Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-06-12 - Minutes - HPC-PCHPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 1 of 9 Final Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda June 12, 2024 FINAL Minutes Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:00 p.m. The regular Joint meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission was held on June 12, 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; Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development; Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning; Justine Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering; Sean McPherson, Principal Planner; Adam Pisarkiewicz, Planner; Albert Felix, Traffic Engineer; Marlena Perez, Principal Engineer; Sophia Serafin, Assistant Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant. B. Public Communications Chairman Morales opened the public communications. Hearing no comments, Chairman Morales closed the public communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of May 22, 2024. Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Daniels, to approve Minutes as presented. Motion carried 5-0. 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. Continued from April 24, 2024. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura requested that the Commission continue the item to a date uncertain while staff continues to work with interested stakeholders. HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 2 of 9 Final Chairman Morales announced that the public hearing was still open and asked if anyone wanted to comment. Seeing none, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Moved by Commissioner Boling; seconded by Commissioner Dopp to continue this item to a date uncertain. Motion carried 5-0 D2. DESIGN REVIEW – FORE PROPERTY – A request to construct a mixed-use development comprising 308 residential units and 14,704 square feet of commercial lease area on 9.15 acres of land at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Grove Avenue in the Center 1 (CE1) Zone. APN: 0207-011- 35, 36, 41, 43, 44, and 45 (DRC2022-00379). Planner Adam Pisarkiewicz presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He mentioned a revised version of the Conditions of Approval have been placed on the dais due to four conditions being removed that contained outdated language. Also, an additional condition is being added requiring the applicant to submit a parking management study to make sure the parking is well managed throughout the site. Commissioner Daniels asked how much parking will be provided. Adam Pisarkiewicz answered that there will be a total of 535 spaces. Vice Chairman Boling requested that staff read out loud the addition to the Conditions of Approval. He stated for the record the red-lined version only includes the deletions, not the additional condition. Principal Planner Sean McPherson read out loud the red-lined changes. Commissioner Dopp asked for the history of zoning and the past General Plans for the site. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura replied that it was originally zoned in the 1980’s as commercial and transitioned to mixed-use in 2010. Commissioner Dopp asked for an overview of the historical findings for the site. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura provided a general overview from the environmental document. Chairman Morales opened the public hearing. Project Architect reviewed the layout of the site plan with the Commissioners. The following persons commented on the project: Carla Kavanaugh; John Crane; Sarah K; Don Horvatich; David Vangorden; Jack Wacshaw; Andrew Patlsons; Sharon Lyn Stein; Russ Burroughs; Joan Hamm; Debbie Parsons; Steve Fuy; Gene Miller; James Hamm; Richard McDonald; Kim Dexter; Matthew Gracia; Douglas Gray; Laura Espinoza; Sarah Edelmaier; Kathy Holguin; Cesar Manjarrez. The comments included the following concerns: • Kucamonga tribe was located on Red Hill. Last piece of undeveloped land. • Complaints ignored. • Traffic study inaccurate. • Misspelled name twice in report. • History will be lost. • City’s main interest is money. • Los Angeles style project. • Traffic impact will be a burden. • Parking crime - road rage with serious injuries. HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 3 of 9 Final • Agriculture lost. • Schools will be overcrowded. • Emergency access will be delayed. • Permit parking on the proposed new road. • Chemical dust onto property. • Work hours 6:30AM-8PM will disturb neighbors. • Golf Course shots onto property. Golfers worry about hitting someone. • 8 ft. masonry wall. • Will increase homeless. • No privacy with 4 story building looking into backyards. • Air quality – health concern. • Requesting proper traffic study be done. • Concern about current lack of police enforcement. • Guest parking. • Improve intersection – flow of traffic. Accidents. • Similar parking issues as Arte. • Pollution. • High rent. More than 1 person living in units. Parking Concern. • Consider history of Rancho Cucamonga Community. For the record, it is noted that the following correspondences were received after the preparation of the agenda packet and the following general concerns are noted. The actual correspondence should be referred to for details: • Petition on Change.org to preserve