The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2025-05-28 - Agenda Packet Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS May 28, 2025 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 May 14, 2025. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS D1. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP - Cinthia Cervantes - A request for the subdivision of an existing 45,600 square foot parcel into two new parcels within the Very Low Residential (VL) zone, located at 13204 Banyan Street. This project qualifies for a Class 15 Categorical Exemption under State CEQA Guidelines 15315 as a Minor Land Division. APN: 0225-122-46 (SUBTPM20962). E. DIRECTOR ANNOUNCEMENTS F. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS G. 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 appeals filed must be in writing with the City Clerk’s Office, state the reason for the appeal, and be accompanied by an appeal fee pursuant to the most adopted fee schedule for all decisions for 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 Draft Minutes –May 14, 2025 Page 1 of 7 2 8 3 1 Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda May 14, 2025 Draft Minutes Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 7:30 p.m. The regular joint meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission was held on May 14, 2025. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Morales at 7:30 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, Planning Director; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Sophia Serafin, Assistant Planner; Michael Parmer, Engagement and Special Programs Director; Justine Garcia, Deputy Director of Engineering; Deborah Allen, Management Analyst; Clarence De Guzman, Management Analyst; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant. B. Public Communications Chairman Morales opened the public communications. Resident Nicole Myerchin shared details of her recent visit to Santa Barbara, noting the abundance of open space, lack of large-scale development, and the lack of active development projects. She urged the Commissioners to take a similar stance by pushing back against overdevelopment and preserving the community’s integrity and open space. Hearing no other comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of April 23, 2025. Executive Assistant Thornhill noted the following minor corrections to the minutes: Called to order to reflect Chairman Morales, not Vice Chairman Boling Item D1: Misspelling of Architect in the title Item D1: Second paragraph - CEQA vendor, replace vendor with consultant Page 3 HPC/PC Draft Minutes –May 14, 2025 Page 2 of 7 2 8 3 1 Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Diaz. Motion carried 5-0 approved the minutes as amended. D. Public Hearings D1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - KIMLEY HORN - A request to permit wholesale and distribution, manufacturing, e-commerce distribution/fulfillment, and storage warehouse uses at two existing industrial buildings totaling 418,265 and 331,872 square feet, currently occupied with legal non-conforming e-commerce distribution/fulfillment and wholesale and distribution uses within the Neo-Industrial (NI) zone and the Neo-Industrial Employment District General Plan land use designation at 11555 and 11599 Arrow Route, respectively; APNs 0229-111-64 and 0229- 111-65. This item is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements under CEQA Section 15301 – Existing Facilities (DRC2024-00378 and DRC2024-00379). Assistant Planner Serafin presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Commissioner Daniels asked staff if there have been any issues within the last few years at either of the two sites. Assistant Planner Serafin indicated there are no recorded issues. Chairman Morales opened the public hearing. Applicant Burnett was present and stated she had no concerns or issues with the conditions as presented and was available to answer questions. Vice Chairman Boling asked the applicant to confirm whether the buildings are currently occupied. Applicant Burnett confirmed. Vice Chairman Boling asked if the buildings were occupied prior to 2021. Applicant Burnett responded that the buildings have been continuously occupied with the same type of uses. She explained that the Conditional Use Permits are being sought in anticipation of future tenant changes, to ensure those uses remain consistent and comply with conditions under which the space is occupied. Vice Chairman Boling asked whether the buildings are configured to allow subdivisions for multiple tenants. Applicant Burnett confirmed. Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing. Commissioner Dopp stated the commissioners have seen a lot of these development code issues and given that there have been no past incidents with these types of projects, he expressed a greater level of comfort. He thanked the applicant for formalizing the request, stating that the proposed uses appear appropriate and consistent. Page 4 HPC/PC Draft Minutes –May 14, 2025 Page 3 of 7 2 8 3 1 Commissioner Daniels commended the applicant for submitting the application in compliance with code requirements and noted that the existing developed site has been fully occupied for some time. He expressed his appreciation for taking the steps to process and obtain the Conditional Use Permit. Vice Chairman Boling concurred with the commissioners and expressed his appreciation to the applicant for proactively addressing a legal nonconforming situation