The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2024-08-14 - SupplementalsPlanning Commission August 14, 2024 DRC2023-00259 Project: Design review of a 2,349 square-foot single-story single-family residence with a 487-square-foot attached garage and a related Variance to reduce the required streetscape setback. Entitlements: Minor Design Review - DRC2023-00259 Variance - DRC2023-00244 Zoning Designation: Low Residential (L) General Plan Designation: Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Project Overview Location Street View Site Plan Development Standards Development Standard Required Proposed Complies Lot Coverage 40 Percent 37 Percent Yes Setback – Amethyst Ave.35’21’Yes* Setback – 19th Street 32’ – 37’ 35’– 7”Yes Setback – Interior 5’5’Yes Rear Yard 20’ 25”Yes Building Height 35’25’Yes *With Approval of Variance DRC2023-00244 Elevations Environmental •This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Sections 15303, which covers the construction of a limited number of structures in an urbanized area, and Section 15305, which covers minor alterations in land use limitations; • The project is for the construction of single-family residences in a residential zone; • There is no substantial evidence that the project will significantly affect the environment. Correspondence •This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper on July 29, 2024; • The property was posted on July 29, 2024, and notices were mailed to property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on July 30, 2024; • Comments were received related to a sinkhole on the property. Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following action: •Approve Minor Design Review DRC2023-00259 and Variance DRC2023-00244 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions. Staff Recommendation Planning Commission August 14, 2024 Arrow and Madrone Development Who: Fairview Enterprise LLC c/o Zhaonan Feng What: A request to subdivide an existing 0.83-acre lot into six numbered lots, one lettered lot, and one dedication lot, and to construct six new single-family dwelling units. Where: Southeast corner of Arrow Route and Madrone Avenue Entitlements: Tentative Tract Map 20616, Design Review DRC2023- 00111 , and Minor Exception DRC2023-00237 Project Description Location 6TH STREET HE R M O S A A V E Arrow Route Ma d r o n e A v e n u e Proposed Project •Tentative Tract Map •Subdivide into 6 numbered lots, 1 lettered lot, 1 dedication lot •Design Review •6 New single-family dwelling units •Minor Exception •Street Setback for lots 1 & 6 •Front Setback for Lot 4 Looking South from Arrow Route Site Visit Photograph Site Plan Tentative Tract Elevations Top: Madrone Avenue view Bottom: Private Driveway view Renderings (cont.) Rendering Rendering Minor Exception Minor Exception (cont.) Previous Meetings •Neighborhood Meeting May 7, 2024 •No major concerns or questions •Design Review Committee Meeting, July 2, 2024 •Washers and dryers within the units •Two -story designs along Arrow Route •Prohibit new walls or fencing from blocking the viewshed corridor along Arrow Route •Require maintenance of the shared private driveway •DRC voted to recommend approval Environmental Assessment •Project is consistent with all applicable General Plan policies. •The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – In-Fill Development Public Noticing •Advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on July 29, 2024 •Notices sent out to all property owners within 660 feet on July 29, 2024. To date, staff has received one response. Recommendation •Subject to the conditions of approval, staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt: •Resolution 24-25 approving Design Review DRC2023-00111 ; •Resolution 24-26 approving Minor Exception DRC2023-00237; •Resolution 24-27 approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20616 Renderings Arrow Route view – Lots 1 and 6 Planning Commission August 15, 2024 DRC2022-00354 Project: A request to construct a multi-family residential development comprising of 145 residential units on 2.72 acres of land at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Lion Street. APN: 0208-632-47 (DRC2022-00354). Entitlements: Design Review Zoning Designation: Corridor 1 (CO-1) General Plan Designation: City Corridor Moderate Project Overview General Plan – Land Use Designation City Corridor - Moderate •Purpose and Intent: To provide a mix of uses at moderate development intensities along Foothill Boulevard. •Land Use and Development Intensity: Uses comprise medium to medium-high density and a broad range of commercial uses, including general retail, personal services, banks, restaurants, cafes, and office. Uses may be in freestanding or mixed-use buildings