the land. • Letter from the Development Services Department Office of the Director from the City of Upland expressing concerns of Air Quality, Hazardous Materials, Traffic Impact Analysis, Parking and Noise. • Email from James Hamm asked when the studies where done, if the City took into consideration the 175 new condos being built on Foothill. • Email from Denise Garzaro noted concern about the increased traffic and activity the mixed-use development will bring to the community. • Email from Sarah Edelmaier expressed concerns with the development. • Letter received from Andrew and Deborah Parsons noting health concerns, quality of life, outdoor lighting during development, noise, and parking shortage. • Letter from Joan M. Hamm is opposed to the project due to air and noise quality, traffic and parking. • Email from Rita J. Cullen expressed she is opposed to the project. • Email from Allen and Melinda Vanderbilt expressed their disapproval of the project plan. • Email from Alyssa Smedley demanded immediate halt to the proposed development. • Email from Eric and Tina Little are in opposition of the proposed mixed-use development. • Email from Anne Marie Lougheed opposed to more apartments being built. • Email from Candace Cooke is opposed to the project being built. • Email from Susan McCoy against more apartments being built. • Email from Mark Bertone, Board member of Red Hill County Club, inquired about what type of fence/wall is planned along North and East side of the project. • Email from David VanGorden is against the project and stated the same issues will occur as Arte apartment complex with the reduction in parking. • Email from Andrew and Deborah Parson expressed their concerns with the project being built. • Email from Karen (a concerned citizen) appealing the project being built. • Email from Candace Cooke is in opposition of the project. • Email from Susan McCoy expressed she does not want another apartment complex in the city. • Email from Sarah Kaleel expressed her strong opposition to the proposed project. HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 4 of 9 Final • Email from Cathy Jarecki is opposed to the project. • Email from Jayne Dam is against more homes being built. • Email from John Crane expressed his concerns and displeasure of the project. • Email from Barbara Done expressed her concerns and reasons why she is again the development. • Email from Melissa Hernandez is against the newly structured townhomes being built. • Email from Jennifer Thorne is in urgent opposition of the project site being built. • Email from Tom Dodd is in opposition of removing the Strawberry Farm. • Email from Doug Gray express his concern with the project being built. • Email from Harvey Rodriguez is against the project. • Email from Danielle Parker expressed her concerns against the project. • Email from Wendee Lee, resident of Upland, expressed the loss of not having the Strawberry Farm and is against the development. • Email from Dr. Sharon Lyn Stein is adamantly opposed of the project. Applicant Legal Counsel Lindsay Tabian spoke on traffic, safety, artifacts, schools and dust. Chairman Morales closed the public hearing. Traffic Engineer Alberto Felix detailed the traffic diversion for vehicles traveling east out of the complex. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura stated that the City is working with the operator of the Strawberry Farm to relocate and keep in town. She said the property is not owned by the farm and that the property owner did decide to sell the property, and the entity purchasing the land is choosing to develop utilizing tools provided in state law that are not consistent with local zoning standards. She said it is written into the parking management plan if there should be impacts to the adjacent streets, the City would require the developer to do the necessary steps to implement permit parking on Red Hill Country Club Drive as needed. Commissioner Dopp asked if it was possible to require the tenants to use garages for parking. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura answered that it is part of the parking management plan, and an annual audit is done to ensure it is being used for parking and not for storage. Commissioner Daniels asked if there are future plans to improve or update the traffic signal at the intersection of Grove and Foothill. Traffic Engineer Alberto Feliz answered the traffic study did not recommend improvements for that specific intersection. Vice Chairman Boling asked if we can mandate that garages be used for parking and audits take place as part of the Conditions of Approval. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura confirmed. Chairman Morales asked what the solutions with Arte parking were. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura answered there were two solutions: 1) Creation of additional parking spots, paid for jointly between the City and the property owner. 2) Initiation of a permit parking district on the streets west of the project site and there have been no additional concerns or complaints received and staff continues to monitor. HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 5 of 9 Final Chairman Morales asked what the parking reduction percentage is for the current project. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura stated they would get the numbers on the reduction and that the Arte parking reduction was approved through the minor exception process, and it was not using state density bonus law. Commissioner Dopp asked the applicant if they think Arte was good for that site. Applicant Legal Counsel Lindsey Tabian answered that Arte parking was a lesson learned and they are providing parking over the density bonus law standard and doing what is necessary to make this site a success. Commissioner Dopp inquired given the parameters, do they think this project can be a success. Applicant Legal Counsel Lindsay Tabian answered she does not think they would be building this project if it would not be a success. Commissioner Daniels asked if they could control how many people occupy a unit. Applicant Jonathan Cornelius answered that there are limitations and strict control of how many people are in a unit and it is policed by the management company. Vice Chairman Boling asked to clarify for the record, and for the public, the rationale for some of the waivers. Applicant Legal Counsel Lindsay Tabian explained the residential grade waiver is to comply with the accessible access standards that are required and to accommodate the residential intensity. She said there are a few spots where the project does not comply with the 30” residential minimum and in order to do so, the application would have to add ramping in too many locations to maintain the accessible access that they need. She said the finished elevations for residential buildings where the 30” grade differential are adjacent to the most meaningful pedestrian connection and the intent of the standards is to maintain those pedestrian connections in all the places where those are important, the project is compliant with the code standards. Vice Chairman Boling asked about the waivers for building type height requirement and parapet height for the buildings. Applicant Legal Counsel Lindsay Tabian replied that in terms of the number of stories, they are in compliance. She explained the zone maximum is 4 stories. She said they are exceeding the heights and parapet widths by a few feet in order to allow for a range of potential floor trusses. The 3 ft. differential accounts for the two options for floor trusses that will be ironed out during the final design phase when going through the plan check. Commissioner Diaz stated the project they are proposing goes along with how the City wants to be walkable community based. She said they are using density bonus law because they are offering affordable units. She asked what the rent would be for these apartments. Applicant Jonathan Cornelius answered that the rent will be market rate when the property opens in two to three years. Commissioner Diaz asked if they have any commercial partners currently to fill the commercial spaces. Applicant Jonathan Cornelius answered not yet because it’s too early. Commissioner Diaz asked if they have any idea who they plan to put in those spaces and if the employees will be able to afford the apartment rent so she can mitigate some of the walkability, parking, and traffic issues. HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 6 of 9 Final Applicant Jonathan Cornelius answered they have not tried to fill the non-residential space yet and that it will be after construction starts. Chairman Morales stated the developer is choosing to use the waivers in compliance with state housing laws. He asked how, as a Commission, are they restricted in what can be denied or approved from what is being suggested. Assistant City Attorney Serita Young answered that in order to deny a requested waiver the Planning Commission would have to find, based on substantial evidence, that the wavier would have a specific adverse impact on public health, safety or on property listed on the state register of Historical Resources and where there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate that specific adverse impact, or is contrary to state or federal law. Commissioner Dopp asked for the City Attorney to provide a summary for the public to differentiate between subjective and objective discretion in denying this project outright when it comes to the housing laws. Assistant City Attorney Serita Young explained the density bonus law that they are relying on for part of the project is laid out in state law in what they get in return for building affordable housing units. She said in terms of subjective vs. objective, as long as they meet those clearly objective criteria under state density bonus law than they are entitled to the increased density and the reduced parking. It is the state’s incentive for production of more affordable housing units. She explained the subjective is different and that it is more related to design. The code is very clear about the types of products that may be placed within that zone and the developers have complied with those required design types. Commissioner Dopp stated if he owned this site and if he had the subjective ability to design this project, he would not put it here. He said there were so many things brought up from public comments that he has on his list such as parking and walkability and he does not see it the most walkable. He said that giant avenue in the northern part next to the four-story buildings, he