that arose due to the City’s changes to occupancy and use requirements. He said if approved, the Conditional Use Permit would provide greater flexibility for the buildings’ use, help maximize the property’s economic value and reduce the risk of prolonged vacancies in the future. He commended the applicant for taking action before any issues developed. Chairman Morales commended the applicant for taking the right approach and collaborating with staff to responsibly address the issue. Motion: Moved by Commissioner Dopp; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling to adopt Resolution 2025-015 to approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2024-00378 and Resolution 2025-016 Conditional Use Permit DRC2024-00379. Motion carried 5-0. D2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT & DESIGN REVIEW - STUDIO ROCA - A request for site plan and design review of 8 single-family residences on 4.78 acres of land on a previously approved tract map (Tract 14644) at the terminus of Camellia Court in the Very Low Residential (VL) Zone, Hillside Overlay, and the Equestrian Overlay; APN: 1076-381-24 thru 31. The project qualifies as a Class 32 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – Infill Development Projects (Design Review DRC2024-00174). Associate Planner Tabe van der Zwaag presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Chairman Morales opened the public hearing. Applicant Miller was in attendance and available to answer questions. Nicole Myerchin expressed her opposition to the project and submitted photos of wildlife around her property, which were collected and included in the official record. The following individuals provided comments on the project and expressed their opposition to it: William Hobbs; Barbara DeWitt; Zaher Azzaw; Dru Davis; Sandra Stillwell Mora; Ron Davis; Gail Burnley; John Peterson. For the record, the following correspondences were received after the preparation of the agenda packet and the following general concerns are noted. An email from Jennifer Allen expressed strong opposition to the proposal site plan, citing concerns about the development’s impact on the local environment and quality of life. An email from Mike Atchison in opposition, citing safety concerns, increased traffic, and the potential impact on the residents due to the construction. An email from Dru Davis expressed strong opposition of the project and how it will affect their quiet neighborhood. An email from Ted Myerchin in opposition, citing that the area should have a second access point due to fire concerns. He also noted safety concerns for the children and the disbursement of wildlife. Page 5 HPC/PC Draft Minutes –May 14, 2025 Page 4 of 7 2 8 3 1 Applicant Miller provided the following rebuttal in response to the comments: - This is an ultra-low-density housing project, and they did the traffic study required by CEQA, and they are in compliance. - They are not proposing more houses that are smaller, but instead they are keeping them big. They exceeded the lot size because originally, they were approved to have septic tanks, which has a ½ acre minimum, so they kept that compliance because they wanted to keep the original tract map. He said this could have been divided into additional lots for a higher profit, but they did not want to do that. They wanted to keep what was approved and keep the lots big and have minimal impact on traffic. - Regarding the nature trail, there is a nature trail access at the end of the cul-de-sac. He said the deer will not be restricted. He added that there are 500+ aces of free nature trail access at the end of the cul-de-sac and there will be no restrictions on wildlife. - Regarding RV Access, he explained that there is one horse trail leading to the property with a driveway cutout in the curb, and another more direct path to the north. The request is to cut the curb for easier RV access to the homes and back up to the trail. Currently, the curb presents a challenge for vehicles like horse trailers or RVs to access, so the proposal is to have the curb cut for improved access. Miller stated that he is working with staff to determine what would be required to make this change. Planning Director Nakamura requested to table the RV access discussion for staff to review. She indicated this is the first they are hearing of this tonight and would like to defer for staff to resolve separately. Vice Chairman Boling concurred. Chairman Morales closed the public hearing. Commissioner Dopp stated that they are being asked to review the architecture, assuming that is the correct understanding. Planning Director Nakamura confirmed and clarified that the lot configuration has been legalized. The vacant parcel constitutes the street right-of-way and is part of eight legal parcels that already exists. Commissioner Dopp wanted to ensure everyone understood that. He expressed empathy for some of the concerns raised. He said when land is purchased and already zoned for single-family development, like the parcel in question, which was previously approved by City Council many years ago, it places the commissioners in a difficult position. With a housing project at hand and the state’s constraints, he noted the challenge. His main concern was the architecture, specifically the window paneling, which he admitted was not his personal favorite but did meet the objective standards set for review. He mentioned that this is not the first infill project the commission has seen, where a street that had been on