 Page 11 RESOLUTION NO. 24-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20680, A REQUEST TO RE-SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTIES COMMONLY KNOWN AS CENTRAL PARK, CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 103 ACRES, FROM THE CURRENT 11 PARCELS INTO 12 PARCELS CONSISTENT WITH THE CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN PHASING MAP. APNS: 1076-591-01, -02, -03, -04, -05, -06, -07, - 08, -09, -10, AND -11. A.Recitals. 1.The City of Rancho Cucamonga filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20680, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2.On the 8th day of May 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3.All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B.Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1.This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on May 8, 2024, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a.The application applies to the properties extending north of Baseline Road to the Pacific Electric Trail, between Milliken Avenue and Deer Creek Channel, commonly known as Central Park; and b.The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 103 acres and constitutes the area designated by the Central Park Master Plan; and c.The existing land uses on, and General Plan land use and zoning designations for, the project site and the surrounding properties (relative to the above-noted parcel) are as follows: Exhibit C Page 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-15 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20680 City of Rancho Cucamonga May 8, 2024 Page 2 Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Park/Vacant General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) North Pacific Electric Trail General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M) South Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Low Medium Residential – Terra Vista (LM-TV) East Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Medium Residential (M) West Deer Creek Channel General Open Space and Facilities Flood Control/Utility Corridor (FC/UC) Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Low Low Medium Residential – Terra Vista (LM-TV) d.The project includes the subdivision of 103 acres of land into 12 numbered lots. The proposed lots are irregularly shaped and would correspond with the Central Park Master Plan’s long-term phasing map; and e.The subdivision complies with each of the development standards for the Parks (P)Zone; and f.The subject subdivision includes no development of the site. 3.Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a.The proposed subdivision is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to subdivide a property with an area of approximately 103 acres of land into twelve (12) numbered lots consistent with the Central Park Master Plan Phasing Map. The underlying General Plan designation is General Open Space and Facilities which is intended for recreational, educational, public utility, and flood control uses and systems that are typically owned or controlled by the city, other public agencies, and public utility companies. b.The proposed subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code for the Parks (P) Zone, and c.The proposed subdivision will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The proposal is for the subdivision only and does not include any development of the site at this time. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Compliance Memorandum, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no Page 13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-15 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20680 City of Rancho Cucamonga May 8, 2024 Page 3 substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment based upon the findings as follows: a.The City of Rancho Cucamonga certified a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Central Park Master Plan Update on April 7th, 2021. According to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Program EIR may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project. Use of a Program EIR gives the Lead Agency an opportunity to consider broad policy alternatives and program- wide mitigation measures, as well as greater flexibility to address project-specific and cumulative environmental impacts on a comprehensive scale. b.Pursuant to Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines, no subsequent or Supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project as long as there have been a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new more severe environmental impacts; c) no new important information that shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and d) no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. The proposed subdivision does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report or Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Therefore, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required for the proposed project. 5.Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 6.The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF MAY 2024. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chairman ATTEST: Matt Marquez, Secretary Page 14 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 24-15 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20680 City of Rancho Cucamonga May 8, 2024 Page 4 I, Matt Marquez, Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of May 2024, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Page 15 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT20680 Project Name: Tentative Tract Map 20680 Location: - 107659101-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval or Approval Letter, Conditions of Approval, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet (s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction /grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 1. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption fee in the amount of $50.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing or within 5 days of the date of project approval. 2. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. 3. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 5/2/2024 Page 16 Page 1 of 1 2 3 4 1 DATE:May 8, 2024 TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM:Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development INITIATED BY:Sean McPherson, AICP, Principal Planner SUBJECT:DESIGN REVIEW – FOOTHILL LOFTS, LLC – A request to construct a mixed-use development comprising 385 residential units and approximately 6,216 square feet of commercial lease area on approximately 8.41 acres of land at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Elm Avenue. The project area has a General Plan land use designation of City Corridor – High. APN: 0208-961-05, -06, and -07 (DRC2022-00162). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Historic Preservation Commission continue the hearing to July 24, 2024. BACKGROUND: The proposed project, consisting of 385 residential units and approximately 6,216 square feet of commercial space was submitted for review on April 20, 2022. The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on March 19, 2024. The item was set for a public hearing by the Planning and Historic Preservation Commission for May 8, 2024. Mailed notices were sent to all property owners (39 recipients) within 660-feet on April 24, 2024. Similarly, a notice was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on April 24, 2024, and the site was posted on April 25, 2024. ANALYSIS: On May 2, 2024, city staff received a request in writing (Exhibit A) from the applicant’s legal counsel requesting that the item be continued to a date certain of July 24, 2024, on behalf of the applicant, Foothill Lofts, LLC. FISCAL IMPACT: None by this continuance. COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED: None by this continuance. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Written request for Continuance. Page 17 From:Ryan.Leaderman@hklaw.com To:McPherson, Sean Cc:Darrin Olson (dolson@realmre.com); CADWELL, T. (tcadwell@realmre.com); Chuck Buquet - Charles Joseph Associates (chuck@charlesjoseph.biz) Subject:DRC2022-0162/Foothill Lofts Continuance Request Date:Thursday, May 2, 2024 10:42:25 AM CAUTION: This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachmentsunless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Sean, Thank you so much for all the hard work in processing the entitlement applications for DRC2022- 0162/Foothill Lofts. On behalf of Foothill Lofts LLC, the Applicant of the housing development project, I respectfully request a continuance of the Planning Commission hearing for the Foothill Lofts project to July 24, 2024. The Applicant needs additional time to prepare and process the City-requested engineering exhibit(s). The Applicant team will need time to review draft conditions of approval, City staff report, and we will need time to respond as appropriate. I will be travelling in parts of May and June, and it will be necessary for me to attend the hearing. As such, we respectfully request a continuance to the July 24, 2024 Planning Commission meeting. Please confirm the receipt of the Applicant-requested continuance. Best, Ryan Ryan Leaderman | Holland & Knight Partner Holland & Knight LLP 400 South Hope Street, 8th Floor | Los Angeles, California 90071 Phone 213.896.2405 | Fax 213.896.2450 ryan.leaderman@hklaw.com | www.hklaw.com ________________________________________________ Add to address book | View professional biography From June 2, 2024 to June 8, 2024 I will be out of the office and riding my bike 545 miles from San Francisco to Los Angeles as part of the California AIDS Lifecycle to help end AIDS. Please consider donating: https://giving.aidslifecycle.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=donorDrive.participant&participantID=40527. NOTE: This e-mail is from a law firm, Holland & Knight LLP ("H&K"), and is intended solely for the use of the Exhibit A Page 18 individual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you believe you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete the e-mail from your computer and do not copy or disclose it to anyone else. If you are not an existing client of H&K, do not construe anything in this e-mail to make you a client unless it contains a specific statement to that effect and do not disclose anything to H&K in reply that you expect it to hold in confidence. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of H&K, you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. Page 19