sees a lot of cars going through there. He said that specific block itself does not hit home to some of the urban planning principles that the Commission is seeing both in the General Plan and over time. The whole point of having the zoning on Foothill is to create Foothill as a corridor. He said corridors mean places where people can get somewhere quickly and have a community. The strategy of mixed-use suggests how important it is in terms of connecting people along similar lines geographically, whether it be streets or otherwise. He said it is something that is very important and critical to the whole premise of why the zones are the way they are on Foothill. Commissioner Dopp said he is personally bothered by the fact that the State of California has decided that a developer can come in and offer a little tiny bit and get all that stuff in return. He thanked the residents for coming out tonight. He heard a lot of comments that they thought the Commission was automatically totally on board with everything being presented tonight. He defended the City’s General Plan because he approved it and a lot of the principals in it. He said he does like some things about this project but in limited measures. He wanted the residents to understand that the Commission is dealing with multiple constraints tonight with making a decision. He said objectively this will probably be a reluctant yes vote for him. Commissioner Daniels also thanked the residents for coming out and speaking tonight. He said that it is nice to see they care about what happens to their community. He expressed the biggest problem he has with this project is the state density law. It sounds like developers can create their own standards for what they want to do and that is due to our legislators in Sacramento, and it is a real problem. He would like to see something done in that intersection to monitor traffic. It seems about every project we have seen in the last year, has had a parking reduction. After speaking with staff, we do not know how much commercial we really need but that is a significant reduction in parking. He mentioned he does not like off-street parking or parallel spaces. HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 7 of 9 Final Vice Chairman Boling requested to have a requirement included in the Conditions of Approval that garages be used for vehicle parking and not for storage and to have mandatory periodic audits. He expressed his concerns with the retail space and the lack of orientation to residents. He said if we are looking for a walkable development, you have many built in customers with these residents and you are going to force them to walk to Foothill to get to these store shops. He suggested maybe having glass entry on both sides, with some windows up high to create a semi-private grass area for residents to enjoy. In regard to health issues/concerns with the dust, the applicant’s representative responded they have requirements for posting contact information so if residents see an unusual amount of dust, they can contact authorities for remedy. Also, noise concern was mentioned, and he asked staff to reiterate what our development code calls out regarding time constraints when construction can take place. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura said that in addition to time restrictions, there are restrictions during the holidays and there are conditions in the project that require large vehicles not to be idling, it is not only an air quality measurement but also reduces noise levels. Vice Chairman Boling inquired of Engineering that along Red Hill Country Club from Foothill going northbound, it curves around into Red Hill Community, how much is currently designated no parking or could it be designated no parking. Traffic Engineer Alberto Felix answered that along residences is where you can currently park and to the east is posted no parking. Residents that live there will lose the ability to park along their frontages, but it can be reviewed. Vice Chairman Boling talked about schools and asked staff if the City has school impact fees and does the City coordinate with the impacted school districts to make sure the developers are working in conjunction with the school districts. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura confirmed and said the school districts maintains and manages their own impact fee structures and the fees must be paid, and proof provided to the City prior to permit issuance. Vice Chairman Boling stated the current tenant are not the owners of the land and that they lease the land. He said if the owner of the property did not want to sell and did not have a willing buyer, in theory, the Strawberry Farm would still be in operation at the site. He said City staff, along with the County of San Bernardino, possibly located a potential site within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. He expressed his concerns with parallel parking immediately east of Grove on Foothill with regard to safety, backend parking (north of Grove) and traffic/congestion. He asked if a U-turn can be made where there is a solid yellow line on Grove. Deputy Director of Engineering Justine Garcia said a double yellow line does not prevent a vehicle from crossing a double yellow line legally, if there is no sign prohibiting a