paper for a long time is now being developed. Although, change is not always easy to accept, he emphasized that, in this case, the key factor for him was adherence to the standards. He said while some commissioners may not be fully in favor of many of the constraints, the fact that the proposal meets existing standards puts them in a tough spot. Page 6 HPC/PC Draft Minutes –May 14, 2025 Page 5 of 7 2 8 3 1 Commissioner Daniels concurred with Commissioner Dopp and noted that many members of the commission share empathy for the concerns and issues raised. He explained that the challenge lies in the scope of what the commission is reviewing. He said if they were evaluating the entire development, including the subdivision layout and the length of the cul-de-sac, it would be a different discussion. He emphasized that the developer is simply proposing to build homes on lots that already exist, and the project is in compliance with all city standards for the type of development proposed. As such, it is difficult for the commission to reject the project based on personal references. He added that he likes the modern traditional design of the homes. While he wishes the homes were somewhat smaller, he acknowledged that they meet all setback and lot coverage requirements. Chairman Morales asked Planning Director Nakamura to explain what happens if we do not comply with the state law. Also, what we can do and not do as far as zoning for this property. Planning Director Nakamura explained that the state has declared a housing crisis, leading to significant changes in the rules governing project review. She emphasized that this is no longer a subjective process. If the commission were to deny a project based on subjective standards, the City would face legal challenges and would likely not be successful. Commissioner Diaz she acknowledged that the commission is often faced with difficult decisions but expressed appreciation when housing is brought into the community, especially when it aligns with what the community has expressed a need for. She recognized the ongoing housing crisis in the state and said she empathizes with residents concerned about changes in the neighborhood. She indicated that a public comment was made about children playing in the street and she could relate and expressed hope that the project would bring eight new families who could become part of that community. Vice Chairman Boling stated there have been a number of issues on various topics brought up. He wanted to make sure it gets covered for a better understanding on the following issues: Water availability and supply: The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not make that determination, but Cucamonga Valley Water District does. Concerns may be directed to the elected official on their board. Use of the property - Community Garden or Tot Lot: Unfortunately, it is private property, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga cannot direct the developer to do something different with the property then what the development code and the zoning allows for. If the community would like the field to remain an open space, they would need to contact the developer, take up a collection and buy the property. Cul-de-sac: The current terminus of the street is temporary. The actual end of the street, as outlined in the city’s street master plan does indicate the street is to continue through, but that is not on the table to discuss today. Evacuation and emergencies: There are fewer other cul-de-sacs in that general neighborhood that contain between 12 or 16 residential units on their cul-de-sac. Having 14 is not anomaly, there is precedent. Sidewalks: Asking the current developer to install sidewalks in front of existing homes that have been there for decades presents a legal challenge. In order for the city to require this, there must be a direct connection between the proposed development and the specific improvements being requested. Legally, a city cannot require a developer to go beyond what is directly related to their project. The appropriate time for sidewalks to have been installed was when those existing homes were originally built. If the developer at that time had been required to include sidewalks, they would already be in place today. Page 7 HPC/PC Draft Minutes –May 14, 2025 Page 6 of 7 2 8 3 1 Sewer: The existing homes are currently on septic systems, which presents an opportunity; the main sewer line for the new development would need to extend all the way up to Beryl. This could benefit existing homeowners who wish to connect to the sewer in the future, as a portion of this project costs would be subsidized by the new development. These homeowners would only need to cover the cost of connecting their individual properties, rather than installing a main line themselves. He noted that, if a good relationship exists between the current property owners and the developer, coordinating the work now, before the street is paved, could lead to significant cost savings. Waiting until after the road is sealed would place the full burden on the individual homeowners. Storm drain and water runoff: State requires there must be a storm water quality management plan filed, reviewed and approved for this project and that would address runoff and water that is collected on site for the project. Current standards require that 90% to 95% of the water gets retained on site, so minimal water could potentially come off the new properties. They are required to put in sidewalk curb