The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007/09/12 - Agenda Packet• • • THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ~'UCAMONGA SEPTEMBER 12, 2007 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Chairman Stewart_ Vice Chairman Fletcher _ Munoz_ Howdyshell _ Wimberly II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Meeting Minutes of August 22, 2007 IV. CONSENT CALENDAR The fo/low~ng Consent Ca/endar~tems are expected to be routine and non-controversial They will be acted on by the Commrssion atone time without d~scuss~on If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion A VACATION OF A PORTION OF ROCHESTER AVENUE (CHARLES SMITH AVENUE) V-211 -CHASE BACK BAY, LLC -A request to find the Vacation of a portion of Rochester Avenue (Charles Smith Avenue), generally about 460 feet south of 6th Street, m conformance with the General Plan- APN 0229-263-05, 0229-283-04 and 05 Related File SUBTPM16009 1 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 12, 2007 RANCHO r,~UCAMONGA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following -tems are public hearings -n which concerned -nd-v~duals may voice the-r op-n-on of the related project Please wa-t to be recogn-zed by the Cha-rman and address the Comm-ss-on by stating your name and address All such op-n-ons shall be I-m-ted to 5 minutes per -nd~wdual for each project Please sign -n after speaking B NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMITDRC2007-00544 - WLCARCHITECTS - A request to operate aprivate/parochial school use (kindergarten through grade 12) and day care facility -Non Accessory at Lifeway Church in an education building and related facilities located in the Low Density (2-4 du/ac) Residential District at 7477 Vineyard Avenue APN 0208-921-36 The project has been determined categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as it qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Existing Facilities Related files Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 22, 2007 C CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - DRC2006-00926 - WLC ARCHITECTS -A review of the Master Phasing Plan for remaining phases of Lifeway Church project development including an education building, temporary classroom modules, a gymnasium and fellowship hall on 5 03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle del Prado -APN 208-921-36 The project has been determined categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as it qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Existing Facilities Related Files Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439, Non- Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 22, 2007 CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 22, 2007 D NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - DRC2007-00536 - INDEPENDENCENETWORKS -A proposed addition of arcade games at a proposed sit-down restaurant within the Victoria Community Plan, Regional Related Office/Commeraal District, (Mixed Use) at 12375 Base Line Road, Suite 101, in the Winery Estates Center at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard APN 0227-161-58 The project qualifies as a Class 1 categorical exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities CONTINUANCE REQUESTED • • 2 of 4 • • PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 12, 2007 RANCHO CUCAMONGA E NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007-00488 - SENOR AGAVE -Anew Conditional Use Permit to allow a full service restaurant with a full bar (no entertainment) replacing existing Conditional Use Permit for Margarita Beach in the Community Commercial (CC) District, Foothill Boulevard Districts (Subarea 3) at 9950 Foothill Boulevard - APN 1077-621-34 The project qualifies as a Class 1 categorical exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission Items to be discussed here are those that do not already appear on th-s agenda VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS/COMMENTS VIII. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Comm~ss~on has adopted Admm~strative Regulations that set an 11 00 p m adjournment time If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission 1, Lois J Schrader, Planning Comm-ss~on Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 6, 2007, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964 2 at 10500 Civic Center Dnve, Rancho Cucamonga - ~. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750 Notification of 48 hours pnor to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility Listening devices are available for the heanng impaired 3 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO SEPTEMBER 12, 2007 CUCAMONGA INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC 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 The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table State your name for the record and speak into the microphone After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments " There is Opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing The deadline for submitting these items is 6 00 p m Tuesday, one week prior to the meeting The Planning Commission Secretary receives all such items AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7 00 a m to 6 00 p m ,except for legal City holidays APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision t0 the City Council within 10 calendar days Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $1,974 for maps and $2,073 for all other decisions of the Commission (Fees are established and governed by the City Council) Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session Copies of the Planning Commission agendas and minutes can be found at http //www ci rancho-cucamonga ca us • 4 of 4 Vicinity Map Planning Commission • a ~ Meeting Location " City Hall • 10500 Civic Center Drive September 12, 2007 r~ L STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Date: September 12, 2007 To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer By: Mark Brawthen, Contract Engineer RANCHO C,UCAMONGA Subject: VACATION OF A PORTION OF Rochester Avenue (Charles Sriuth Avenue) V-211 - Chase Back Bay, LLC - A request to find the Vacation of a Portion of Rochester Avenue (Charles Smith Avenue), Generally about 460 feet South of Sixth Street, in conformance with the General Plan- APN 0229-263-05, 0229-283-04 and O5. Related File SUBTPM16009 BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Chase Back Bay, LLC is currently processing SUBTPM16009 (Parcel Map 16009), a four parcel commercial subdivision on 4 86 acres of land Plamm~g Commmssion approved this parcel map on June 28, 2006 The map was conditioned to re-align the portion of Charles Srmth Avenue (Rochester Avenue) south of Sixth Street to align with the portion of the street north of Sixth Street Utility Companies were notified of the proposed vacation There were no ob~echons, however, all existing underground uhlrhes will remann within the existing street and reservation of easements for these utilities will be maintained over the original alignment The vacation Is consistent with the goals and objectives of the circulation element of the General Plan Circulation is being maintained as intended It is dust relocated on a modified alignment RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planming Commission make the finding through summary action that the proposed vacation conforms to the City's General Plan This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final action Respectfully submitted, G~ Dan James Semor Civil Engineer DJ MNB tlv Attachments Vicinity Map V-211 (Exhibits) ITEM A Vicinity Map NTS _r _ , __ ~; - -- ~: s ~ .~ `-~ -1';~fiit~ Birch t7~ ~ ~ ~1 ''~' f ~ 1~ N I ~ ~iG ~.._._..... c• ~___ ._.._ r-. ___:L7 t_ ._. I .." ~i r- i ~ I ~ t~f~~r Blhr~J~ CAn~a~~, ~,., r /' ` _" .tkf •~, ~~ ITEM: Street Vacation V-211 TITLE: Vicinity Map EXHIBIT: 1 City of Rancho Cucamonga • • A-2 EXHIBIT "A" ~ACAT/ON OF A PORTION OF ROCHESTER AIiENUE LEGAL DESCR/PTION (V-211) THAT PORT/ON OF ROCHESTER AIiENUE (ORANGE), IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDlNO, STATE OF CALIFORN/A, AS PER MAP OF ROCHESTER, RECORDED /N BOOK 9 OF MAPS, PAGE 20, RECORDS OF SA/L) COUNTY, MORE PARTICULAR[ YDESCR/BED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCING AT THE /NTERSECTION OF THE CENTER[/NE OF S/XTH STREET, AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP ND 15651, RECORDED /N PARCEL MAP BOOK 194, PAGES 22 AND 23, RECORDS OF SA/D COUNTY, W/TH THE WESTER[ Y L/NE OF THE EASTERLY 60 00 FEET OF ORANGE (ROCHESTER) AIiENUE, VACATED BY RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERI~ISORS OF SAID COUNTY, RECORDED DECEMBER 18, 1936 /N BOOK 1177, PAGE 320, OFF/C/AL RECORDS OF SA/D COUNTY, THENCE SOUTH 00' 10 51 ° WEST ALONG SAID WESTER[ Y L/NE, A D/STANCE OF 60 00 FEET, TO A POINT ON A LINE DRAWN PAR4LLEL W/TH AND D/STANT 60 DO FEET (MEASURED AT R/GHT ANGLES) SOUTHERLY OF THE CENTER[/NE OF SAID SIXTH STREET, BEING THE POINT OF BEG/NNING, THENCE SOUTH 89 50 23 ° WEST ALONG SAID PAR4LLEL LINE, A DISTANCE OF 30 12 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 4T30 53" WEST, A D/STANCE OF 32 46 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 00'10 51 " WEST, A L)/STANCE OF 68 40 FEET, TO THE BEG/NN/NG OF A TANGENT CURE CONCAVE EASTER[ Y, HALING A RAD/US OF 467 00 FEET, THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SA/D TANGENT CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11'3109" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 93 89 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 1120'18" EAST, A L7/STANCE OF 199 53 FEET, TO THE BEG/NN/NG OF A TANGENT CURE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY, HAS/NG A RAL)/US OF 533 00 FEET, THENCE SOUTHEASTER[ Y ALONG SA/D TANGENT CURE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02 54 50"AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 2711 FEET TO THE WESTER[ Y LINE OF SAID EASTERLY 60 OD FEET OF ORANGE (ROCHESTER) AVENUE, THENCE NORTH 00'10 51 ° EAST ALONG SA/D WESTER[ Y L/NE, A DISTANCE OF 406 03 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SA/D PARCEL OF LAND CONTAINS 14,245 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS ~NPL LAND ~`'~ P~ C H 7L1~ ~i~G ~ v i ~^ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ o a ~ * No 5137 EXP 6-30-09 ~~qTF OF CA~~F~~~\Q Prepored by HILLWIG-GOODROW, LLC 31604 Yuco~po Blvd , Yuca~po, CA 92399 (888) 626-5137 ALA~J C HILLWIG, PLS 51 7 DAATE LICENSE EXPIRES 6-30-09 SCALE N/A I FILE NO 228-020 1 DATE JUNE 22, 2007 ~ SHEET 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT "B" I/ACAT/ON OF A PORT/ON OF ROCHESTER AVENUE (V-211J SIXTH STREET N89 50 23'E ~_ ~N89 50:36 "E~ _ ~~ ~~o~ ~i~~ z~m~ ~o O O v ~ W C~~C~~ ~~~~ Z ~ ~ ~ ooZ^ ~~ ~~~~ C~W~Wm a=~Q~ ~ ~Q v I O V I ~ V I 1 Q 1 ~ v 00 m _, :`'ool 0 °o ~~~ Ll POB N89'49'097Y(RJ - g l~ ~O~ STREET VACATION s'~ ROCHESTER AVENUE . o N78'39'42"E~R) 0 I ~ C O~ ~ \ R o ~ ~~ o i pP S~~~o o ~ ~ ` ~ ~` OG~~e 91 y ~ o ~ ~ ~ o~~o, - - - o ~ o~~~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ Q c,.~ W ^~° o "' "' `° W ~ Q z Nhh =~~,°n°O V m ~~~ W ~ v v v R t Q W ~~ ^o W J OO Q ~ ~ h W V ~ ~~ Q ~N j V V V ~ ,~ ~1 (~ -RECORD DATA I I I I I I N81.34'32 „E(RJI Prepared by HILLWIG-GOODROW, LLC 31604 Yuco~po Bivd , Yuca~po, CA 92399 ALAN C HILLWIG, PLS 5137 LICENSE EXPIRES 6-30-09 A-4 ~~ PER PMB 90/90-91 ~ J -RECORD DATA PER PMB 194/22-23 ~ ~ -RECORD DATA PER RS 44/4 SCALE 1" = 60' (888) 626-5137 • FILE NO 228-020 '~Q DATE JUNE 22, 2007 D TE SHEET 1 OF 1 T H E C I T Y O F SUBJECT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 -WLC ARCHITECTS - A review of the Master Phasing Plan for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church project development including an education building, temporary classroom modules, a gymnasium and fellowship hall on 5 03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle • del Prado -APN 0208-921-36 Related Files Conditional Use Permit DRC2001- 00439, Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007-00544 -WLC ARCHITECTS - A request to operate a Private/Parochial School Use (Kindergarten through Grade 12) and Day Care Facility -Non Accessory at Lifeway Church in the education building and related facilities located in the Low Density (2-4 du/ac) Residential District at 7477 Vineyard Avenue -APN 0208- 921-36 Related files Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 BACKGROUND At the August 22, 2007 Planning Commission meeting, the above-referenced projects were presented at a single public hearing for both related requests The staff report and exhibits were presented and testimony by the applicant and neighbors was taken The Planning Commissioners expressed serious concerns over several aspects of both requests including school operation and coordination with the nearby public high school, traffic and parking impacts, substantial noise, site design, and visual impacts of the additional phases and compliance for the southerly screen wall The Planning Commission provided direction that a master phasing plan vinth potential negative impacts could not be favorably acted upon without reviewing more substantial architectural design drawings, receiving more school operation information and detailed traffic and parking information In an effort to provide the applicant with an opportunity to rectify these concerns, the items were continued until this meeting to give staff an opportunity to devise a draft set of procedures for the applicant to follow to address the • commission's concerns adequately ~TEM B&C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00926 AND DRC2007-00544 - WLG Architects September 12, 2007 Page 2 In conference with Planning Department staff, the applicant and the church have decided to modify their application The Non-Construction CUP DRC2007-00544 for the private school and daycare operation will be withdrawn 2 The application for the Master Plan for future phases is being amended to a Development Review of the Classroom/Education Building and the Gymnasium A consequence of this change is that the K-12 school and daycare will remain prohibited by Planning Condition 9 of DRC2001-00439 until such time as the church re-applies for a new CUP In addition, full architectural and site planning review of the Classroom Building and Gymnasium will take place without a phasing plan PROCEDURAL ANALYSIS Staff proposes a set of procedures and general direction for the applicant to follow as the item is continued for commission action at a future date • The Development Review protect DRC2006-00926 should be continued by the Planning Commission m order to give staff, the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission an opportunity to review the revised protect and provide a further hearing • opportunity for the site and building design 2 The applicant shall provide full architectural drawings and site plan for the Classroom Building and Gymnasium If changes m grade are necessary, a Conceptual Grading Plan shall also be submitted 3 A detailed development schedule shall be provided to establish a timeline for the removal of the temporary classroom units and all other parts of the program 4 The applicant shall provide a quality development package for review to staff within 45 days so that it can be docketed for review by the Design Review Committee at the earliest possible date The Planning Commission will provide the final review of the protect after the Design Review Committee is sufficiently satisfied with the design changes to make a recommendation Other issues remain which require direction in this process There exists concern over the visibility of the proposed buildings near the southerly protect boundary, and re-configuration of the site layout and the buildings' locations and size will be likely to alleviate this problem Work with staff on potential revisions to the site plan and on the elevations needed to provide for review first by the Design Review Committee and then the Planning Commission 2 Compliance of the southerly screen wall and landscaping with Planning Conditions will receive closer examination Additional landscaping on the south may be a component m • reducing the overall visual impacts B&C-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00926 AND DRC2007-00544 - WLC Architects September 12, 2007 • Page 3 3 The City will allow the temporary classroom units (which are part of Phase 1, but dependent on the approval of a permanent building replacement m this Development