and projects. •Residential Density: 42 dwelling units/acre (maximum) •Non-residential Intensity: 0.4 - 1.0 FAR Zoning District Corridor 1 Zone •Purpose and Intent: Medium intensity mixed-use development that transitions existing auto-oriented corridors and places to vibrant areas that promote walkability. Building and entrance/façade types are diverse, contributing to a mix of distinct places along major corridor areas. Buildings front streets and transition in scale to surrounding neighborhoods with some auto-oriented development along secondary streets. •General Use: Moderate density residential with a mix of commercial and retail activity at key intersections. Medium to high intensity uses act to transition to lower intensity suburban neighborhoods adjacent to the corridor. •Residential Dwelling units per Acre: 42 du/ac (maximum) •Floor Area Ratio: 0.4 (min)/1.0 (max) Legislative Context •Applicant is utilizing State Density Bonus Law . •Projects that include a minimum of 11 % Very Low Income units shall be granted a 35% residential density bonus. (Govt. Code Section 65915(f)(1), (2)) •Per State Density Bonus Law , since the Project provides 11 % affordable units (12 units, Very Low Income), project is also eligible to request: •Concessions; •Waivers; •Incentives; and •Automatic Parking Reduction. •107 residential units allowed by Code. Applicant is proposing 145. Requested Incentive •Any modification to the City’s zoning and development standards which results in “identifiable and actual cost reductions” towards providing affordable housing (Gov. Code Section 65915(k); RCMC Section 17.46.040(B)) •Chosen incentive is a reduction in the site development standards and square footage requirements that generally require a non-residential FAR of 0.4-1.0 for the CO-1 zoning district. •The applicant is not proposing any non-residential FAR . •Minimum required amount would be 47,412 square feet. Requested Waivers •Modifications to development standards that would physically preclude the construction of a project at the proposed density. (Gov. Code Section 65915(e)(1); RCMC Section 17.46.030(E)) •Waiver 1 – Building Façade Plane Dimensions •Waiver 2 – Prohibition of Balconies, Decks on Upper-story Facades abutting Residential Zones •Waiver 3 – Prohibition on Residential Units on the Ground Floor •Waiver 4 – Primary Frontage Placement •Waiver 5 – Secondary Frontage Placement •Waiver 6 – Minimum Dimensions of Private Open Space(s) •Waiver 7 – Maximum Build-to Line Requirement for Primary Frontage •Waiver 8 – Setback from Curb for Gallery & Arcade Variation Façade Type •Waiver 9 – Clear Distance Requirement for Small Front Yard, Porch, and Stoop Variations •Waiver 10 – Required Finished Floor Minimum Dimension Requested Waivers •Modifications to development standards that would physically preclude the construction of a project at the proposed density. (Gov. Code Section 65915(e)(1); RCMC Section 17.46.030(E)) •Waiver 1 – Building Façade Plane Dimensions •Waiver 2 – Prohibition of Balconies, Decks on Upper-story Facades abutting Residential Zones •Waiver 3 – Prohibition on Residential Units on the Ground Floor •Waiver 4 – Primary Frontage Placement •Waiver 5 – Secondary Frontage Placement •Waiver 6 – Minimum Dimensions of Private Open Space(s) •Waiver 7 – Maximum Build-to Line Requirement for Primary Frontage •Waiver 8 – Setback from Curb for Gallery & Arcade Variation Façade Type •Waiver 9 – Clear Distance Requirement for Small Front Yard, Porch, and Stoop Variations •Waiver 10 – Required Finished Floor Minimum Dimension Waiver 2: Prohibition of Balconies, Decks on Upper-story Facades abutting Residential Zones Section 17.130.030.O.1: Requested Waivers •Modifications to development standards that would physically preclude the construction of a project at the proposed density. (Gov. Code Section 65915(e)(1); RCMC Section 17.46.030(E)) •Waiver 1 – Building Façade Plane Dimensions •Waiver 2 – Prohibition of Balconies, Decks on Upper-story Facades abutting Residential Zones •Waiver 3 – Prohibition on Residential Units on the Ground Floor •Waiver 4 – Primary Frontage Placement •Waiver 5 – Secondary Frontage Placement •Waiver 6 – Minimum Dimensions of Private Open Space(s) •Waiver 7 – Maximum Build-to Line Requirement for Primary Frontage •Waiver 8 – Setback from Curb for Gallery & Arcade Variation Façade Type •Waiver 9 – Clear Distance Requirement for Small Front Yard, Porch, and Stoop Variations •Waiver 10 – Required Finished Floor Minimum Dimension Waiver 3: Prohibition on Residential Units on the Ground Floor Section 17.130.040.B.1.3: Reduced Parking •Pursuant to State Density Bonus Law , the City must reduce the required parking standard for all residential units, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, to