gutters. Chairman Morales stated that he visited the project site and understands the concerns raised by the neighboring residents. He shared that he could relate to their perspective, as his own neighborhood is adjacent to the foothills and underwent development and fortunately, deer still come down to graze on the landscape, which he recognizes is important to the community. He noted that the project complies with existing zoning regulations, which limits the commission’s ability to deny it. He also confirmed that the storm drain issue has been addressed and expressed satisfaction with it. Motion: Moved by Commissioner Diaz; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling to adopt Resolution 2025-014 to approve Design Review DRC2024-00174. Motion carried 5-0. E. General Business E1. Consideration of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Major Projects Program for Fiscal Year 2025/26. Management Analyst Allen and Management Analyst De Guzman presented a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). With no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public hearing. Commissioner Dopp thanked staff for their presentation and the annual update. He said it is always interesting to read every year and see what is going on around the city. There have been a few parks that have been added, dedicated bike lanes and the Trail Head Cucamonga Canyon. He said it is nice to see that progress is being made on topics of conversations that come up whether it be issues by residents or things they see in projects. Commissioner Daniels commended staff for doing a great job. The documents are very easy to read. He is amazed at the cost for some of the projects. He said it is interesting to see what the city is planning to do in the next 5 years. Vice Chairman Boling stated that, from a commissioner’s perspective, he greatly appreciates staff’s efforts to reference the corresponding General Plan goals for each project, ensuring that the plan is in conformity. He is amazed to see some of the projects and activities going on in the city. He said the identification of the funding source is helpful as a resident. It shows the city is being transparent and it helps educate the public. Page 8 HPC/PC Draft Minutes –May 14, 2025 Page 7 of 7 2 8 3 1 Commissioner Diaz thanked staff for preparing the report, noting that it is one of her favorite documents to review. She mentioned that she shared it with colleagues in her office, as people appreciate knowing what is happening in the city. She added that the report is easy for the community to understand, so it is very much appreciated. Chairman Morales thanked staff for the informative presentation and well-prepared packet. He stated that the project’s alignment with the General Plan reflects the team’s effectiveness in executing the City’s vision. Motion: Moved by Commissioner Diaz; seconded by Vice Chairman Boling to adopt Resolution 2025-011 approving the Major Projects Program (MPP) for FY 2025/26. Motion carried 5-0. F. Director Announcements Planning Director Nakamura announced that the city was awarded the California American Planning Association Inland Empire Section 2025 Award of Excellence for the Planning Agency. She thanked the Commissioners for their support and staff for all the work they do on a day-to- day basis. G. Commission Announcements Vice Chairman Boling addressed the general public still in attendance, noting that it can be challenging when individuals make statements during public comment without an opportunity for commissioners or staff to respond on corrected potential inaccuracies. He referenced a comment made earlier in the meeting claiming that there is no new development occurring in the City of Santa Barbara. He clarified that, to his knowledge, nearly 4,000 units are currently under consideration in Santa Barbara, including 61 proposed affordable units. He expressed concern that, without the ability to respond, members of the public may leave with misconceptions about how the city’s planning process functions. Chairman Morales congratulated the Planning Department on receiving the award. He indicated they are true professionals and thanked them for being the best. H. Adjournment Motion: Moved by Commissioner Diaz, seconded by Commissioner Dopp to adjourn the meeting. Hearing no objections, Chairman Morales adjourned the meeting at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant Planning Department Approved: Page 9 DATE:May 28, 2025 TO:Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM:Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director INITIATED BY:Jared Knight, Assistant Planner SUBJECT:TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP - Cinthia Cervantes - A request for the subdivision of an existing 45,600 square foot parcel into two new parcels within the Very Low Residential (VL) zone, located at 13204 Banyan Street. This project qualifies for a Class 15 Categorical Exemption under State CEQA Guidelines 15315 as a Minor Land Division. APN: 0225-122-46 (SUBTPM20962). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution for the approval of Tentative Parcel Map 20962 subject to the attached conditions of approval. BACKGROUND: The 45,600 square foot project site consists of a single parcel improved with a single-family residential structure. The east side of the property is vacant and features several trees. The project site is further improved with two points of access from Banyan Street to the south. The subject property is located in the Equestrian Overlay Zone and is bordered to the west by the Etiwanda Colony Elementary School. An aerial view of the project site is provided in Figure 1. Figure 1 - Aerial View of Site Banyan Street Ea s t Av e n u e Page 10 Page 2 of 4 2 7 9 8 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 Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Very Low Residential (VL) North School Bus Depot General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) South Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Very Low Residential (VL) East Vacant Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Very Low Residential (VL) West Etiwanda Colony Elementary School General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) ANALYSIS: The application is a request to subdivide the project site into two new parcels, hereafter referred to as Parcel 1 and Parcel 2. Parcel 1 would feature a total area of 25,080 square feet and includes the existing single family residential building, which shall remain. Parcel 2 would encompass vacant land with a total area of 20,520 square feet. The proposed Subdivision meets all lot dimension standards detailed in Development Code Section 17.36.010 as follows: Standard Requirement Proposed New Lots Analysis Minimum Lot Width 90’Parcel 1 – 110’ Parcel 2 – 90’Compliant Minimum Lot Depth 200’Parcel 1 – 228’ Parcel 2 – 228’Compliant Minimum Lot Frontage 50’Parcel 1 – 110’ Parcel 2 – 90’Compliant Minimum Lot Area 20,000 sq ft Parcel 1 – 25,080 sq ft Parcel 2 – 20,520 sq ft Compliant Minimum Net Average Lot Area 22,500 Avg. 22,800 sq ft Compliant While the applicant has indicated their intent to develop Parcel 2 with a single-family residential structure in the future, no design package or application has been submitted for Development of Parcel 2 at this time. Thus, this application is for the subdivision only. The approximate layout of Page 11 Page 3 of 4 2 7 9 8 the proposed subdivision is shown in Figure 2. Figure 2 - Proposed New Parcels It should be noted that the existing house on Parcel 1 is currently legal nonconforming with regard to the deficient westerly side yard setback. Whereas Development Code Section Table 17.36.010- 1A establishes that interior side yard setbacks provide at least 10 feet on one side of a house, and 15 feet on the other, the existing residence provides a westerly side yard setback of approximately 3 feet. The proposed subdivision will modify the existing Lot Coverage and side setbacks of the existing structure relative to the new Parcel 1 as follows: Standard Requirement Current New Analysis Maximum Lot Coverage 25%10%18%Compliant Minimum Side Yard Setbacks 10ft/15ft West: 3 ft (approx.) East: 101 ft West: 3 ft (approx.) East: 11 ft Existing Nonconforming Per development code section 17.62.030, modifications can be made to nonconforming structures which do not increase the degree of nonconformity. The existing nonconforming setback on the westerly property line will not be impacted in any way by the proposed subdivision. The setback on the easterly property line will be reduced from 101 feet to 11 feet as a result of the proposed subdivision. If we were to impose the larger 15 foot setback on the east side of Parcel 1, this would result in Parcel 2 being under the minimum lot size standards. To avoid causing Parcel 2 to become nonconforming, the 10-foot minimum setback has been applied to the easterly property line with the existing approximate 3 foot westerly setback considered the deficient 15-foot side yard setback. Future development on Parcel 2 will be required to conform to all objective development standards in effect at the time of development, including but not limited to setbacks, lot coverage, and building height. Banyan Street Ea s t Av e n u e Page 12 Page 4 of 4 2 7 9 8 Public Art As there is no development associated with the proposed subdivision, public art is not required. For future development of the site, housing projects with a density of less than 4 units per acre are exempt from the public art ordinance as outlines in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. Environmental Assessment Planning Department Staff have determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines. The project qualifies as a class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 – Minor Land Divisions. The project scope is for the subdivision of a residentially zoned lot into two separate parcels. Both parcels are in conformance with the General Plan and the Development Code’s requirements for the Very Low Residential (VL) zone. Both parcels can be adequately served by fire, public safety and utility services, and have driveway access onto nearby roadways. Both parcels are relatively flat and do not have a slope greater than 20 percent. The parcel proposed to be divided was not involved in a division from a larger parcel within the previous 2 years. There is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Correspondence 41 notices were mailed to property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site on May 13th, 2025. On May 14th, 2025, notices were published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. The project site was also posted with physical notices on May 14th, 2025. To date, planning staff have received no comments related to the proposed subdivision. FISCAL IMPACT: The project site currently is assessed an annual property tax. A percentage of this annual tax is shared with the City. The proposed new parcel will increase the value