Review) to remain m place while this process continues Because now that no school or daycare use is proposed, the Classroom Building and Gymnasium are only for uses ancillary to the approved religious assembly use (e g ,ecclesiastical training, etc ) 4 Note that any daycare use and/or private school use cannot commence until a new future Non-Construction CUP is applied for and approved by the Planning Commission as a separate future action At that time, a substantial school operations statement will be required and an Initial Study will be required Among other details, this must include verifiable evidence of the project having minimal conflict with the operations of nearby Alta Loma High School, and the nearby elementary school Verifiable evidence shall be in the form of a letter from the school principal or district laying out school schedules, number of children, etc RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the withdrawal of Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 be accepted and DRC2006-00926 be continued to a date uncertain subject to following the procedures set forth in the analysis in this staff report Respectfully submitted, • Jame R Troyer, AICP Planning Director JRT/VP/Is Attachments Exhibit A -Planning Commission staff report dated August 22, 2007 • B&C-3 Stiff Report DATE August 22, 2007 TO Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM James R Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY Vance Pomeroy, Contract Planner SUBJECT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 -WLC ARCHITECTS - A review of the Master Phasing Plan for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church protect development including an education building, temporary classroom modules, a gymnasium and fellowship hall on 5 03 acres of land in the Low • Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle del Prado -APN 0208-921-36 The protect has been determined categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as it qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 -Existing Facilities Related Files Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439, Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007-00544 -WLC ARCHITECTS - A request to operate a Private/Parochial School Use (Kindergarten through Grade 12) and Day Care Facility -Non Accessory at Lifeway Church in the education building and related facilities located m the Low Density (2-4 du/ac) Residential District at 7477 Vineyard Avenue -APN 0208- 921-36 The protect has been determined categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as it qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Existing Facilities Related files Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION This protect is to allow the further development of the original Master Plan for the protect site including the subsequent phases of a classroom building, gymnasium, and fellowship hall, and the operation of a Kindergarten through Grade 12 school at the site The protect site is located on the east side of Vineyard Avenue across from • Red Hill Park, and now includes the sanctuary and offices along with fully developed parking and landscaping EXHIBIT A B&C-4 PLANNING COMMISSION S~IAFF REPORT DRC2006-00926 AND DRC2007-00544 - WLC Architects August 22, 2007 Page 2 A Surrounding Land Use and Zoning North -Single-Family Residential, Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential South -Single-Family Residential, Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential East - Single-Family Residential, Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential West -Park, Open Space B General Plan Designations Project Site -Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential North -Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential South - Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential East -Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential West -Open Space C Site Characteristics The project site is the slope and crest of a hill that stands somewhat steeper than the land to the west and south and creates some interface issues with the surrounding single-family neighborhoods ANALYSIS • A Master Pian On July 1, 2001, an application for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 was filed for the construction and occupation of a church complex on Vineyard Avenue across from Red Hill Park The complex included several phases of construction with a sanctuary, offices, education building, fellowship hall, and gymnasium After concluding • the public hearing, the Planning Commission approved the project on April 24, 2002, with 15 Planning conditions, which include the following 7) The Master Plan is approved m concept only Future development for each building proposed in Phases 2, 3, and 4 shall be subject to separate Development Review process 9) This approval is for the operation of a church and office and does not include a daycare or private K-12 school Development Code Section 17 02 100, and repeated m the Standard Conditions for DRC2001-00439, is the requirement that building permits be obtained for buildings within five years and diligently pursued toward completion The Master Plan approved under DRC2001-00439 expired on April 24, 2007 without the building permits for the subsequent phases being issued The applicant submitted this new application, Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, for the remaining phases that had not obtained building permits prior to the expiration The application was accepted as complete prior to the April 24, 2007 expiration of the previous Conditional Use Permit Portable temporary classroom units were placed on the site in October, 2006 At the December 13, 2006, meeting, the Planning Commission determined that the portable temporary classroom units were part of Phase 1 and were not to be permanent but must • be associated with a permanent building which has an active Conditional Use Permit The permanent building to replace the temporary units is the classroom building which is part B&C-5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00926 AND DRC2007-00544 - WLC Architects August 22, 2007 • Page 3 of Phase 2 With the expiration of the 2002 Conditional Use Permit, this subject Conditional Use Permit must be approved for the temporary classroom units to remain The duration of those units on the site will be determined m this review The Design Review Committee reviewed this project on June 19, 2007 Based on the application, applicant testimony, and the Planning Commission discussion and determination in December, the Committee recommended approval of the project (Exhibit E) Staff has included the recommended conditions of approval of the Design Review Committee into the attached draft Resolution Staff has also included a condition to clarify the status of the temporary portable classroom units ws-a-vis the permanent facilities for that function The intent of allowing temporary facilities for temporary occupation is that there is the anticipation of a permanent occupation of a permanent building for the same function The portable units serve as a temporary location to house the school and daycare facility that cannot be housed m any of the permanent buildings currently on the site At the moment, the Phase 1 buildings, the sanctuary, and the office building cannot serve to house the school or day care The Phase 2 classroom building apparently can house the entire school and day care functions as the classroom building is proposed as a two-story, 12,000 square foot structure and the temporary units are only about 4,200 square feet m floor area Therefore, the temporary portable classroom units should • be removed as soon as the classroom building can be occupied or when the five-year life of this approval has lapsed, whichever is first Staff has received some complaints about the project site since the December 13, 2006, Planning Commission meeting These complaints were confined to landscaping on the south slope, unsightliness of the portable classroom units from the southerly neighborhood, and lighting glare The landscaping was remedied per the landscape plan with the replacement of damaged trees However, staff is recommending additional review of the landscape plan as a condition of approval for this project The lighting complaint lodged with the Code Enforcement section has not been rendered as concluded B School Use The second application as part of this project is for the establishment and operation of a Kindergarten though Grade 12 school on the site The Low Density (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) Residential District in which this site is located allows "Schools, Private and Parochial" as a Conditional Use In general, Conditional Uses, as opposed to Permitted Uses which are allowed by right, are allowed only if found to be compatible on a site-specific, case-by-case basis with the surrounding land uses and with other possible permitted uses in that distract If the Conditional Use is found to be compatible, it can be approved Otherwise, conditions must be set to make the use compatible in order to be able to approve the use at that location The church intends to create a new Kindergarten through Grade 12 elementary school for general instruction in the classroom building proposed as Phase 2 of the Master Plan • portion of the project As a temporary measure while the classroom building is constructed, the church intends to start the school by using the portable temporary classroom units to house the school A day care facility preschool for ages 2 through 5 is also planned B&C-6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2006-00926 AND DRC2007-00544 - WLC Architects August 22, 2007 Page 4 • The operation is proposed to include as many as 187 children with up to 14 teachers and aides The hours of operation are 6 30 a m to 6 30 p m ,Monday through Fnday The key potential impacts that the use could have on the surrounding single-family uses are parking/traffic and noise The existing parking lot consists of over 230 spaces, therefore, parking is adequate The potential for peak movements in and out of the parking lot would be no more, and likely much less, than the peak movements contemplated for the Sunday worship service times Any potential noise impact would be generated only when the students are outside During the period of potentially up to five years that the portable units are used for classroom space, this outdoor activity could take place where the education building is proposed However, it is unclear from the site plan where physical education activity is planned To minimize possible noise impacts, such activity should be concentrated toward the center of the site and confined to the hours between 8 00 a m and 5 00 p m Staff recommends that the location be designated by the applicant subtect to the approval of the Planning Director C Environmental Assessment The Planning Department staff has determined that the protect is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines The protect qualifies under as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Existing Facilities because the protect will use the existing site and there is no substantial evidence that the • protect may have a significant effect on the environment CORRESPONDENCE This item was advertised as a public hearing m the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the protect site As of the date of preparation of this report, three letters of opposition were received from neighbors in response to the legal noticing of the protect RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 and Non-Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 subtect to the conditions set forth in the accompanying draft resolutions Respectfully submitted, ~- Jam R Troyer, AICP Plan ng Director Attachments Exhibit A -Site Plan Exhibit B -Phasing Pian Exhibit C -Grading Plan Exhibit D -Planting Plan Exhibit E -Design Review Committee Action Agenda June 19, 2007 Exhibit F -Letters of Opposition • Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926 Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00544 B&C-7 U .a • • --~ i i i ~I i~ i~ ~ i~ i 'Q~ ~~ ~~ ~J ~~ ~W' ~~ ~W~ ~J J ~Q ~ ~, ~~ I~ ./ ~~~'~ B&C-8 f- m ~ : .. ~ ~ (O ~" N . o .. U ^ d ~ ~ Z ~ _ - ~_ _ - ¢ U o W W - _ - ~ i o R > V !- (n CA Q t0 Q _- ____ tiZp 3 ~ p g a a a a ~ § ~ N gy J ~ ~ ~ a m ~ 8 ~ W ~ k ~ i F irc ~ W ai a w g 4 4 4 ° g ~ °~ _, J Q ~ Ca c~ 1 1>' > ¢ z 5 a q o W v ~" ~ o = ,~, ;,~ ~.;,,~ ~ e= _ e w ~ G d. W ~ ~ p to w z w ON ?~3, ~ M Z ~ t ~ ~~ r~ cx~~'" ~ - - T i~~ N Q U U U J U 2qv [L~aa D ~ ~ ~t~~~~" ~~~ ^_ _ __ _ l ii ~J 1 i i i' ~Ji ~ !~ ____-~ ___~ , ~o~ ~~~ ~w- ~~~ W. J ~~ v ~ €~~ ! ~ { ~a ~a I ~g ~ 9 I ~ e Em $ l o a WI ~ ~ I d ~ ~ ~ ~ g R ~ ~ ~~~~Z 1 i..x«m io,~a~~a--- ------- - -J ^L ~_ -,L- ~ ~` 27l_ n L OLD U- 4_ __ __~ . -~------ end a~d~~Nin ------------ ------------------------ --s °o ~ ~ z y 0 5 ~ U mN~ ~ LL - ~ m ~ U OWOF 2 O ZOZF W tiK Q Z CO~ ~ m Z S ~ Q .-j~SW 1-?O~ } N ~ rvO WQ N ~N N ; vQ O Z xNx ~ Y~NWH? QQS= aW QF Q hLL RC7 a ® ® ® a EXHIBIT B ~w y • ~_ r~_ J~~11~ ~I 1 ' -I- '~ ~ `~ ~~ ~ I r9 '( I ~\ ~I ~' h ~ \~ ~ ~ r ~, ~ ;%I ~ (~ I- ¢= ~ ~~~ I I~' ~ z y ~, ` u~i 1 _ 3n~ .~ -- - ~\1 y ~~ ~, ~ ~~ i ~~' ~~ i ~, ~~ 7 /~ ~ ~~~'~'~ Y ~~~ 1 e$ ~ a 1 ~~Y/ Y ~lV3A_d~~__ e e e 8 6 3 x =_ _ _ _ __ w ~X o ga ~~ o ~ 44448 ~~ p qq qq qq p g A g qq pp pp @@ pp qq pp ggF 3 k S~ t c c B K 6 6 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 9 3 3 d 3 6 y~ R €~4 y7~ 3pp~~ )~ R~~B/iYC epa€ 1XE K ~ yl~~,~[{gy~^jp~~~ °~8 o ~ X~ ~~ i~d B "~ [ deR `9~Xr~ ~ i~[tl Q ~ ~ a e Q Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a a a ~ x a ~ ~ a d ~ ~ ®[ @ ~ i ~ g 7P ~ k~~ p 5 ax r x Y S x r ~ s~ % b b i e ~ ~ iq p~ ~ 6' ~ ~r~~F e~ g$€ ~~3 _ .... . . _ ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~3 ~k~'~ q~~ 4 @~ iik}fie 36 i~ ~gg ~4~ ~ iA ~g ~~~ ~ Sg~ ~ ~3p~~~ ~n~p~~~ ~ ~g~~i@gY ~~~ ~ ~~~~K~~~~~~~ ~ ~~ 3 ~ ~loooo ~iiiiiiii i ii i ~~ 0 0000 _~ ~~ ~~,\ I ~~~ _ J - _ _- ,, , - - ~~11 = - ~,II _ _ It II ~- _ _J _ ~ ~~ - - ~ ZZ J ga a s~ bl La3y5 3Jl IO1VM ltl 1~S ~J'1 KJ1tlWi B&C-12 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS • 7 00 p m Vance Pomeroy June 19, 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2006-00926 - WLC ARCHITECTS -Review of a Master Plan for the remaining phases of Lifeway Church project development including education building, temporary classroom modules, gymnasium and fellowship hall on 5 03 acres of land in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 7477 Vineyard Avenue at Calle del Prado - APN 0208-921-36 Related Files Conditional Use Permit DRC2001-00439 Design Parameters On July 1, 2001, an application for Conditional Use Permit DRC2001- 00439 was filed for the construction and occupation of a church complex on Vineyard Avenue across from Red Hill Park The complex included several phases of construction with a sanctuary, offices, education building, fellowship hall, and gymnasium After concluding the public hearing, the Planning Commission approved the project on Apnl 24, 2002 Development Code Section 17 02 100 and repeated in the Standard Conditions for DRC2001- 00439, requires that building permits be obtained for all buildings within 5 years and diligently pursued toward completion The master plan approved under DRC2001-00439 expired on April 24, 2007, without the Building Permits for the subsequent phases being issued The applicant submitted this new application, Conditional Use Permit DRC2006-00926, for the remaining phases that have not obtained Building Permits pnor to their expiration Staff Comments The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee • discussion The owner of the property has worked closely with staff to work out any technical and design issues Mayor Issues The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project At the December 13, 2006, Planning Commission meeting, the original project approval was brought for clarification of conditions The issues surrounded the temporary classroom units and whether they were a part of the approved phases The portion of the determination pertinent to this application was that the temporary classroom units were part of the original approval of all the phases, but that they must be associated with a permanent building which has an active Conditional Use Permit With the expiration of the 2002 CUP, a new CUP (the one before you) must be approved for the temporary classroom units to remain The permanent building to replace