the following ratios: (Gov. Code Section 65915; RCMC Section 17.46.030(D)) •Studio & 1-Bedroom Units: 1 parking space per unit; •2-3 Bedroom Units: 1.5 parking spaces per unit; •4+ Bedroom Units: 2.5 parking spaces per unit. Reduced Parking Total Parking Spaces Required State Density Bonus Law Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Code Proposed 176 Spaces 274 Spaces 185 Spaces 166 Off-Street Spaces + 19 On-Street Spaces Plan Overview Architecture Architecture (cont.) Architecture (cont.) Building Materials Development Standards Applicant has also requested reduction in parking. Pursuant to state law, the project meets minimum parking requirements. Building Type: Mid-Rise Building Type: Mid-Rise Public Open Space: Pocket Park Public Open Space: Pocket Park New Off-Street Parking: 19 Spaces Re-opening of Lion Street General Plan Policies: •Policy LC-4.3 Connected Neighborhoods. Require that each new increment of residential development make all possible street, trail, and open space connections into any adjoining parcels. •Policy MA-2.4 Street Connectivity. Require connectivity and accessibility to a mix of land uses that meets residents’ daily needs within walking distance. Public Safety: •Emergency Response (Police, EMS, Fire) •Fire Department Access (Two points of access required by Fire Code) •Traffic circulation into/out of the property Re-opening of Lion Street Re-opening of Lion Street Right-turn only onto Foothill Boulevard Re-opening of Lion Street STOP STOP Neighborhood Meeting •Neighborhood Meeting was held on April 18, 2024 at Sweeten Hall. •Approximately 30 people attended the meeting and expressed their concerns about the project which generally focused on density, building height, parking, and the re- opening of Lion Street to two- way traffic. Design Review Committee Meeting •Project was heard at the May 7, 2024 Design Review Committee Meeting •DRC Members were supportive of the proposed architectural style as well as the associated materials and colors. •The Commissioners asked the applicant to consider adding additional amenities for young children such as a playground or swing set. Environmental Assessment •The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under CEQA Section 15332 for Infill Development Projects. •A compliance memorandum was prepared by Dudek demonstrating that the project is in compliance with CEQA Section 15332. •The compliance memorandum and associated analyses cover various topics including: •Air Quality •Noise •Traffic •Water Quality Public Noticing •Notices were mailed to all property owners within 660 feet on July 25, 2024 •Notice was posted on-site and published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on July 26, 2024 •To date, Staff has received numerous comments on the project •Comments sent after the Agenda Packet was published have been made available to Commissioners before the meeting. Conditions of Approval Amendment •Planning Department Special Condition #1 amended to add: “Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy, a parking study, which includes a parking management plan, shall be submitted, reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Planning and Economic Development Director and City Engineer. The parking management plan shall describe how resident parking will be managed in order to prevent residents and guests from parking along adjacent neighborhood streets. The project shall remain in compliance with the parking management plan at all times. In the event of any observed parking violations to the parking management plan, the City reserves the right to require the preparation of off-site, on-street parking restrictions such as, but not limited to,residential permit parking district. It is the responsibility of the property owner of the subject project to prepare, at their cost, for City adoption and implementation a paid on-street parking permit district to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Said district shall include, at a minimum, all on-street parking on Lion Street and along the Foothill Boulevard frontage (within the multi-way).” •The red-lined Conditions of Approval document has been provided to the Commissioners. Staff Recommendation As required by State law, staff recommends adoption of Resolution 24-28 to approve the project. You don't often get email from kalriss1@gmail.com. Learn why this is important From:Mendez, Bond To:Thornhill, Elizabeth Subject:FW: Concerns & Questions for Proposed Project APN: 0207-262-05 Madrone Ave and Arrow Route Date:Wednesday, August 14, 2024 11:48:09 AM Hi Liz, I just received the following email from an adjacent resident for my project tonight. Bond From: Kirk Rissinger <kalriss1@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 11:35 AM To: Mendez, Bond <Bond.Mendez@cityofrc.us> Subject: Concerns & Questions for Proposed Project APN: 0207-262-05 Madrone Ave and Arrow Route CAUTION: This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Bond, I am a resident of 8535 Madrone Ave. The neighboring property on the south side of the proposed project. I have questions and concerns below to be put on record and addressed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the development proposed. Please respond and confirm that this email has been received and also confirm that this will be read in and addressed at the August 14th, 7:00PM public meeting for the proposed project. Please send me the names and contact information for the involved persons from Rancho Cucamonga City Planning and any that will be overseeing this project. Who will be the direct contact for any issues that may arise during the project and who is the supervisor of that role? Storm and Rain Runoff. Even with the full soil of the field now, rain consistently floods through the rear of the 8535 parcel. Adding structures and non-porous surfaces will significantly increase the runoff to the 8535 parcel, likely causing damage to the property. What are the plans address runoff? Sewer Tie-in. The previous projects on the East side of Madrone Ave (Los Amigos Park and the Adega Homes) were allowed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to only run sewer up the Madrone Ave to the south side of the Adega housing community. Adega has a private sewer system that connects at the south side of the lot. This leaves the 8535 parcel stranded 300-400 feet from the nearest sewer tie-in. What are the current plans to connect these new homes to sewer? How will connecting the 8535 parcel to sewer be addressed in the future? Above ground power lines. The Los Amigos Park and the Adega Homes projects installed underground power and left the above ground power starting with a power pole 40 feet from the southern property line and an additional power pole and vault at the northern edge of the 8535 parcel. What plans are made to convert this to underground power and not leave one parcel on the street with above ground power. Sidewalk Will the new project be connecting the Adega community sidewalk to the new projects sidewalk or will the city of Rancho be allowing the sidewalk between the two community’s disconnected for the 100 feet in front of the 8535 parcel? If sidewalk is to be connected, there are large 20+ year old bushes at the front of the 8535 parcel that create a privacy as well as a sound barrier from the street. These bushes should be preserved. If removed they should be replaced with sufficient effort to restore the current foliage. Pest abatement The field hosts a significant amount of outdoor pests including earwigs and beetles. Thousands of earwigs and beetles enter the 8535 parcel annually from the field. What steps are being taken to control the pest that will inevitably flee to neighboring parcels during construction? Gopher abatement The field and 8535 parcel have an extensive history of gopher infestations. When there is activity in the field the gophers push to the 8535 parcel causing damage. This occurs annually when the field is cleared of weeds and brush and especially in 2018 when the trees were cleared from the field. Abatement of gophers is very costly with typically needing multiple treatments, spanning months, costing between $150-$250 per treatment. What steps are being taken to prevent property damage from gophers to neighboring properties during this construction? Existing Fence on the property line. The plans currently show a wall is to be constructed on the property line. The existing fence will need to be removed and disposed of by the new project. This was done by the Adega project on the southern property line of the 8535 parcel. There is also a dog that lives on the 8535 parcel so temporary fencing will need to be in place while the wall is being constructed. Dust Pollution. The field has a fine, silt like, dirt at the top layer of the soil. This silt will create significant dust on the surrounding properties and Arrow Highway. What steps are being taken to avoid dust pollution and how will this be dust pollution be prevented? Noise Pollution. I work remotely from home at 8535 Madrone Ave. I am on conference calls regularly throughout the day with customers and cannot have excessive noise pollution during the day as it will negatively impact my work. My hours are between 8AM-5PM Monday-Friday. What are the plans for noise abatement and what are the proposed working hours of the project? Thank you for your consideration. Resident of 8535 Madrone Ave. Kirk Rissinger Kalriss1@gmail.com