of the project site when developed with a new home and the City’s annual share of the property tax will increase accordingly. The project proponent also will be responsible for paying one-time impact fees. These fees are intended to address the increased demand for City services due to the proposed project. The following types of services that these impact fees would support include the following: library services, transportation infrastructure, drainage infrastructure, animal services, police, parks, and community and recreation services. COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED: The project promotes the City Council’s core values of “Building and preserving a family-oriented atmosphere” and “Intentionally embracing and anticipating our future”. In addition to helping create new housing by creating a new residential parcel, the proposed new parcel’s location near a day care and elementary school may make it appealing and convenient for families. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A – Aerial View of Project Site with Proposed New Parcels Exhibit B – Proposed Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit C – Resolution 2025-017 With Conditions of Approval Page 13 Aerial View of Project Site with Proposed New Parcels Image 1 – Aerial View of Project Site Image 2 – Proposed New Parcels Exhibit A Page 14 EXHIBIT B Page 15 CL BANYAN STREET20 0 . 0 0 ' N 8 9 ° 5 0 ' 5 4 " W N 8 9 ° 5 0 ' 5 4 " W 20 0 . 0 0 ' N 00°09'55" E 228.00' N 00°09'55" E 228.00' TV TV E (1 5 2 3 ) (1 5 2 2 ) (1 5 2 2 ) (1 5 2 1 ) (1 5 2 1 ) (1 5 1 9 ) (1 5 1 9 ) (1 5 1 8 ) (1 5 1 8 ) (1 5 1 8 ) (1 5 1 7 ) (1 5 1 6 ) (1 5 1 6 ) (1 5 1 7 ) (1 5 1 4 ) (1 5 1 3 ) (1 5 1 3 ) (1 5 1 4 ) (1 5 1 4 ) (1 5 1 3 ) (1 5 1 2 ) (1 5 2 0 ) (1 5 2 0 ) (1 5 1 5 ) (1 5 1 5 ) (1 5 1 5 ) W/M CONC CONC DWY DWY A/C A/C LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE CONC LANDSCAPE CONC CONC PA T I O LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPE 6' H CF 6' H CF 8' H CB W 8' H CB W 7' H CF 7' H CF 7' H CF 7' H CF 12"∅ 18"∅ 45"∅ 20"∅ 50"∅ 26"∅ 16"∅ 16"∅ 16"∅ 18"∅ 18"∅ 18"∅ 46"∅ 10"∅ 18"∅ 15"∅ 16"∅ 6"∅ 6"∅ 9"∅ 8"∅ SDMH VENT ED I S O N BUSH BUSH 33' (1521.66) (1521.59) (1521.36) (1520.57) (1519.52) (1521.17) (1521.47) (1519.67) (1518.26) (1519.32)(1520.13)(1521.07) (1522.44) (1521.89) (1522.36) (1522.64) (1522.22) (1522.60) (1520.71) (1520.04) (1520.38) (1521.54) (1522.29) (1522.33) (1521.19) (1520.66)(1521.07) (1519.33) (1518.81) (1518.62) (1517.75) (1517.56) (1517.46) (1517.71) (1516.52) (1516.57) (1516.94) (1516.83) (1516.68) (1515.75) (1515.12) (1515.28) (1516.61)(1515.42)(1514.89) (1515.14) (1514.35) (1514.66) (1514.10) (1514.29) (1514.18) (1513.74) (1512.62) (1513.26) (1513.58) (1513.32) (1 5 1 2 . 2 5 ) (1 5 1 2 . 0 6 ) (1511.34) TC(1511.87) FL(1511.30) (1511.91) (1511.84) (1 5 1 1 . 7 5 ) (1 5 1 1 . 7 6 ) (1 5 1 1 . 8 1 ) (1 5 1 2 . 1 6 ) (1 5 1 2 . 1 9 ) (1512.40) (1512.51) (1513.18) (1511.32) TC(1512.15) FL(1511.49) (1511.38) TC(1512.31) FL(1511.69) (1512.43) (1 5 1 2 . 7 8 ) (1514.26) (1512.60) TC(1512.66) FL(1512.03) (1512.13) TC(1512.76) FL(1511.79) (1 5 1 2 . 7 2 ) (1 5 1 4 . 1 7 ) (1 5 1 2 . 8 5 ) (1 5 1 3 . 0 1 ) TC(1512.97) FL(1512.03) (1512.46) (1512.55) (1 5 1 3 . 1 4 ) (1512.56) (1 5 1 2 . 9 1 ) (1513.02) (1513.05) (1513.23) (1514.42) (1514.81) (1513.77) (1513.67) (1513.51) (1513.52)(1512.65) TC(1513.25) FL(1512.62) (1513.49)(1512.59) TC(1513.05) FL(1512.72) (1513.72) (1514.14) (1513.67) (1511.64) (1519.99) (1520.06) (1519.83) (1519.34) (1518.69) (1519.16) (1518.80) (1519.18) (1519.23)(1518.79) (1519.21) (1521.61) (1522.17) (1523.41) (1522.81) (1522.74) (1522.89) (1522.85) (1521.81) (1521.73) (1519.47) (1521.56) (1517.94) (1518.45)(1517.92) (1517.51) (1517.42)(1517.48) (1517.51) (1516.70) (1516.63) (1516.41) (1517.30) (1517.35) (1517.72) (1517.70) (1517.72) (1517.55) (1517.87) (1518.04) (1518.09) (1519.05) (1519.07) (1515.93) (1516.81) (1516.85) (1517.99) (1516.76) (1516.41) (1516.14) (1516.25)(1516.30) (1516.88) (1516.85) (1516.83) (1516.64)(1516.70) (1516.35) (1516.44) (1516.58) (1516.54) (1516.42)(1516.43) (1516.51) (1518.07) (1516.51)(1518.15) (1516.46) (1516.56) (1514.32) (1514.27) (1516.66) (1516.53) (1516.66) (1516.57)(1517.07) (1517.26)(1517.29)(1517.91) (1518.53) (1518.21) (1518.56) (1518.58)(1518.19) (1518.62)(1518.67) (1517.74)(1517.52)(1517.15)(1516.33)(1515.96) (1515.83) (1515.97) (1515.52) (1515.12) (1515.56) (1515.92) (1514.73)(1514.93) (1514.62) (1514.57) (1514.68) (1515.02) (1515.36) (1515.12) (1515.28) (1515.04) (1514.67) (1513.70) (1513.78) (1513.85) (1513.62) TC(1513.49) FL(1512.87) (1513.15) (1512.18) (1514.86) PROJECT SITE EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (4,405 SF) 5 BEDROOM / 3 BATH 90.00' 110.00' 228.00' 228.00' 228.00' 90.00' 110.00' EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM TO REMAIN 11'-3" 15'-0" 10'-0" 60'-0" 42'-0" C 2021 Doug Andresen, Architect expressly reserves his common law copyright and other property rights in these plans. These plans are not to be reproduced, changed or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to any third party without first obtaining the express written permission and consent of Douglas Andresen, Architect. LIC EN S E D ARCHI T E CT S T ATEOF CAL I F O RNIA Do ugla s Andre s e n C-14504 12-31-25 RENEWAL DATE C: \ U s e r s \ A d r i a n a G o m e z \ A n d r e s e n A r c h i t e c t u r e I n c \ A A I - A c c e s s \ P r o j e c t s \ 4 _ P r o j e c t s 2 0 2 0 - 2 0 2 9 \ 2 0 2 4 \ 2 4 - 5 2 4 1 C h a n B a n y a n L o t S p l i