the temporary units is the education building included in the subject CUP Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the project as presented Design Review Committee Action Members Present Lou Munoz, Pam Stewart, Michael Diaz Staff Planner Vance Pomeroy • EXHIBIT E B&C-13 • The Committee recommended approval of the protect subtect to the following conditions: 1 The remaining phases approved are. • Phase 2 -Education Building • Phase 3 -Fellowship Hall • Phase 4 - Gymnasium 2 The full five years permitted in Section 17 02 100 shall be extended to this approval including the other requirements and limitations of that section, except that the temporary classroom buildings shall be removed from the site by the end of the five year period regardless of the status of the progress of the several phases of the Master Plan or any extension that may be provided for the rest of the Master Plan's phases 3 The temporary classroom buildings shall be maintained ~n good condition at all times including, but not limited to, paint No signs and/or banners shall be installed and/or affixed to the temporary classroom buildings Please note that, contrary to information conveyed at the meeting, per Planning Condition 9 for this protect (DRC2001-00439), the approval" does not include a daycare or private K-12 school " "Private and Parochial Schools" is a conditional use ~n the Low Density Residential District and requires a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). in order to proceed with such a use, regardless of the buildings or facilities provided for the use, the • CUP must be approved by the Planning Commission The current request for the Master Plan for the additional phases, DRC2006-00926, does not include a request for a private school L B&C-14 ~l°fY OF RANCHU CUCANiO~I~A At,gust 7, X007 ~~~ ~ ~ 200 To Pam Stewart, Chair per son • ~~CE~VE~ - P~AN~l9~lC We have r ecerved a letter from the city regar drug a public hearing concer nrng the extension of the approval fvr the conditional use permit for the Lrfewa} Church at 7477 Vrne}and Ave , adiacent to vur proper t} We appreciate bernb notified of this llearrng, and intend to be there and voice our concerns However we would also like to notrfi} you ahead nl writing of the problems this prv~ect has caused for us and vur nerghbor hood We first became alarmed about the project during the rntrtial grading of the propert} when we realized dust what they wer e doing to the elevation of the landscape rt5elf Dur rng a Wrsrt to the plamm~b department r egar drub concerns about a var ranee bernb granted to allow the herght of the oribrna] church buildrrlg to be above the standard allowance, then e had been no mention of the herght of future Structures planned for the property behind the church We now wonder rf your department was even away e of~ust what this would look like rn the end, or rf ther e wer e other reasons why we wer e nvt told At this trine, as yvu are aware, there are a number of portable classrooms looming directly veer our nerbhborhood, with very little landscaping or other mrtrbatrvn of any kind to even attempt to soften the effect They were placed as close to the edge as possible, we assume to rnaxrmrze the usuable land Since thei e is no room for a block wall or fence we have the full view of air condrtronrnb units, etc and rt looks very rnappropnate and out of place rn a residential nerghbor hood The elevation itself rs mappropnate They sit way above the homes on the street below As you drrve up Zircon toward the portables, the visual effect rs that the portables ar e r rbht on top of the houses immediately below • It rs vur urlderstandinb that future permanent building(s) that are proposed for the same location may tower even hr~her than what's there now The portable buildings, as well as proposed future buildrnUs are over-whelmrng and incompatible with the surroundings What'S there now (the portables) rs veryv unsrghtl} as well We feel embaiassed when friends who haven't been here recently, drrve up tv ow house and say something to us about how horrible those burldinbs look They look conspicuousl} out of place, and somethinb even larger on the same spot would look even more over-whelmrnb As rs typical with buildings, the arr COrldltiollring UrlltS, pipes, etc are placed behind the burldunbs so as nvt to make the fiont of the buildings unsightly Therefore all the unsightly parts of the buildings are looming rn the arr above our nerghbor hood fvr all of us to live under ~'Ve have asked Rex Uutier iez, Diane Williams, arld some member s of the Plarnnrng Commission to drrve tip vur street and have a look for themselves VVe are asking all of the cvmmrssrvn member s tv take a look before the meetnlg on August ?2 Please look, and consrder how }ou would feel living rn vur house or in this nerghbor hood It r eall} seems that little consrder atron is biven for this part of town rn general an}more, and tllrs pr o~ect is r eall}~ a slap in the face to those of us Who ar e good citizens, tr}rng tv keep this a decent communrt} to live irl The project looks nice frvm the fiont because } ou r ealI} don't see the portables and rt lovks decent from the nerghbor hvod above the pr olect because rt seems that great pares have been takvnb to beautify that side of the pr opera} and not impact then view, yet the back end of the project sits r rght on top of us The landscaping rn the fiont and north of the properh seems well taken care of, het the landscaping that was required to be put nn place rn the small strip between vur proper-t} and the chwch, rs ~er~ neglected The} have ahead} had to replace trees that died due to lack of water, but onl} months after we complained about rte The current • landscaping rs d}rng rn places now and obvrousl} neglected ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ B & C- 15 ~A~e also question the appropriateness of a school housrng up to 187 students planned for this location . We have a ]egrtrmate concerns about the norse and traffic such a school would bang It seems much too rntense for the area and too close to homes ~'~~~~G~~ 9~C~~~ Barbara Rrch • When we first moved here, 26 years ago, there was an empty field next to us It was a hell wrth a gradual slope We had a view of the mountains, red-tailed hawks, and other wr]dlrfe While we were blessed to have this empty area next to us for many years, we realized that the properrty would eventuall~~ be developed However, rt never occulted to us that rt would be an}thin; but residential homes, or that rt that rt would bang concerns such as the ones we've mentioned Please gyve thought to these issues and do what rs rrght for the exrstrng community which has been so disrupted by this very mapptopnate building project You have the authority to not extend the conditional use permit or allow further extension of this building pro~ec,t Please consider our positron, and how you would feel rf } ou were m rt~ Thanks ~ pp, cc Diane \h~rlirams Rex Gurtrerrez Charles Rich B&C-16 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA City of Rancho Cucamonga AUG 13 2007 Planning Commission - 10500 Civic Center Drive ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RECEIVED -PLANNING Re NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007-00544 Operation of a Private/Paroclual School (Kindergarten through Grade 12) and Day Care Facility at Lifeway Church, 7477 Vineyard Avenue (APN 0208-921-36) Regarding the above proposal, as residents of this area, we have concerns as follows September through June, Alta Loma High School traffic adversely affects residents ability to enter or exit the area using Vineyard Avenue between Baseline and Carnelian Both morning and afternoon, parents' and students' cars block intersections along Vineyard Avenue and traffic becomes snarled on Baseline as cars enter and exit the high school parking lots Year round sporting events at Red Hill Park create a tremendous amount of traffic as well as a large number of parked cars lining both sides of Vineyard Avenue with parents and children crossing the street to reach the park. During the summer months, Concerts m the Park not only fill all available parking along • Vineyard Avenue (as well as side streets) but create traffic dams making rt difficult to enter or leave the area during the tune before and after the concert Our objection is not to a private/parochial school but to the added traffic rt will create A school and day care at Lifeway Church will add to the already over crowded streets during the same times of day Alta Loma High School traffic and sporting/entertainment traffic is heavy When the church was first proposed there was no objection on our part because Sunday mornings are not usually a heavy traffic time m this area It was our thought that perhaps the church would allow the use of their parking facilities to supplement those of the park for special events The gate they have installed and the signs they post warning against parking m their lot has shown us that we thought wrong Had we known they had the intention of opening a school and day care, adding hundreds more cars to an already over crowded street, we would have voiced our objection before their construction began As rt is now, certain hours of the day, rt is difficult (if not nearly inpossible) to enter Vineyard Avenue from intersecting streets Traffic backs up and cars block the intersections leaving residents sitting at stop signs until someone decides to leave space allowing them to proceed onto Vineyard Avenue Traveling this area m the morning and coming home from work or leaving again m the evening become time consuming and frustrating experiences • B&C-17 Each child enrolled at Lifeway will have to be dnven to and from the church each day Parents • driving their children to and from the church for school or day care will probably be on their way to or from work, on a time schedule and in a hurry. Adding more cars to this area, at the same time it is already over crowded, will not only add to the traffic problems and frustrations, but wall create more safety issues for students, sports participants and those attending concerts who are crossing streets to reach their destination What began as a mce improvement to our neighborhood has taken on a new appearance as a possible detnment to the area We strongly suggest a traffic study be conducted before any further action is taken on this proposal Thank you for your consideration and attention to our concerns. Sincerely, ~~-~-~-~ David L and Debra K Pnce J`ol 73 79 Garnet Street • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9 i 730 (909)987-7384 B&C-18 f ~.._ ~ ~ ~ ~~-~,.- ~~a~ 7 ~-~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~-~ ~~` `~~ ~.. ~~`'° ~ cep ``~,o ° `~`~ • ~--b ~ ~ C3c,N~rrZ.:Pf/~. ti-~--~~ _~..~z. ~ i.SL-'~ I~.e ~1.~.~--L _ ~°`,~ ~ c~~~~. ~ ~~~~ ~o~ ~ ~c> ~~ ~jl ock STP~1G't t....in-e a~~ ~cm~ac.Q ~CB~ ®F ~Af~C~~i ~~AE~Q~G~ i i ~~~ ~~~~ B&C-19 t n"':, a -~(/ T H E C I T Y O F R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A Stiff Report DATE September 12, 2007 TO Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM James R Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY Michael Diaz, Senior Planner SUBJECT NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - DRC2007-00536 - INDEPENDENCE NETWORKS - A proposed addition of arcade games at a proposed sit-down restaurant within the Victoria Community Plan, Regional Related Office/Commercial District, (Mixed Use) at 12375 Base Line Road, Suite 101, in the Winery Estates Center at the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Day Creek Boulevard APN 0227-161-58 The project qualifies as a Class 1 categorical exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities BACKGROUND • The owner of the recently approved Buffalo Wings & Rings restaurant at the Winery Estates Center has requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow an arcade (for more than 3 videogames/amusement devices) as part of their business operations However, upon a review of the entire Master Conditional Use Permit for the center (DRC2003-00504/PC Resolution 04-86), staff determined that the proposed arcade use is a prohibited use for the Winery Estates Center This determination is based on Condition 16 of the original Conditional Use Permit for the center, which references another related document entitled "Proposed Methods to Assure High Standards of Operation and Quality Tenants" that specifically lists Arcades as a prohibited use for this center The applicant has been made aware of the condition, and is expected to withdraw her request CORRESPONDENCE This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site No comments have been received in regard to this project RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the request for Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00536 to be continued to a date non specific to allow time for the applicants to determine their course of action Respectfully submitted, • Ja s R Troyer, AICP Planning Director JRT MD/rlc ITEM D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2007-00488 -SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT September 12, 2007 Page 2 approximately 3,260 square feet in area with no outdoor dining The interior of the lease space has been repainted, furnished, and decorated as the space was already a fully functional restaurant Approximately 2,000 square feet of the lease space is devoted to dining tables and booths, while the remaining area is used for a bar (existing from the previous use), a kitchen, and restrooms The proposed hours of operation for the restaurant are 11 00 a m to 9 00 p m , Monday through Thursday, Friday 11 00 a m to 11 00 p m , and Saturday and Sunday 7 00 a m to 10 00 p m No entertainment is proposed at this time Beer and wine served with meals is permitted by right, but the service of mixed drinks (Type 47 license) requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit The applicant has submitted an application with the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) for a new Type 47 Liquor License for the restaurant The ABC regulations require the restaurant owner to apply for a new liquor license because the previous nightclub/restaurant owner surrendered his license back to ABC until he could find a new location to reuse the license or decide to sell the license to another party A Surrounding Land Use and Zoning • Site - Commercial Center/ Community Commercial (CC) District, Foothill Boulevard Districts (Subarea 3) North - Apartments/Low (L) Residential District South - Mobile Home Park/Medium (8-14 Dwelling Units) Residential Distract East - Restaurant/Commercial/Office (CO) District, Foothill Boulevard Districts (Subarea 3) West - Gas Station/Commercial/Office (CO) District, Foothill Boulevard Districts • (Subarea 3) Northwest - Single-Family Residences/Low (2-4 Dwelling Units) Residential District ANALYSIS A Proposed Use As noted above, Senor Agave Mexican Restaurant is a sit-down eatery that provides Mexican style cuisine The restaurant menu offers a wide variety of items In contrast to the former business, the lease space has been remodeled to provide an open, well-lit, dining area consisting of booths and tables The windows have been uncovered to allow views in and out of the restaurant The appearance of the existing bar has been upgraded and is directly accessible to the dining area The kitchen improvements, as required by the Health Department, have been made Moreover, there is no stage, dance floor, or plans for entertainment of any kind As such, the decision not to include entertainment as a key element for the business eliminating nearly all of the concerns/problems associated with the former use Typical with most full-service restaurants, the applicant intends to serve beer, wine, and mixed alcoholic drinks with meals During peak business hours (lunch, dinner, and weekends) there will be approximately 12 employees No physical expansion of the restaurant is proposed with this request Overall, staff finds the new restaurant use and improvements to be appropriate and in keeping with type of use envisioned for the center B Hours of Operation The proposed hours of operation are indicative of most similar restaurant uses m the area Late hours are limited to Fridays and Saturdays when peak • hours are expected These hours are consistent with the hours of the existing sushi restaurant in the center Staff does not expect the proposed hours of operation to pose E-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2007-00488 -SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT September 12, 2007 . Page 3 any significant impacts on the center as parking is plentiful and most (if not all) of the other (non-food) businesses in the center will be closed during the peak evening hours C Land Use Compatibility The restaurant is located m a fully developed commercial retail center with sufficient parking located primarily at the front of the leased spaces The restaurant use is located in the Commercial Office zoning district of Foothill Boulevard District, Subarea 3, which allows for a range of retail, office, and sit-down restaurants As such, Senor Agave Mexican Restaurant will be compatible as a land use and consistent with the other restaurant uses in the center/area During the past year, the appearance of the existing shopping center has been significantly improved by means of new paint, roof repairs, signs, enhanced landscaping, and better maintenance When in full operation, the restaurant use m the center will provide local workers and residents another dining option from which to choose D Security and Fire Safety - Security was an important issue for the former nightclub/restaurant use located at the subject site However, as a restaurant use only with no live entertainment (e g , bands, D J 's, dancing, comedians, etc ), there are no immediate issues/concerns that would warrant the continued use of security guards for the business Rarely, if at all, do restaurant uses (even those serving alcohol beverages with meals) require security guards Staff believes the elimination of this requirement is appropriate as long as a bona fide restaurant use at the subject site is maintained as such • As a standard procedure, the applicant will be required to comply with Fire Department requirements regarding fire safety and maximum occupancy A condition of approval requiring that the applicant contact the Fire Department to obtain a new Assembly Use Permit for the business has been added E Parking Restaurant uses are parked at a ratio of one space per 100 square feet of gross floor area As such, the 3,260 square foot restaurant will require a minimum of 33 parking spaces for the proposed use The existing multi-tenant commercial center was constructed in the mid-1980s with 215 on-site parking spaces The visits staff has made to the site indicate that parking is generally available for patrons of all the business tenants at all times As with most commercial centers, peak hours are at lunch and dinner hours Additionally, a majority of the businesses within the center will be closed during evening hours, leaving more parking spaces available for restaurant patrons Staff does not anticipate any significant parking impacts for the restaurant use F Environmental Assessment The Planning Department Staff has 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 under the Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (e) (2) because the project is in an area were all public services and facilities are allowed for maximum development which is permissible per the General Plan In addition, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment CORRESPONDENCE This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Vailey Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site No comments have been received in regard to this project E-3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2007-00488 -SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT September 12, 2007 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION Based on the above analysis, staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00488, thereby replacing the existing CUP which applied to the former Margarita Beach nightclub/restaurant with a new CUP for the proposed Senor Agave Restaurant at 9950 Foothill Boulevard Respectfully submitted, ~" Jamd R Troyer, AICP Planning Director JT MD/ge Attachments Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E ~~ City Council Resolution No Margarita Beach establishment Location/Aerial Map Floor Plan Executive Summary of Business Senor Agave Menu 06-052 pertaining to the former Draft Planning Commission Resolution of approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-004888 • • E-4 • RESOLUTION NO. 06-052 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING AND MODIFYING THE DECISIONS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REFLECTED IN ITS RESOLUTION NOS. 05-50 AND 05-51, FOLLOWING APPEALS BY MARGARITA BEACH, LOCATED AT 9960 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. RECITALS. (i} Based upon numerous complaints received by the City, on July 13, 2005, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider modification of Conditional Use Permit No 88-45 and Entertainment Permd No 91-03 issued to Margarrta Beach (li) Following the conclusion of the public hearing referred to m Recital (Q above, the Planning Commission approved Resolution No 05-50 modifying Conditional Use Permit No 88-45, and Resolution No 05-51 modrfying Entertainment Permit No 91-03. Margarita Beach timely appealed the Planning Commission's decisions • (lily On November 2, 2005, January 18, 2006, and February 1, 2006, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing concemtng the appeal of Margarita Beach (iv) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred B. RE5OLUTION. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows 1. All facts set forth in the Rentals, Part A of this Resolution, are true and correct 2 Based upon the entirety of the record rn this matter and substantial evidence presented during the public hearings before this City Council, the City Council specifically finds as follows a. The previous businesses on the site, Siam Garden Restaurant and Skipper's Bar and Grill, were authorized by prior approvals to operate a full service restaurant, serve alcohol and provide I~ve entertainment pursuant to an entertainment permit, until 2 00 a m provided that the full food service menu be concurrently available during ail hours of operation • EXHIBIT ~- E-5 Resolution No 06-052 Page2of6 • b. Although secondary effects disturbing the quiet enjoyment of residences closely proximate to Margarita Beach, and attributable to the operation of Margarita Beach, have occurred during years of its operation, those problems have been substantially mitigated by the management of Margarita Beach c. Notwithstanding the finding in Subsection "b", above, the City Council finds that there remains a potential for further such secondary effects to occur in the absence of additional conditions governing the operation of Margarita Beach 3 Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 and 2, above, the City Council hereby sustains the action of the Planning Commission in adopting Resolution No 05-50, subject to the following modifications and additions a. Condition No 2 generally requiring documentation establishing gross receipt attributable to the sales of food and alcohol, is hereby deleted b. Condition No 4 is hereby amended to read as follows "The serving of alcohol in conjunction with restaurant usage may occur only between the hours of 11 00 a m and 2 00 a m " c. Condition No 7 is hereby amended to read as follows "All doors shall remain closed during entertainment for noise • attenuation purposes The rear (north doors) shall be used only for emeraencv from 8 00 o m to 2 00 a m" d. Condition No 19 is hereby amended to read as follows "Uniform security personnel shall be provided within the parking area at all times during evening business hours (8 00 p m to 2 00 a m) to continue parking and monitor crowd behavior A minimum of one member of the security team shall be continually present at all times When the front parking lot reaches fifty percent capacity, the number of security personnel outside the establishment shall be increased to a minimum of two persons morntonng the parking lot and directing patrons not to park within the adjacent residential neighborhood Security personnel shall immediately report any observed criminal activities to the Police Department " e Anew Condition No 23 is hereby added to read as follows "A full food service menu shall be displayed in a conspicuous location on each table, and all other locations where food service is provided The menu shall be legible and shall clearly state that all menu items are available during all business hours J E-6 Resolution No 06-052 Page 3 of 6 • 4. The City Council further finds that in order to further mitigate the potential for further adverse secondary effects in adjacent residential areas and businesses attributable to the operation of Marganta Beach, conditions suggested by Counsel for Margarrra Beach during the course of the public hearings on the Marganta Beach appeal, should be implemented Accordingly, the City Council further amends Planning Commission Resolution No 05-50 by adding new Condition Nos 2432 to read as follows "24 The business operator shall cause ds employees to inspect the RamonalEstacta Court neighborhoods wdhin 250 feet of the Ramona/Estacia intersection far litter (end remove any that is observed) at least three times everyday in which the business is open One of the inspections must be within thirty minutes of the business' closing, one must be 9 30 p m and 10 30 p m ,and one must be between 5 30 p m and 6 30 p m "25 The business operator shall deny entrance to the business to any person or persons reasonably believed to have parked on Ramona or in the Estacia Court neighborhood "28 Within fi0 days of this Resolution becoming effective, the business • operator shall insta{I an additional urinal in the men's lavatory within the business "27 Within 60 days of this Resolution becoming effective, the busless owner shall cause speed bumps to be installed in the driveway between the building and the north sound wall "28 Within 180 days of this Resolution becoming effective, the business owner shall expend a minimum of $20,000 00 towards promoting and expanding food sales This money is to be spent on remodeling the kitchen (adding a pizza oven for gourmet pizzas}, convection oven (for fresh bread), additional refrigeration, and promoting food sales (through coupons and advertising} The business owner shall promptly provide proof to the City Planner following the required expenditure "29 Within 60 days of this Resolution becoming effective, the business owner shall pay to the City all costs of installing and thereafter maintaining, at the entrance to Estacia Court from Ramona and at the entrance to the Pasito cul-de-sac from Estacia Court, two (2} highly visible signs indicating, in wording, configuration, location and size satisfactory to the City Engineer, that the street is a dead end, does not go through or has no outlet This cond~t~on is contingent upon the City Engineer obtaining appropriate approvals of affected property owners • E-7 Resolution No 06-052 Page 4 of 6 • "30 The security guard required to be stationed at the intersection of Ramona and the east/west alley between the shopping center and the residential complex, shall wear a dark packet bearing the word 'SECURITY', in lightly colored, contrasting and conspicuous letters, on the back "31 The business owner shall meet with a Police Department representative, not less than once every sixty (60) days, and preferably with interested neighbors, to discuss policing and related community issues pertaining to the operation of Margarita Beach "32 The busrness owner shall contact individual neighbors who have indicated an interest in the relationship between nearby residents and Margarita Beach, to arrange to meet at least once every sixty (60) days to discuss matters of mutual concern and resolve any ongoing issues " 5 Based upon the findings set forth rn Sections 1 and 2, above, the City Council hereby sustains the action of the Planning Commission in adopting Resolution No 05-51, subject to the following modifications and additions a Condition No 1 is amended to read as follows "This approval is for the provision of entertainment in conjunction with the restaurant use Entertainment is approved for small bands or • individual musicians, and a dance floor area Any change of intensity or type of entertainment shall require a mod cation to this permit " b Condition No 3 is hereby amended to read as follows "Hours of operation of the entertainment use shall be limited to Sunday through Saturday, from 8 00 p m to 2 00 a m " c. Condition No 6 is hereby amended to read as follows "When entertainment is being conducted, doors and windows shall remain closed for noise attenuation purposes The rear (north doors) shall be used only for emergencies from 8 00 p m to 2 00 a m " d. Condition No 14 rs hereby amended to read "Uniform security personnel shall be provided within the parking areas at all times during evening busrness hours (8 00 p m to 2 00 a m) to control parking and monitor crowd behavior A minimum of one member of the security team shall be continually present at all times When the front parking lot reaches fifty percent capacity, the number of security personnel outside the establishment shall be increased to a minimum of two persons monitoring the parking lot and directing patron not to park within the adjacent residential neighborhood Security personnel shall immediately report any observed criminal activities to the Police Department " • E-8 Resolution No 08-052 Page 5 of 6 • 6. The City Council further finds that in order to further mitigate the potential for further adverse secondary effects in ad}acent residential areas and businesses attributable to entertainment occurring at Margarita Beach, conditions suggested by Counsel for Margarita Beach during the course of the public hearings on the Margarita Beach appeal, should be implemented Accordingly, the City Council further amends Planning Commission Resolution No 05-51 by incorporating by reference new Condition Nos 23 through 32 of Planning Commission Resolution No 05-50, as set forth in Sections 3 e and 4 of this Resolution 7. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution ~: Pleato soo IhY foliowingpage (or forma! adoption, corti(lcarlon and slgna(uros • E-9 Resolution No 06-052 Page6of6 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 15`h day of February 2006 AYES Gutierrez, Michael, Williams NOES: Spagnolo ABSENT• None ABSTAINED: Alexander ATTEST• D a J Ada s MC, City Clerk I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held on the 15"' day of February 2006 Executed this 16"' day of February 2006, at Rancho Cucamonga, California Debra J Ad s MC, City Clerk • • E10 h ~yq t{t..''~' h~q` ~ z+snm a ~saa ~ , d? - PI ~~, A NI ~'r gt~'~5`R r^~ t! `L°i~~ ~~ ' ~'~...._' ~? _ j t t ..~M.. MW 1~ 'LC '_" ~ y } ~ i'~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ p~rN+~ w ~ ~ ~ ~.~ `~ qq w~ t ~ i ~ ~ r . V _.1 d n w z .~ , i w k ,t v ..'~ , w. pp ~ .y ,,mo~ ~ ~ "~ ~~ ~+ a ' ~ r i ~ ~ ~./ ~rf l nl a CS r ~ ~ ~ ` ~'~ ~ P ~ k x ~~ P.'P n ,mod ~a ` _ ~ m 11 f~ ~ ~ „~r. r ~ @Q p.