U-turn. She said that parking on Foothill will be constructed as a part of one of the capital improvement projects happening now. She explained that with this project they are narrowing travel lanes to eleven feet, which provides for slower speeds. She mentioned with this capital project they are putting in the last portion of the traffic signals sync project. The signals will be synced to interact and slow speeds down in the area for safety. Vice Chairman Boling clarified that the parallel parking we are seeing on the site plan is part of a different project. Deputy Director of Engineering Justine Garcia confirmed it is part of the capital project under a grant. Vice Chairman Boling clarified it is the City’s project and not the applicant’s project. HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 8 of 9 Final Deputy Director of Engineering Justine Garcia confirmed. Commissioner Diaz thanked the public for coming out and expressing their concerns. She said it is clear we are removing a significant resource from the community and there is nothing we can do about these mitigating factors. It was mentioned there will be 16 units of low income, which is the bare minimum, and they asked for a lot of waivers, she expressed concern about that. She said having Foothill as the corridor, there is a missed opportunity with doing something along the roof top of the buildings and she does not see the walkability on the frontage. Chairman Morales asked about comments received from the public about historic preservation and talked about the Tongva Indian people, Tapia Family Ranches and the Strawberry Farm who previously occupied the space. He strongly suggested the developer create some kind of art. He asked staff if this is something that we can require from the develop as a condition of approval or strongly suggest. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura replied that this project falls under an exception because it is providing affordable housing. She said if the developer can show, through an independent appraisal, the value of the units is greater than the art that will be required, they can request to be exempted from the public art requirement. We cannot force them to put in the art because we have to follow what is in the code. She said when it comes to the landscaping, the Commission can add a condition to include some of the key historical landscape items and identify what those should be. Chairman Morales suggested to the applicant that they add art with murals on the wall or some kind of art. He inquired as far as landscaping goes, is that something they could do, because it would be very important to the community. Applicant Jonathan Cornelius answered that they would look into it. Chairman Morales asked the Commission if they want to require some kind of landscaping to the farm. Vice Chairman Boling indicated that he is not in favor of having art for the Strawberry Farm, but he does give a nod to have the historical native culture and tribes that were here noting that the Strawberry Farm is a tenant that does not own the land and is looking to relocate within the City. Chairman Morales stated that he withdraws his suggestion to have art for the Strawberry Farm because it may not be practical or feasible, but he highly recommends for the developer to include historical art of the Tongva Indian people because they were there first, and as a second thought, the Tapia Family Ranch to have a good relationship with the community. He thanked the public for coming out tonight and expressed that their communications where read. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura suggested that the Commission consider a condition that parking garages shall be restricted to vehicle parking only and shall be audited semi-annually to assure compliance and the report will be provided to city staff upon request. Commissioner Diaz asked how we know if they are in compliance. Deputy Director of Planning Jennifer Nakamura answered that it will be in the parking management plan and reported back to staff. Motion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling to adopt Resolution 24-18, Design Review DRC2022-00379 including the 4 removed conditions and the two added conditions: 1) Parking Management Plan, and 2) Parking Garage Restrictions. Motion carried 5-0 HPC/PC MINUTES – June 12, 2024 Page 9 of 9 Final E.Director Announcements – None F.Commission Announcements Commissioner Daniels requested for staff to talk about the clearview parking at a future meeting. He also requested to have the Economic Development Director come to talk about commercial developments. He said that the Commission needs more knowledge on what the city needs and does not need. Commissioner Dopp requested at a future meeting staff put together a report on agriculture resources in the city. He asked if there are strategies that other cities are using and what tools we have to attempt to try and preserve land that is still available for farming. G.Adjournment Motion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp, seconded by Commissioner Diaz to adjoin the meeting. Hearing no objections, Chairman Morales adjourned the meeting at 10:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant Planning and Economic Development Department Approved: HPC/PC June 26, 2024 Meeting