t \ R e v i t \ 2 4 - 5 2 4 1 C h a n B a n y a n L ot S p l i t . r v t 5 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 5 8 : 1 7 : 3 7 A M A-1Site Plan Proposed Lot Split For: Sam Chan 21 May 2025 24-5241 13204 Banyan Street, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Vicinity Map 1" = 10'-0" Site Plan Proposed Lot Split For: Sam Chan 13204 Banyan Street, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Project Information OWNER: SAM CHAN 7069 ISLE COURT RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739; APN: 0225-122-46 (818) 967-1618 somarin@yahoo.com PROJECT ADDRESS: 13204 BANYAN STREET RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91739 APN: 0225-122-46 ARCHITECT: ANDRESEN ARCHITECTURE, INC. 17087 ORANGE WAY FONTANA, CA 92335 (909) 355-6688 CONTACT: DOUG ANDRESEN doug.andresen@aaifirm.com CIVIL: CAL LAND ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. 574 E. LAMBERT RD. BREA, CA 92821 CONTACT: JOYCE YU - MANAGING ASSISTANT (+1) 714-671-1050 Ext: 117 joyce@callandeng.com Page 16 90.00'110.00' 228.00' 228.00' 228.00' 90.00'110.00' Land Use Designate (VL) Very Low Residential Land Use Designate (VL) Very Low Residential Land Use Designate (VL) Very Low Residential Land Use Designate (VL) Very Low Residential Land Use Designate (VL) Very Low Residential Land Use Designate (VL) Very Low Residential Land Use Designate (P) Parks Land Use Designate (P) Parks 600'-0" 60 0 ' - 0 " 600'-0" 60 0 ' - 0 " Land Use Designate (VL) Very Low Residential C 2021 Doug Andresen, Architect expressly reserves his common law copyright and other property rights in these plans. These plans are not to be reproduced, changed or copied in any form or manner whatsoever, nor are they to be assigned to any third party without first obtaining the express written permission and consent of Douglas Andresen, Architect. LIC EN S E D ARCHI T E C T ST ATEOF CA L I F O RNIA Do ugl a s Andre s e n C-14504 12-31-23 RENEWAL DATE C: \ U s e r s \ A d r i a n a G o m e z \ A n d r e s e n A r c h i t e c t u r e I n c \ A A I - A c c e s s \ P r o j e c t s \ 4 _ P r o j e c t s 2 0 2 0 - 2 0 2 9 \ 2 0 2 4 \ 2 4 - 5 2 4 1 C h a n B a n y a n L o t S p l i t \ R e v i t \ 2 4 - 5 2 4 1 C h a n B a n y a n L ot S p l i t . r v t 5 / 2 1 / 2 0 2 5 8 : 1 7 : 3 7 A M A-1.1Site Utilization Map Proposed Lot Split For: Sam Chan 21 May 2025 24-5241 13204 Banyan Street, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 1" = 60'-0" PL - Site Utilization Map Page 17 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-017 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 20962 TO SUBDIVIDE AN EXISTING 45,600 SQUARE FOOT PARCEL INTO TWO NEW PARCELS WITHIN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL (VL) ZONE, LOCATED AT 13204 BANYAN STREET. APN: 0225-122-46 A.Recitals. 1.The applicant, Cinthia Cervantes, on behalf of the owner of the property, filed an application for approval of Tentative Parcel Map 20962, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Parcel Map is referred to as "the application." 2.On the 28th day of May 2025, 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 28th, 2025, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a.The application applies to the property currently addressed 13204 Banyan Street, APN: 0225-122-46, generally located near the northwestern corner of East Avenue and Banyan Street; and b.The project site consists of a single 45,600 square foot parcel, currently improved with a single-family residential structure; 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 18 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-017 Tentative Parcel Map 20962 May 28, 2025 Page 2 d.The application includes the subdivision of a parcel totaling 45,600 into 2 numbered parcels. Parcel 1 includes the existing single family residential structure and is 25,080 square feet. Parcel 2 is vacant and is 20,520 square feet; and e. The subdivision complies with each of the applicable development standards for lot dimensions Very Low Residential (VL) Zone as follows: Standard Requirement Proposed New Lots Analysis Minimum Lot Width 90’ Parcel 1 – 110’ Parcel 2 – 90’ Compliant Minimum Lot Depth 200’ Parcel 1 – 228’ Parcel 2 – 228’ Compliant Minimum Lot Frontage 50’ Parcel 1 – 110’ Parcel 2 – 90’ Compliant Minimum Lot Area 20,000 sq ft Parcel 1 – 25,080 sq ft Parcel 2 – 20,520 sq ft Compliant Minimum Net Average Lot Area 22,500 Avg. 22,800 sq ft Compliant Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Very Low Residential (VL) North School Bus Depot General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) South Single Family Residential Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Very Low Residential (VL) East Vacant Suburban Neighborhood Very Low Very Low Residential (VL) West Etiwanda Colony Elementary School General Open Space and Facilities Parks (P) Page 19 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-017 Tentative Parcel Map 20962 May 28, 2025 Page 3 f. The existing structure located on Parcel 1 is currently legal nonconforming as the westerly building setback is only 3 feet instead of the required 15 feet from the adjacent property line. Pursuant to Development Code Section 17.62.030, the proposed subdivision will not increase the degree of nonconformity of the existing structure, or create a new nonconformity; and g.The application as submitted 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 45,600 square feet into 2 numbered parcels. The underlying General Plan Land Use Map