~". e + ~ EXHIBIT B -. _ .. f , `~ w~ ~ 4 s~., } r ~ : - '_ ~` °~, , ~ ~;~ f. S ~t1dOR AC-;A~~ ~ ~ 9 S~ FOOT4-~I I (_L i31_V D. s~ ~ I ~, ~ -; €~ i 0 0 0 0 o ~ o~ ~ ^ D^ D o o ^oD^oD^o ^ D^ D^ 0 ^ D^ D^ ^ D^ D^ 0 A; c~ D ° ~ ~ ~~ ^......... ~ a LI OIiI ~ II ~m~~~~ ~~ ~D ~m SENOR AGAVE 9950 FOOTHILL BLVD ~ SUITE R AND S ~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 4 j TEL (909) 945-5146 '(~-/ ~ FAX (909) 945-5176 12 0 ~~o ~~ H a FRANZ GUARDIA 1262 W FOOTHILL BLVD UPLAND, CA 91786 TEL (951) 768-9214 FAX (909) 946-9286 D D D D SENOR AGAVE • 1 Executive Summary Senor Agave will establish a successful presence in the food service industry within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and neighboring cities The proposed 3,300 square feet location within the Cucamonga Village Center in the City of Rancho Cucamonga is expected to gross in excess of $1 million in sales per year within the first three years of operation The first year operation is expected to produce a net profit of $170,000 This will be generated from an investment of approximately $100,000 in initial capital Senor Agave will focus in serving authentic Mexican food with a full bar, however, it will incorporate dishes and spirits from the Bolivian cuisine providing additional options to patrons Senor Agave will run a casual sit-down operation with waiter/waitress service at each table similar to competitors such as EI Torito, Don Jose, Cozymels, and others, but initially at a smaller scale Six Mexican fast food restaurants can be found within a 2 mile radius, but only two of them are sit-down operations Additionally, no Bolivian food restaurants have been found in the area as the nearest ones are located in the greater Los Angeles and Orange County areas The principal senses that the needs from most of the workforce of the surrounding businesses, residents and families are not currently met A survey was conducted throughout the general area and it has been determined that a casual sit-down Mexican food restaurant would fit well The location is centrally located and it is surrounded by middle to upper class residential neighborhoods, Class-A professional office buildings, industrial complexes, and other shopping centers which bring thousands of shoppers to the area It appears that the proposed operation would be very successful at this location Expansion is expected to be necessary after the third year of operation Owner funding, internally generated cash flow and availability of additional space in adjacent units within the shopping center will enable the expansion Management recognizes the rapid growth potential made possible by the quick success and fast return-on-investment from the proposed location Payback of total invested capital will be realized in less than 24 months of operation Cash flow becomes positive from operations immediately and profits are substantial in the first two years CITY OF RANCHO Cl~CANIONOA SUN 12 2007 • RECEIVE®-PLANNING EXHIBIT D E 13 SENOR AGAVE 2 Obfectives Senor Agave has the objective of opening its store in the City of Rancho Cucamonga before summer of the present year (2007) The management feels confident of its ability to successfully attract new clientele, establish repeat clientele, and replicate the operation to additional venues in the near future The following objectives have been established • Have the restaurant operational by June, 2007 • Maintain tight control of costs and operations by hiring quality personnel and utilizing automated computer control • Maintain food and beverage cost under 25% of revenue • Selection of the location that meets ail the parameters of success • Grow the proposed location to the $3 to $4 million annual sales level 3 Mission Senor Agave strives to be the premier Mexican food restaurant in the region Our goal is to be a step ahead of the competition by combining menu selection of the traditional Mexican and Bolivian cuisines, atmosphere, ambiance, and service to create a sense of "place" by providing an over-all value in the dining experience 4 Keys to Success The keys to success in achieving our goals are • Product quality Not only great food but great service • Successfully implement select Bolivian dishes • Managing finances to enable expansion and increase size of restaurant • Controlling costs at all times without exception • Instituting management controls to insure replicability of operations over multiple locations This applies equally to product control and to financial control 2 • • • E14 SENOR AGAVE 5 Company Profile Senor Agave is a privately held company by Franz L Guardia, principal owner In 2001 Mr Guardia successfully established family owned Jarritos Mexican Restaurant in the City of Upland This restaurant currently operates under the management of Guardia Brothers, Inc Mr Guardia currently holds a full time position at the City of Ontario as an Assistant Engineer and manages Jarritos M R part time However, his pnmary focus will be Senor Agave once opened The restaurant will be comprised of approximately 3,300 square feet and will seat approximately 200 persons at any given time The restaurant will be improved to feature a traditional Mexican decor and ambiance, clean looking, open, and pleasing to the customer Senor Agave will focus in serving authentic Mexican and Bolivian food with a full bar serving, among other drinks, popular Mexican spirit such as Margaritas and Pina Coladas Senor Agave will run a casual sit-down operation with waiter/waitress service at each table similar to competitors such as EI Torito, Don Jose, Cozymels, and others, but initially at a smaller scale Future plans are to expand to the adjacent units for a total of 6,000 square feet with a • capacity for 300-plus patrons Management is considering the addition of live entertainment such as mariachis and karaoke possibly after the third year of operation or when the expansion takes place This will add additional appeal to the restaurant's concept and will increase sales particularly in days in which live entertainment is present 6 Location The proposed restaurant will be located within the Cucamonga Village Center in the heart of the City of Rancho Cucamonga The shopping center faces Foothill Blvd ,also known as Historic Route 66, and it is located between Archibald and Haven Avenue It is centrally located and it is surrounded by middle to upper class residential neighborhoods, Class-A professional office buildings, industrial complexes, and other shopping centers National and regional retail tenants such as Target, Mervin's, Barnes and Noble, Best Buys, etc which brings thousands of customers can be found less than one mile away Since this location was formerly used as restaurant/night club, minor tenant improvements will be necessary The restaurant will be improved to feature a traditional Mexican decor and ambiance, clean looking, open, and pleasing to the customer • 3 E15 SENOR AGAVE • 7 Strategy and Implementation Our strategy is based on serving our niche well The targeted clientele are the families dirnng out with a focus to local work force and business entertainers All can enjoy of the Senor Agave cuisine We are building our infrastructure so that we can replicate the product, the experience, and the environment across broader geographic lines Concentration will be on maintaining quality and establishing a strong identity at the proposed location The identity becomes the source of critical mass upon which the expansion efforts will be based on Not only will it add marketing muscle but it will also become the framework for further expansion to different locations The key elements of Senor Agave's restaurant concept are as follows • High profile location -The Company selected the store location based on key demographic indicators, including traffic counts, average income, and number of households, hotels, and offices within a certain radius • Quality food -Senor Agave store will serve freshly prepared, high quality, popular • traditional Mexican and Bolivian cuisine that is targeted to appeal to a variety of tastes and budgets with an emphasis on reasonably and moderately paced signature items of particular appeal to a local market • Quality service - In order to maintain its unique image the Company will provide attentive and friendly service with a reasonable ratio of service personnel to customers and will also invest in the training and supervision of its employees 8 Promotion and Marketing Strategy A combination of local media and event marketing will be utilized Radio is most effective, however most expensive, followed by the local print media Advertising budget and other promotions efforts will be an on-going process of management geared to promote our products However, nothing will be as effective and inexpensive as positive word to mouth from repeat as well as new clientele The restaurant will focus in implementing lunch specials to attract the local work force For example, "Taco Tuesday" is certainly the most common within the Mexican food industry consisting in the sale of such product at a reduced price This will in turn introduce the patrons to our menu selection and operation It is expected to attract such patrons not only 4 E16 SENOR AGAVE for lunch with work colleagues, but also for dinner with their families Support will also be given to a number of charitable and community causes such as churches and school activities A kids menu will be incorporated to additionally attract the local little leagues and their parents This effort is geared towards attracting the indiscriminate family oriented customers Additionally, the owner of the business will be an active member of the local Chamber of Commerce • 5 E17 • • E18 a 4 t- w ~. N Z F- a w u ... W x o~ w o. N 0 4 -, _ n r D_ d u 4 0 u O E E Z ~ v ~~ 01 C a W c O ~f ~ ~ .° m o V' E;~ A/ m O L IrW V S m ~_` '00 ~ v K e y E o w ~ d u E uHo w Q 4 o: 0 •z w H s E -$ b ~ O 0 ~ o. E ~$ s 1 N c ° d '$ t u C 3 a u ll1 N °Z 'n° 'C ~n c e e°. 0! O u $oo.o 'o ~ E >.g iocs$e a u ° O O N 'O ° V ~ y m;~N ~.p~1 QI d ~ V i. N 7 °~ .9sr~ O ° E `°3~i E 8 C .NO.. E 2 3 ~O d ~ OLY ~v~ 0 E ° ° ~ d u °S -o od O E -° m ~ c N .+ ° ~. ~ g .° o~~o t3~ a o g o E E o~ C"~ N p d s S u d '~7 d O O .a E "- ~ g~ o 7 ~O O Ol d s ~ O '~ ~~ N o ° ~ ~ o m.Sg"° ~. S ° C 0 F^ u`~. ° v i 'TM o '=moo s~.a; ' o a„"r c c 3 a= ~ y ~s~ ~$ r-~ a ~ ~ m 1 W D ~ c I ~,d, ° _ t ~ ~ m u O G ~~ 3 c °03 E.o N O d u O 15 N ~ ~ S a u °` ~" O ° N u _ . ~ 0 ~ G C L ~ u i ~ ~ t~trr~~ .0 O ~ o E ~~ =a ;~ t E p c gs a 0.' ~~ v m a -° ~~ a -o -° c a a ~ oa a ~o a o S y ~ y N S^ ° N ~ ° C O~ o v W C° o= C d C '!' ~- ° Q of ° Y ° ai ~'3 m o a '-°-°1 sc u m° d u ~`o .O ° ~ c R ° E-° ~ u~i Y u c'D Egg°' "Y «g=E °-'aa ~ and°o -° a G~ ° u u mS C O L C D W N ,«, c` ga U V ; liV ~ 3 U~; V]~.,~ Cn P N N N .-Nf7 N w I- O w F r H po i g- m N ~ lJ aNNN C~9 `D ~ N N Q N d F E O ~ d w V ,°, o -°c' o d o ~°- o z E N ~ d ~ 'C ~ O d ° u ~. QCSuCi ILJ U'= ~~ ~--~- 3A\/ N3AVF{ L'W 0 ~ ~: W l~ NL O 3Ay dNOWV~J O W mJ .7 JJ m VY LL 3A\J OlV91H7tly ~~ W a z~ Z p0 ~a z~ ~} J 1 Q ~- p Y W a ~O m a~ ~~ ~~ 0- 0- 00 v~ ~ M =~ ~~ N Q :V m z _J O = Q ~o°~ u' 0 az ~~ d Q 0 G ILL ~ .n ~ S a E r h ~ p-~ ~~~ N D. x.. o = m~ DY ~ Dog rn V . W V ~ ~ u= Q O W z~ O W Q V~ v0 ~ W N M a J Q W V P d y xu ~ c_ ~T. c` E O xx ~ ; ~~ > ~ m = ~~,~r ~ E a s ~ o 0 ~'+N C ~O CO > >t~y GLU V C~'~in~ ~ s~ _ o N E $ ~ ~ ~ a I YY E > O C 3 O'F~~f N I ~ ~ y ' Fa ~ r G Q a .i .- u C to N E a ~ c c ~ c >, r M ' d S ;_ ~ ~ ~ o + o ~ yO. ~- C ± t o ~ y' 'u p ~ O_ 4 o W m O C G = >>_ ~.. G?~~. ~ P~ _cc a y t ra ~,° ° v ~E~ ,a13~ E19~~~~_`- P O Z O ° ? ~ c N C c E •°- ~_ c ° o u L » ~ d ~s° O N v m O ~ O N N N x 'm z D d r~ C o~~ ,a c ~ o o` n> C p /y LL "' G _ h Z 4 ,_~ EOo Z 3 ~ a u 0 o 4 a° w y o rn ~yUO Q °c~w 2 o°i3a C W V Z ~ma E ca ~ ~~°'o ~ y u `o `~ m_'O EXHIBIT E N P P H a ao '~+ a ~ ~n w~~ q l ~ Q G C d y ~ O N a O Z~> ~8 O u u C h Fs~ -- O O ~ P v ~~ ..u~ oi. m '' ° o e 5 3 Y O ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ u o gs ~v f d O C L P O C7 ~ 3 ~ -~ ~ a o a -° ~ "g o$~ E ~ ~ E ~ V d ^ ° ..O O~ N S O d u O O aci i~ ~'s o,P~~ o EY L OI ~ ~ V L "O V N ~ 'O ~ ~.r C N~LJt a~~ ; ~ d ~i E ~ o : O` ~i o .c ~ c N N c~ mr~Y~ y ~ o`^~' o O m e ~ o S .u2 u> o V V c ~ ..L e m w w u N °' d L L L ~' m N N g O a y u V V V m 01 d~ e c o q ` q~~ O O O S L .dC O 't Q tee,,, m ~~~uuu.- - o o- t C p g m 0 .G u W u r x v~ V _ N .n v u+ m °~ v n - ° ° ~~ w E d~ ~ ~~ .~.~o v°`i J ° r E ^R o_ c ~ g 3 W L d ~ ~ C d m W ~ n ° E ~ O u ~ ~ ~ ~ O U $,o~ O u o ~ ,.d. s o .a F' iv c c ~ V{ /0 u -o v '~ m o m 9 ~ L p ~ Q' L N 6 >N E u ~ °s m O Q S P ~' (J O N ~ o ~~~ V H ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ d ~ p_ C .1C O N ~ N u Nl O, '°O ~P ~P -° oc° o c o+ ~o -+„ -° °i -°' d ~ '~ O - ~C ~C O V N C E S ~ $ m > w tla y~ c ~ m C~ o C °ao -t ~ ~c C ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ d N€ ~ 'F+ u o '+7 '" N N~ "O ; y ~i O m Q O° W E > o 'O Ems` O u~ O m 0 ~~ D O ~ d 0 dQ v ~ .C ~L~ d N u L ot_s_ v o __ ~ $' a U~ 3 3 w.3 3 E v~ -g ~e -o s L m _m 0 0 ~ ~ P3 0 ~ 3 ~ ° r3 W wti $ s o E s ~ ° L E c {il 0 3 0 ~: L E ~ ~~ N 3 E $' ~ s aEi uPi F.. °o ~ c s ~, n c ° ' ~ ~ $ o o, 0 0 -p ~ o L Z ~'~, C rn °~ 3 a = c 0i o m c c w a~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ° o d '~ a Te-j P W ~ `p ~ C l(1 QI~ O ~ L ~ Y P N P P m ~ ~ P O >~ yn^ ^ N 0 W 3 ~ ~ W ~ W ~ ~ ~8 P ~ p ~ '9 ~ C. ~p, N ~ .` O m ~` ~- N O S'P Y~ ~L N P C O po yCy K1 O _ p Q U O a ~= ~ C h a d O ~ C~ ~ d C H d 0 O P ~ p P ~C ` ~ -mac F Q ^O ° `o ~ "- ° o '" c °' ~ -° d N ~ v '~ .o 0 o _ _ ~ o~~ ,p O c G ~, o y; .~ i Z c$ ~ ~e v e o O~ ~ .C e ~ V a g y m° u c ~ O ?~ ~~ °i iC .3 3 y N d os a y' N p° o U.Y ro '~ "~ > m Q E L o o ~ ~ v - ''3i o u v-i 9 '~` m V~ N ,a `_' eu J ~^ ~' C- ip °' Y 3 H o ~° ~~ y ctJ ~ E C d° ~ d c d> > N °~ Q ~ m ip m ~, ~ o ae i0 e ~ .~+ d E~ O d ~ ~~ m Os HvPi ~ ~ c R ~ ~ .C ~t~ t ~ p~ i.. ~ `"~ V Q N NH..O. O HO Ol mNN ~.N P u V) 4. f- O UN U C~ VI V C71-- ~h- d ~ E L E ~~ o at 3 'N 0 ~ ~ -° 3 P ~E ~ °u a~i o' r > o V: v u V c ~ rn-p _ d pp' no, c o O E o ~ E P ~ P p ~ o- ~ N a+ ^ ~' iq ~ ~ O s~ O V O ~'° N d 0 I~ E~-Q Ec O 3 Q1 L m c~ .° O Y O^ E 7 H w~ `~ C a ~ - m L O m C N o 'L O ° g N V o~ N O g u u c r N E ` N ' ,, , F ~ ~u ~ o dd.o ° ~ q e o E ~ u ~~ " ~ .~ = ~ v ~ oY =° t oo Eri7 ` -o a` ~ o s o .~ ~ ~e c E$ ~ o a Lac u~ i d n 0 . n ~ = c ~-o e ~ ov r' y a r~ F ~ ' ao~ Of ; s ~~ ; n °~ ~°~ ~ S c o m O ~ ~ ~ 3 N d E o ~ ~ c O m o o ~ ~ ~ _a ~ a m y gL ~ NL d3 0 y d N C C O O ~ 7 a O u ~ u d R ~ 1 C Q ~ C o y ~° o$ o $ 0 m ~ o ° ° o O fL V x' iD N ,Q ~ ° ~ x c 'o t= o ~= ° ~ E S H ~' d ~ E E `~ ~ .~ ~ m • c~ s " " ~;; P i ~ ' - °i E -° ~ d a ~ c U .- C 't o a! ;n s 3 V1 ' E~ "C ~' ~ ° e ° m P u d~^"' W E y a-L o { - w^ drn~~ n E d EV C E a ~ N•- ` ~rnv o E o- d ~`Ecn c ar-LN Ea = ENE Ea'^o .e~c 1O~- d m a R o~ o0 0~ x g ~s' ~ o ,~r'tw .e` a o rs C= o d d R c a ~ ... t- N ~ m r n F- o E o o [n f- s v ~n w°~ to u_ z of ~n ~° V u_ a V (9 w v e c= o $ o m o ~ u N 5 5 ° ~ c E o d C 0 'O p 0 i^ G d C 0 C °O-s 'O O C > 'O >. ~ i. L O P ~ 1!1 1~ L N g Z E E ~ ~€ .-n E E ` ~ f" ? u oa 3a ~ 3P P m ° ~% P o` m + $ ' ` ~ o y 3 o H 3 a ~ y yy c a V ao °' ~o ~ d ~ ~0 d 2 'G ° C L o ~ P ..C D O P 3 P Q ~. n d~ d ~ N Q d U l p ~~/ a u 3~ O~ ~ d 2 V O s u > O N~ ~ a T y 2 L~ O p 0 V O O 3- ~ ~ O N O C~ ~ 3 V ~ v ~ L C ~ 1 ` L A P P L d ~ =- t- ~ OC ~ L `;moo C C c°3 p ' , .D ~T V O ~ ~ ~ g-3o~ ;= Y pO =° d d -° m~ ~ " Leo X. . n rn ~ oo m oZy ~. m~ °-$ °$ d o`o .~ .n y a m ° ;= ~ ~ c Y c c a ti o y 3 w s N .n ~.o U> ~ -O ~ m~ Q1 E O O ` E U> y u m .. P G ~ ~ y C C y .C ~ ~ ~ V S O ~ ~ O O7 4J O L P d~ P 7 O) N ~~ ~~ d O P~ .