designation is Suburban Neighborhood Very Low which is intended for the development of low-density residential neighborhoods with a suburban character; and b.The proposed subdivision complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code for the Very Low Residential (VL) 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. The Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment based upon the findings as follows: a. The Planning Department Staff have determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City’s CEQA guidelines. The project qualifies as a class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 – Minor Land Divisions. The project scope is for the subdivision of a residentially zoned lot into two separate parcels. Both parcels are in conformance with the General Plan and the Development Code’s requirements for the Very Low Residential (VL) zone. Both parcels can be adequately served by fire, public safety and utility services, and have driveway access onto nearby roadways. Both parcels are relatively flat and do not have a slope greater than 20 percent. The parcel proposed to be divided was not involved in a division from a larger parcel within the previous 2 years. There is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. 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. Page 20 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2025-017 Tentative Parcel Map 20962 May 28, 2025 Page 4 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF MAY 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tony Morales, Chair ATTEST: Jennifer Nakamura, Secretary I, Jennifer Nakamura, 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 28th day of May 2025 by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Page 21 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTPM20962 Project Name: Tentative Parcel Map - 13204 Banyan Street Location: 13204 BANYAN ST - 022512246-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval The applicant shall sign the Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval provided by the Planning Department. The signed Statement of Agreement and Acceptance of Conditions of Approval shall be returned to the Planning Department prior to the submittal of grading/construction plans for plan check, request for a business license, and/or commencement of the approved activity. 1. The applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or any of its officials , officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, those City agents serving as independent contractors in the role of City officials and instrumentalities thereof (collectively “Indemnitees”), from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature ), and alternative dispute resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to, arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures ) (collectively “Actions”), brought against the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and /or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City ), for or concerning the project, whether such actions are brought under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), State Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivisions Map Act, Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085 or 1094.5, or any other state, federal, or local statute, law, ordinance, rule, regulation, or any decision of a competent jurisdiction. This indemnification provision expressly includes losses, judgments, costs, and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys’ fees or court costs) in any manner arising out of or incident to this approval, the Planning Director’s actions, the Planning Commission’s actions, and/or the City Council’s actions , related entitlements, or the City’s environmental review thereof. The Applicant shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or the other Indemnitees in any such suit , action, or other legal proceeding. It is expressly agreed that the City shall have the right to approve , which approval will not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the City’s defense, and that the applicant shall reimburse City for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the City in the course of the defense. City shall promptly notify the applicant of any Action brought and City shall cooperate with applicant in the defense of the Action. In the event such a legal action is filed challenging the City’s determinations herein or the issuance of the approval, the City shall estimate its expenses for the litigation. The Applicant shall deposit said amount with the City or, at the discretion of the City, enter into an agreement with the City to pay such expenses as they become due. 2. www.CityofRC.us Printed: 4/16/2025 Page 22 Project #: SUBTPM20962 Project Name: Tentative Parcel Map - 13204 Banyan Street Location: 13204 BANYAN ST - 022512246-0000 Project Type: Tentative Parcel Map ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 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. 3. This 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. 4. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval The project Final Map shall meet the Subdivision Map Act, City Development Codes, and Conditions of Approval requirements. The Final Map shall be approved and recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorders Office prior to issuance of Building Permits . 1. www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 2Printed: 4/16/2025 Page 23