>' ~ O 3 w y 2 p2 ~ L p d ~ a N C 01 `o °; Q1 >. E m d °' o o ai '^ m d a ` W ~ p =_ o o 3~ ~''~ o ~ ~ y o' ..n` '° >, o ~ d E O 1Q X 0 0 u L ~ L N y y Q C ~ C -O N s C Y C R 9 Y ~ ° ~~ O E y ~ u O~ m 0 u~v C ~O d d A~ ~ U c 3 L O ° N~ 3= ~~ ~_ Y t ~ a ~ p K p ~ O'~ Y OI O E..c G C O us G Q v o ~ {/f 0 0 ~ o > u ~~ E~ x o-~ o .,. o~i ° O u eo o ° , y E d c ~ iv,Y ~ u n~ E nd Y u ~ " ~; S O 5~-- u >. R L N u P ~H cao d p d C ESN V .C N d C CJOv~ u ~"' O O C]S.:_ E o .t O` 20L Vs e m s Nan v R 3 s mr v Q 3 S 2f- V _ O' G NQ >. • • • RESOLUTION NO 07- 54 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING NON-CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2007-00488 TO ALLOW AFULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT WITH A FULL BAR (NO ENTERTAINMENT) IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) DISTRICT, FOOTHILL BOULEVARD DISTRICTS (SUBAREA 3), LOCATED AT 9950 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN 1077-621-34 A Recitals 1 Franz Guardia, owner of Senor Agave Mexican Restaurant at the above location, filed an application for Non-Construction Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00488 as described in the title of this Resolution Hereinafter, in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit is referred to as "the application " 2 A Conditional Use Permit 88-45 was originally approved forthe subject site in 1988, allowing the full service restaurant (Siam Garden Restaurant) with alcoholic beverages (Planning Commission Resolutions 88-242 and 88-242A), and 3 In 1996, the restaurant use was sold to a new ownerwho operated a nightclub/restaurant use at the location initially under the name Margaritaville, then later in 2004 as Margarita Beach, and 4 On February 15, 2006, City Council, after an intensive investigation of the operational impacts of the Margarita Beach business, adopted a new set of conditions of approval (Resolution No 06-052) that • were designed to specifically address identified impacts of the nightclub/restaurant business, including the requirement for security guards, and 5 In February 2007, Margarita Beach permanently closed its business at the subject location, and 6 The Senor Agave Mexican Restaurant opened for business in the same location in August of 2007, and the owner submitted an application requesting approval of a new Conditional Use Permit to establish a new set of conditions to govern the operation of a bona fide restaurant use and allow the service of alcoholic beverages at the subject location, and 7 The applicant has submitted an application with the Department of Alcoholic and Beverage Control (ABC) to re-establish a Type 47 liquor license at the subject site to allow the service of alcoholic beverages in conjunction with meals, and 8 On the 12th day of September 2007, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date 9 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 E21 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO 07- 54 DRC2007-00488 -SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT September 12, 2007 Page 2 2 Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the • above-referenced public hearing on September 12, 2007, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows a The application applies to Senor Agave Mexican Restaurant located at 9950 Foothill Boulevard, within an existing commercial center that has a street frontage of 632 feet and lot depth of 278 feet, and b The property to the north of the subject site consists of apartments, the property to the south of the site consists of a mobile home park, the property to the east is a restaurant building, and the property to the west is a gas station, and c The existing restaurant use occupies an existing lease space of approximately 3,260 square feet (no outdoor dining area) that was previously used for a restaurant, and d The applicant proposes no exterior changes or expansion of the restaurant facility, except for minor interior revisions to accommodate a full service restaurant, and e The proposed hours of operation for the restaurant are 11 00 a m to 9 00 p m ,Monday through Thursday, Friday 11 00 a m to 11 00 p m ,and Saturday and Sunday 7 00 a m to 10 00 p m ,and 3 Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing 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 request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the service of alcoholic . beverages with meals 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, and b The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially m~urious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, and c The application, which contemplates the operations of the existing restaurant use, complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code 4 The Planning Department Staff has 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 under the Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (e) (2) because the project is in an area were all public services and facilities are allowed for maximum development which is permissible per the General Pian In addition, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on its own independent~udgment, concurs in the staff's determination of exemption 5 Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the Planning Commission hereby approves the application, subJect to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference Planning Department 1) Approval of Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00488 is granted for the sale • and service of alcoholic beverages (beer, wine, and distilled spirits) for E 22 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO 07- 54 DRC2007-00488 -SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT September 12, 2007 Page 3 • on-site consumption in conjunction with a bona fide full-service restaurant Whenever alcoholic beverages are served, the restaurant shall offer a menu with an assortment of food items commonly ordered during various hours of the day at all times The sale and service of alcoholic beverages shall not begin before and/or extend beyond the approved business hours for the restaurant 2) Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00488 shall hereby replace and supersede all previous CUP and Entertainment Permits issued for the subject site The business shall operate in conformance with the conditions of this approval and performance standards as defined in the Development Code including, but not limited to, noise levels If the operation of the restaurant causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses and/or residences the Conditional Use Permit may be reviewed by the Planning Commission for consideration and a possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit and termination of the use 3) The restaurant shall offer a full menu of food items cooked on the premises and served during all hours that alcoholic beverages are made available for purchase and consumption At no time shall alcoholic beverages be served when full menu items are not offered by the restaurant 4) No alcoholic beverages of any kind shall be served without an approved Type 41 or Type 47 liquor license as issued by the Department of Beverage • Control (ABC) The applicant shall at all times comply fully with all applicable regulations of the Department of Alcoholic and Beverage Control (ABC) including, but not limited to, those provisions regarding attire and conduct 5) Ail business activities shall be conducted inside the building Any change, modification or intensification of the restaurant use beyond that as described in the staff report, and as specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission 6) Approved business hours for the restaurant shall be 11 00 a m to 9 00 p m , Monday through Thursday, Friday 11 00 a m to 11 00 p m ,and Saturday and Sunday 7 00 a m to 10 00 p m Changes to these business hours shall require the review and approval of the Planning Commission 7) No live entertainment (e g , DJ, live bands, dancing, etc) as defined by the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code shall be allowed with City review and approval of an Entertainment Permit Any future request for entertainment for the restaurant use shall be family oriented and clearly incidental to the primary restaurant use 8) No physical expansion of the existing restaurant use shall be allowed without prior City review and approval and amendment of this Conditional Use Permit 9) Customers shall be encouraged to use the parking lot area at the front • (south) entrance/exit of the business The use of the rear (north) parking lot shall be limited to employees only E 23 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO 07- 54 DRC2007-00488 -SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT September 12, 2007 Page 4 10) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the • Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, Health Code, or any other City Ordinances 11) The applicant shall comply with the requirement to obtain a New Assembly Use Permit for the restaurant from the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Contact the Fire Marshall at 909-477-2770, ext 3011 for further information on the requirements to obtain the above permit 12) The applicant shall contact the Building and Safety Department, (909) 477-2710 to obtain required permits for interior improvements requiring a Building Permit 13) The use of search lights or flashing or otherwise light-animated signs which contain or are illuminated by flashing or moving lights or lights which are intermittently on and off, change m intensity, or which create the illusion of flashing in any manner, shall not be permitted 14) The applicant shall be responsible for the clean up and general maintenance of the areas in front and behind the lease space and m any and all parking lot areas occupied by its patrons All collected trash and debris shall be properly disposed in the trash receptacles located on the site 15) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Foothill Boulevard Distracts, all applicable City Ordinances, Foothill Fire • District requirements, Labor Codes, and Public Health codes 16) All signage, including window signs, shall be m conformance with the Comprehensive Sign Ordinance of the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6 The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY Pam Stewart, Chairman ATTEST James R Troyer, AICP, Secretary I, James R Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission 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 12th day of September 2007, by the following vote-to-wit E 24 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO 07- 54 DRC2007-00488 -SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT September 12, 2007 • Page 5 AYES COMMISSIONERS NOES COMMISSIONERS ABSENT COMMISSIONERS • • E 25 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT # DRC2007-00488 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE BONA FIDE RESTAURANT USE AND ALLOW THE SUBJECT. SERVICE OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES APPLICANT FRANZ GUARDIA FOR SENOR AGAVE MEXICAN RESTAURANT LOCATION. 9950 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD - APN 1077-621-34 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS• • General Requirements Completion Date 1 The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, Its _/_/_ agents, officers, or employees, because of the Issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval The appllcant shall reimburse the City, Its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at Its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition 2 Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No 07-54, Standard _/_/_ Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be Included on the plans (full size) The sheet(s) are for Information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect B. Shopping Centers 1 Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours /_/_ 2 The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and In no event shall trash and _/_/_ debris remain for more than 24 hours • I \PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2007 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2007-00488StdCond 9-12 doc E 26 Protect No DRC2007-00488 Completion Date C. Environmental 1 Noise levels shall be monitored after construction to verify the adequacy of the mitigation _/_/_• measures Noise levels shall be monltored by actual noise level readings taken on-and off-site A final acoustical report shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to final occupancy release The final report shall also make recommendations as to additional mltlgatlon measures to reduce noise levels to below City standards, such as, residential exterior noise levels to below 60 dBA and interior noise attenuation to below 45 dBA APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS NOTE ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) D. Existing Structures 1 Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements may be required _/_/_ • I \PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2007 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2007-00488StdCond 9-12 doc E 27 9/12/2007 09 33 9492509008 JC MANNING PA~aE 02/02 ~~~ MANNINQ~ HOMES September 12, 2007 Ms Candyce Burnett Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91729 Re Johnston House Dear Gandyce, I have received your letter dated August 9, 2007, and the Staff Report dated September 1;?, 2007, regarding the Johnston home at 6998 Etiwanda Avenue I am willing to cooperate wilh the Historic Preservation Commission per one of the alternatives mentioned in the August 'a, 2007 letter if we decide to move the house and build the foundation we estimate it to be around trte $40,000 - $60,000 range We can get bids to get a more definitive price as we progress We look forward to working with you on this project Sincerely, G. James C Manning President cc' Mayuko Naka~ima, City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department ~ PS ~ kyY / ~r ; b y 20151 SW Birch Street I Suite 1 SO I Newport Beach CA 92660 I TEl 049 250 4200 I FAX 9A9 2S0 9008 I WEB www manninc~homes com c Mayor DONALD J KURTH, M D Mayor ProTem DIANE WILLIAMS Counc:lmembers REX GUTIERREZ j L DENNIS MICHAEL SAM SPAGNOLO Cety Manager THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA JACK LAM, AICP RANCHO C;UCAMONGA August 9, 2007 James C Manning Manning Homes 20151 SW Birch Street Suite 150 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject. Johnston House meeting with Planning Department Staff Dear Mr James Manning Thank you for meeting with The Planning Department staff on August 2, 2007 to discuss working with the Planning Department in preserving the historic Johnston House During that meeting we discussed the following alternatives for saving and preserving the Johnston House 1 Community Development Block Grant funds -The City has the ability to use these CDBG funds to move the structure These funds would have to be re-appropriated with approval from City Council and justified why these funds should be used on the Johnston House instead of the Isle House or the Etiwanda Depot during this fiscal year To use the CDBG funds, the structure would need to be designated as a Landmark 2 Annual Redevelopment Historic Preservation Funds ($50,000) -Must be in the project area, and it must be adjacent to Rails to Trails, but does not have to go to City Council for final action 3 Density Bonus -The density bonus would permit an additional lot if the Johnston House stayed on site The unit may either be rented or sold, as long as it follows the agreement of affordable housing This option must be approved by City Council 4 Fee Credit -The developer would be responsible for moving the structure and building the foundation in return for fee credits towards future building permit fees Building permit fees are credited back approximately $35,000 If the City and Manning Homes is unable to secure the move of the Johnston House, then the previous recommendations of the Historic Preservation Commission may permit the demolition of the structure If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mayuko Naka~ima, at (909) 477-2750, extension 4307, Monday through Thursday from 7 00 a m to 6 00 p m or by appointment Once again, thank you for the opportunity to work with you and your associates toward preserving a part of the City of Rancho Cucamonga's history Si cerely, Candyce B nett Senior Planner 10500 Civic Cenrer Dr • PO Box 807 • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 • Tel 909-477-2700 • Fax 909-477-2849 • wwwci rancho-Cucamonga ca us Memorandum DATE September 12, 2007 TO Chairman and Members of the Historic Preservation Commission FROM James R Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY Mayuko Naka~ima, Assistant Planner SUBJECT MEMORANDUM REGARDING MILLS ACT CONTRACT 93-01 -JAN AND DALE SUTTON - For the Emory Allen House, a Historic Landmark, located at 9441 Lomita Drive - APN 0202-082-13 Related file Landmark Designation 93-01 On February 17, 1993, City Council approved a Landmark Designation and Mills Act Contract (93-01) for the Emory Allen House Since the approval, minimal improvements have been made to the property and structure, and no standard property maintenance has been performed Therefore, staff has initiated rescinding the Mills Act Contract on the subject property With the assistance of Associate City Attorney, Gena Stinnett, Staff determined that review for compliance with a Mills Act agreement is within the City Council's jurisdiction The Historic Preservation Commission has the power and duty to designate historic properties as landmarks or point of historic interest (or rescinding such designation), along with the review of permits for alteration of such property, but not to enforce or rescind Mills Act Contracts This memo is being provided to the Historic Preservation Commission to inform you of Staffs intent to forward a recommendation to the City Council to rescind the Mills Act Contract (93-01) for the Emory Alien House This item is tentatively scheduled for October 3, 2007 A notice of the hearing will be provided to the neighbors and published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, 15 days in advance of the hearing BACKGROUND On November 5, 1997, Planning Staff was responsible for conducting Mills Act inspections on qualified local landmarks According to our files, the Suttons expressed their interest in completing the tasks listed on the Improvements List, but claimed financial constraints were holding them back On December 4, 2006, and again on January 22, 2007, Staff sent out an inspection request letter to the Suttons requesting access for Mills Act contract inspection of the property Neither of the letters provided any response from the Sutton sisters HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEMORANDUM MILLS ACT CONTRACT 93-01 -JAN AND DALE SUTTON September 12, 2007 Page 2 Staff was asked to perform a site visit with Code Enforcement Officer Mary Burgan on May 16, 2007, where it was evident that most of the tasks listed on the Potential Home Improvements List (Exhibit C) were not completed Overgrown trees and bushes obstruct the view of the house and staff was not able to enter the property or the structure during the inspection Items listed as part of the Mills Act Contract to be completed are as follows • Landscaping - Out of the seven items listed under "Landscaping," none have been completed • Exterior of the structure -Out of the fifteen items listed under "House Exterior," Items 2, 3, and 7 are complete (removal of air conditioner unit, antenna, and cable T V line) The rest have not been completed • Interior of the structure -Since staff was not able to get access into the property for any of the interior inspections, it is believed the nine items listed have not been completed During that site visit m 2007, Ms Dale Sutton claimed once again that financial constraints were the reason for not complying with the tasks listed in the Mills Act agreement ANALYSIS Based on the Suttons' response to previous letters, staff believes that property owners, sisters Jan and Dale Sutton, had not been complying with their Mills Act Agreement Under the "Secretary of the Interior's Rehabilitation Standards", attached hereto as Exhibit B, the owner(s) have not been complying with the list of potential home improvements or allowed periodic examinations of the interior and exterior of the property The decision to move forward with the possible cancellation was based on the current condition of the house, failure to respond to Mills Act inspections, and violation of code requirements The Suttons also have an open case with Code Enforcement, pending prosecution with the City Prosecutor's Office regarding code violations If City Council believes that the Mills Act Agreement has been breached, the City may initiate cancellation of Mills Act Agreements with the property owner(s) If cancellation is approved, under California Government Code Sections 50284 and 50286, the owner(s) may be subject to payment of a cancellation fee equal to 12 1 /2 percent of the current fair market value of the property, as determined by the County Assessor as though the property were free of the contractual restriction Resp ctfully submitted, ~• Ja s R Troyer, AICP Pla Wing Director JRT/MN rlc Attachments Exhibit A - Historic Property Preservation Agreement (Mills Act contract) for the Emory Allen House Exhibit B - The Secretary of the Interior's Rehabilitation Standards Exhibit C - Potential Home Improvement list RECORDING REQUESTED BY and when RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk, City of Rancho Cucamonga P.o. soX so7 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 1 FEE 8 CHRfi 2 MSVS 7 OtAAS 3PC011 8NOF@ 4 LN1VT SST FEE 6SW 5 DTT ' 93~92~34 RECORDED IN OFFICIAL. RECORDS 93 FEB 25 PM 12~ 28 SAN BERNARDINO CO .CALIF. HISTORIC PRDPBRTY PRSSSRVATION AGRBSKBNT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this 17th day of February 1993, by and between the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA+,,~a municipal corpor~~acc~~t,,((ion (hereinafter referred to as the "City") and Jan" Sutton and Dale~utton (hereinafter referred to as the "Owner"). W ITN $ S S g T$ A. Recitals. (i) California Government Code Section 50280, et seq. authorize cities to enter into contracts with the Owners of qualified Historical Property to provide for the use, maintenance and restoration of such Historical Property so as to retain its characteristics as property of historical significance; -1- ., -~ ~ 9~ r °~~ '3-0~ zas y (ii) Owner possesses fee title in and to that certain real property, together with associated structures and improvements thereon, commonly known as the Emory Allen House and generally located at the street address 9441 Lomita Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 (hereinafter such property shall be referred to as the "Historic Property"). A legal description of the Historic Property is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "A" and is incorporated herein by this reference; (iii) On February 17, 1993, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted its Resolution No. * thereby declaring and designating the Historic Property as a historic landmark pursuant to the terms and provisions of Chapter 2.24 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code) and, (iv) City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this agreement both to protect and preserve the characteristics of historical significance of the Historic Property and to qualify the Historic Property for an assessment of valuation pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 3, of Part 2, of Division 1 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code. B. As3reement NOW, THEREFORE, City and Owner, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, do hereby agree as follows: 1. Effective Date and Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective and commence on February 17, 1993, and shall remain in effect for a term of ten (10) years thereafter. Each year upon the anniversary of the effective date, such initial term will automatically be extended as provided in paragraph 2, below. 2. Renewal. Each year on the anniversary of the effective date of this Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the "renewal date"), a year shall automatically be added to the initial term of this Agreement unless notice of -2- .ti ~~ .. i` ai .F .. ~ '.',~ ~ r y.3-092034 nonrenewal is mailed as provided herein. If either Owner or City desires in any year not to renew the Agreement, Owner or City shall serve written notice of nonrenewal of the Agreement on the other party in advance of the annual renewal date of the Agreement. Unless such notice is served by Owner to City at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by City to Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the term of the Agreement as provided herein. Owner may make a written protest of the notice. City may, at any time prior to the annual renewal date of the Agreement, withdraw its notice to Owner of nonrenewal. If either City or Owner serves notice to the other of nonrenewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from its original execution or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply. 3. Standards for Historical Property. During the term of this Agreement, the Historic Property shall be subject to the following conditions, requirements, and restrictions: a. Owner shall preserve and maintain the characteristics of histarical significance of the Historic Property. Attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "B", and incorporated herein by this reference, is a list of those minimum standards and conditions for maintenance, use, and preservation of the Historic Property, which shall apply to such property throughout the term of this Agreement. b. Owner shall, where necessary, restore and rehabilitate the property accorclLng to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation and in accordance with the attached schedule of potential home improvements, drafted by the applicant and approved by the City Council, attached hereto as Exhibit "C". c. Owner shall allow reasonable periodic examinations, by prior appointment, of the interior and exterior of the Historic Property by -3- 9.3-092©34 representatives of the County Assessor, State Department of Parks and Recreation, State Board of Equalization, and the City, as may be necessary to determ~,ne Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. 4. Provision of Information of Corporation. Owner hereby agrees to furnish City with any and all s.nformati on requested by the City which may be necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement. 5. Cancellation. City, following a duly noticed public hearing as set forth in California Government Code Sections 50280, et seq., may cancel this Agreement if it determines that Owner breached any of the conditions of this Agreement or has allowed the property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property. City may also cancel this Agreement if it dete rmines that the Owner has failed to restore or rehabilitate the property in the manner specified in subparagraph 3(b) of this Agreement. In the event of cancellation, Owner may be subject to payment of those cancellation fees set forth in California Government Code Sections 50280, et seq. 6. Enforcement of Agreement. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms of this Agreement. In the event of a default, under the provisions of this Agreement by Owner, City shall give written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address stated in this Agreement, and if such a violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the City within thirty (30) days thereafter, or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default if said breach or default cannot be cured within thirty (30) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default may be commenced within thirty (30} days and must thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by Owner), then City may, without further notice, declare a default under the terms of this Agreement and may bring any action necessary to specifically -4- y~3~09203~ enforce the obligations of Owner growing out of the teens of this Agreement, apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive relief against any violation by Owner or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate. City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if City does not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other re meds.es at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided f or in this Agreement or in City's re gulations governing historic properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereinunder. 7. Binc'b.ng Effect of Agreement. The Owner hereby subjects the Historic Property described in Exhibit "A" hereto to the covenants., reservations, and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. City and Owner hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations, and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon the Owner's successors and assigns in title or interest to the Historic Property. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the Historic Property, or any portion thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered, and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations, and restrictions expressed in this Agreement regardless of whether such covenants, reservations, and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. City and Owner hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the covenants, reservations, and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that Owner's legal interest in the Historic Property is rendered less valuable thereby. City and Owner hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants, reservations, and restrictions touch and concern the land by enhancing and maintaining the historic characteristics and significance of the -5- sa--as~a~~ Historic Property for the benefit of the public and Owner. e. Notice. Any notice requi red to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided at the a ddress of the respective parties as specified below or at any other address as may be later specified by the parties hereto. To City; City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attention: City Planner To Owner. Jan Sutton & Dale Sutton 9441 Lom~.ta Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 9. General Provisions. a. None of the terms, provisions, or conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered point ventures or members of any joint enterprise. b. Owner agrees to and shall hold City and its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations of Owner or those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on his behalf which relates to the use, operation, and maintenance of the Historic Property. Owner hereby agrees to and shall defend the City and its elected officials, officers, agents, and employees with respect to any and all actions for dams ges caused by, or alleged to have been caused by, reason of Owner's activities in connection with the Historic -6- s~-os2o~~ Property. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of the operations referred to in this Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the pla ns, specifications or other documents for the Historic Property. c. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties here in, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the Historic Property, whether by operation of Law or in any manner whatsoever. d. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations, or restrictions contained herein, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorney's fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to court costs and other relief ordered by the court. e. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenf orceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enf orceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be effected thereby. f. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 10. Recordation. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties execute and enter into this Agreement, the City shall cause this Agreement to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino. - 7- y.`3,~y2~~,~ 11. Amendments. This Agreement maybe amended, in whole or in part, only by a written recorded instrument executed by the parties hereto. IN WITNSSS WHSRSOF, City and C+wner have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Dated: ~ ~ ~g' 9.3 Dated: ~ "~j1 ~ 9•~~ Dated• o~' ~ -~l,~ By: ~ Dennis L. Stout, Mayor BY~ V ~i7t--~--- Owner Sz'l.v~ Lee ~i,~.-t~}~v~ _ r•, By' ~~u~le~•• _~ Owner ~ ~`'c~~-Z ~ rya vie.. ~~~ -8- 9.3-09"U3~4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO) ss On ~ , /~ /~i ~3 ADAMS, City Clerk of the Ity of R can hro Cucamon a, before me, DEBRA J. STOUT, personally known to me to be the person whose n arme asl s b se bed to Ehe w th n instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument WITNESS my hand and official seal State of((rf ~ / j/J ~J(C! , NT Der J Adams City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga On ~~ before me, ~1/~Gi./ ~l ~ ~jQ S~ ATE NAME TITLE OF OFFICER E G JANE DOE NOTARY PUBLIC' ' personally appea NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S) ' J~personally known to me - o e to be the person(s) whose name(s) Isk~- subscribed to the within Instrument and ac- knowledged to me that he/she/Sf1'e~c.executed the same In his/her~iz authorized „d„~.,,~,~, capacity(les), and that by his/her/ ie ... ^• ,, ORRCIAL SEAL signature(s) on the Instrument the person(s), ,~ JUDITH A ACOSTA orthe entit u on behalf of which the erson s It°^, M Notary PublC-Col(fornia y P P ( ) ~ sew ee~wwoiNO couNtY acted, executed the Instrument ~ "" My Commlaion Expires ,,,,'~, ~ ~, 1995 Witness my hand and official seal ATTENTION NOTARY Although the information THIS CERTIFICATE MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE DOCUMENT DESCRIBED AT RIGHT SIGNATURE OF NOTARY CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER ^ CORPORATE OFFICER(S) TITLE(S) ^ PARTNER(S) ^ ATTORNEY IN-FACT ^ TRUSTEE(S) ^ SUBSCRIBING WITNESS ^ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR ^ OTHER SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITYQES) is OPTIONAL it could prevent fraudulent attachment of this certtticate to unauthorized document Title or Type of Document G D Number of Pages Date of Signer(s) Other Than Named Above ~~'r~~ ®1991 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION 8236 Remmet Ave P 0 Box 7194 Canoga Park CA 91304 7184 -9- ~f~ h1a7 R~~IJ~' STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF SAN SERNARDINO ) On , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared known to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary public in and for said State -10- LgcAI. DLSCRIpTION 9'~~.7~Q~ for 9441 Lomita Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91701 TR 2190 LOMITA HEIGHTS W 47 FT N 121.99 FT LOT 16 AND N 121.99 FT LOT 15. THS SSCRSTARY OF INTERIOR'S RSHABILITATTOIQ STANDARDS I. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property that requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site, and its environment, or to the use of a property for its original intended purpose. II. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, or site, and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historical material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. III. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations which have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged. IV. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the history and development of a building, structure, or site, and its environment. V. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship, which characterize a building, structure, or site, shall be treated with sensitivity. VI. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced, wherever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historical, physical, or pictorial evidence, rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other buildings or structures. VII. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the gentlest means possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage the historic building materials shall not be undertaken. VIII. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological resources affected by, or adjacent to, any acquisition, protection, stabilization, preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, or reconstruction project. IX. Contemporary design for alteration and additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historic, architectural, or cultural material and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the property, neighborhood, or environment. X. Wherever possible new additions or alterations to structures shall be done in such a manner that if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the structure would be unimpaired. ESHIBIT 'B' r PROPBR'1'Y' 1~INTgNANCS Property Maintenance. All buildings, structures, yards and other improvements shall be maintained in a manner which does not detract from the appearance of the immediate neighborhood. The following conditions are prohibited: 1. Dilapidated, deteriorating, or unrepaired structures, such as: fences, roofs, doors, walls, and windows; 2• Scrap lumber, dunk, trash or debris= 3• Abandoned, discarded or unused objects or equipment, such as automobiles, automobile parts, furniture, stoves, refrige rators, cans, containers, or similar items; 4. Stagnant water or excavations, including pools or spas] 5. Any device, decoration, design, structure or vegetation which is unsightly by reason of its height, condition or its inappropriate location. ffiIBIT 'B-1' DEC 151992 POTENTIAL HOME IMPROVEMENTS ' Q~' "Mills Act" Agreement `~(~i5~ `i 44 I l.ovw~ tt~ ,4~,yi~ Ra~c,Jn.o Cutawio~a , G4 a ~ 70( Planned Restoration: LANDSCAPING General goals are to relandscape yard and add such elements of design as will be appropriate fora 1930's farmhouse. Where possible, plant materials will be of types available at time of original construction, or reasonable facsuniles thereof. Design elements will be structured as to blend into style of home. Ilen1 Yom[ Task 1 1 Establish mayor trees/shrubs of type sortable for period. 2 2 Begin planting orchard trees of type sortable for period. 3 3 Begin establishment of Heritage Rose and vegetable garden areas suitable for period 4 45 Continue development of garden areas. 5 6 Build small gazebo in a style compatible with house. 6 7-8 Replace perimeter fencing with wood picket fencing. 7. 9-10 Build stone~wood entry arbors for east and north gateways in style suitable for home. General goals are to rehabilitate and restore as much of the original materials on the house as possible, or to repair and replace with reasonable facsimiles if original materials are beyond recovery House Eztenor Beal 1'.~t 1 1 2. 3 4 5. 6. 7. 8 2 2 3 4 4 5 6 Task Remove aluminum framed screens from the front porch and rescreen using the original wooden frames and uistall a wooden porch screen door, Remove aluminum window screens and replace with wood framed screens as onguially used. Remove window air conditioner in upstaus bedroom window Remove roof t.v antenna, and underground cable t,v line Repair wundow casements around house Put loose wiring on south side of house into condort compatible with conduit on north stde. Replace bubble skyLght in latchen with more appropriate and less obtivsive design, Remove cedar shingles from original wood siding, and either rehabilitate original siding or replace with compatible siding. House ExtPnar ( onhn ~ ~ TSSk ~~`~-09~03a 9 6 Replace aluminum sLding wundows with wooden framed sash windows to match onguutl window design. 10. 7 Remove stucco and restore onguial brick where possible 11 7 Remove wall au condntioner unnt 12. 8 Cover stucco on garage with material compatible with house. 13 8 Paint exterior of house and garage, 14 9 Remove poorly constructed stone wall extension and back patio area and replace with compatible stone work 15 10 Renovate interior of garage, work room, and loft House Interior Il~m, Ys~[ Task 1 1 Remove carpetinig, sand and refinish hardwood floors 2, 2 Replace modern hardware (switchplates, doorknobs, handles, etc.) with antique or repLca pieces 3 3 Replace broken weights m windows 4 3 Remove acoustical ceiling 5. 4 Restore piaster to ceilnng and wall areas as heeded. 6. 5 Replace latches cabinets with style appropriate for period. 7 9 Remodel bathrooms to style appropriate for period of house. September 5, 2007 Dear Members of the Planning Commission and Rancho Cucamonga Crty Planning Staff I appreciate the opporiumty we had to speak before the planning commission on 8/22/07 regarding the operation of a private/parochial school and day care facility and a review of the master phasing plan for the remaining phases of the Lifeway Church at 7477 Vineyard Avenue. I must first apologize for speaking out of turn occasionally at the meeting I appreciate rules and tend to follow them if they are fair and conducive to a full discussion of the facts and issues involved I do not feel that was the case at the meeting on 8/22 and it may not be the case with the way the process is set up My first concern is the process I had questions about exactly what the two issues were and what was meant by the way they were written on the agenda before the open comment penod began, yet I was not allowed to get answers to those questions When the issue was addressed, it still did not answer all my questions, yet we were not allowed to question or comment on any part of rt because it was after our comment penod, even though it was not clear from the beginning, even to members of the commission Why not have things clarified at the beginning if you are only going to allow five minutes and no follow up questions At times during the meeting there was a discussion going on with two people who really didn't know the answer and residents did, yet were not allowed to speak Another time, when the architect of the church was called back to be asked a "technical" question about the height of the gymnasium, he made many more comments to the effect of, "I don't know what they want," "We gave them exactly what they asked for," "We had many meetings and explained all of this ahead of time and all were in agreement," etc Yet we requested and were not allowed to respond to those comments If the commission would have wanted to know exactly where the residents stood on the issues brought up, we could have been asked It did not appear that the process allowed for a complete disclosure of all the issues involved m order to make a more informed decision After the public comment penod, there was a side comment to the effect of, "I question the dates of the photos " Yet, we were not given the courtesy of being asked directly I really don't know what the comment was directed at that someone didn't believe, but we could have been asked more questions if there was an interest m full and open disclosure We have invited all members of the commission to come by the property and see it for themselves, and appreciate all who did If there are still questions about how some parts look, we would be happy to have everyone come and see those parts We have no reason ±o be deceptive about this issue because rt speaks for itself In terms of the comments by the architect, who stated that the classrooms would be a two-story building, after the pastor had testified that it would be a one-story building, and went on to comment about how they had many meetings to explain the whole plan to the residents I am aware of two meetings that I attended and it is possible that there may have been a third meeting that I did not attend We are not aware of any other meetings that we were notified of I'm sure the record should show copies of the letters that were sent to the residents inviting them to the meetings, that would indicate exactly how many meetings were held The sad, and most defining part of the whole process is that at the meetings, the church staff and architect were not clear that the property directly behind us would be built up to the extent that it was. It may have been on the elevation plans, but when I asked them directly, because we had grave concerns about them building a road right next to the back of our property where no road had been planned, the church staff explained that there would be a gradual grade by the side of our property from the west end until the east end where the road would be about the height of our fence This is ~ D ~'~ ~~ possibly the biggest concern we have with the whole project The residents on the south side of the project had no idea that the church would take the top of the hill and put it at the bottom so that the elevation of the front of the property would be so high At the west end of our property, the church side of the property actually sloped down five to ten feet and there was only a slight increase at the east end, before the project grading began, as indicated by the photos we presented at the hearing I think the church staff were right in saying how they presented to us that rt would be so much better than two- story houses, because that is exactly how they presented it to us, not mentioning that the ground level of the buildings on the east end of our property would be higher than any two-story house that may have been built on that property It was very deceptive and a shock to us when they actually began building the project and the elevation by our property was so much higher than what we were led to believe They mentioned that the only vanance they would need would be for the steeple, wlich would be higher than code, not mentioning that by the time the other buildings would be built, they would be far above the steeples As you look at the property now, and the walls that were built, rt is evident that if two-story homes were built in the same spot, based on the level of the property before building, they would not be any higher than the block walls are now The church is proposing buildings that go far beyond than They should not be approved Yes, we definitely asked for the block wall, originally only being aware of one, which would be used to block the new road that would be built along the side of our property, which was to gradually slope until it would be about at the top of our block wall at the end, as previously explained We were shocked to find out that there would actually be a retaining wall built that would be much higher than our block wall, then a block wall built on top of that due to the fact that they were going to elevate the property so much At the hearing, we were not complaining that we had a block wall instead of a view of all the noisy cars driving above our property or people looking down directly into our property from such a short distance, we were dust showing the commission how bad rt looked and how rt turned out, completely blocking our view, which you can be assured, was never pointed out to us at any of the meetings that were held We definitely want the block wall there to give us a modicum of privacy, but we definitely do not want a gymnasium built on top of than That is what we were trying to say At the commission meeting, something to the effect of, "The church is here to stay That isn't going to change," was stated We do not expect the church to go away, nor the block walls to be torn down. We did not ask for that. We just feel that the commission should make a correction, realizing that there was not due diligence done when the first phase was approved and that more than likely, it was approved in a situation similar to how the church teed to have the next phase approved, without the actual details of the proposed compound and the impact it would have on the surrounding homes One of the commissioners was exactly right when he referred to the project as a "compound" as opposed to simply a church We appreciate the steps the commission took to realize that there definitely was not enough information available to approve the next building phase, particularly when the details of the amount of property left over for the school children to play or assemble on after all the building is done was described as something like "a large piece," with absolutely no details We were also glad to see that the commission realized that there simply was not enough information presented regarding the school, which would have 187 students along with a day care of up to 36 children, for a total of somewhere around 223 Is there a good reason that information of the amount of students and clients involved, along with the proposed operation time of the facilities was not included in the letter sent out to the residents We definitely feel that that property is not the right location for the operation of a school that large along with a day care. The traffic on Vineyard is already a mess at certain times of the day, not only due to the high school traffic but also due to soccer practices and games beginning m the late afternoon as well as a variety of other activities at Red Hill Park We certainly hope that the commission follows up on their question about why the block wall is nice on the church side of the property and more poverty looking on the resident side of the property I am very interested in knowing whether that was exactly the block that was asked for in the plans, as the architect indicated Another concern we have is the lack of oversight provided by the city to the project. In the meeting, it was mentioned that the church had portables on site without permission, and when the city found out, they stopped further setting up of the portables until permission was secured What was not stated is that that did not happen until homeowners called the city on several occasions and insisted that something be done by the city, before anything was done The residents have had to be the ones to call the city m order for action to be taken from the beginning of the project, from the cleaning up of the mud on Vineyard that flowed onto the street dunng construction due to proper precautions not being taken (a number of times), the flooding of the resident's house dust south of the church on Vineyard on several occasions, the fact that there was construction going on dunng unapproved times of day, the fact that there were trees that were planted that were dead due to lack of proper maintenance, the fact that the lights from the church shone directly into the windows of some residents, etc What made all this more difficult is that we could not find one point person in the city to deal with but had to talk to a different department in the city, depending on what the issue was It was extremely frustrating At least two of the homeowners attempted initially to deal directly with the pastor, but after a stung of broken promises and an "I don't care attitude," by the pastor, we realized that would not work Due to the many difficulties involved in this project, the lack of church staff being able to work with the residents regarding problems, and the fact that the area is simply not the place for a large school and day care compound, we definitely feel that the other phases of the project should not be approved as proposed. We especially feel that the property where the portables currently are should be left open as a park like area to help mitigate the damage that has already been done to the neighborhood to the south of the property We do not feel that any of the members of the commission would like to live under the property as the project is proposed and we hope you will allow us the same courtesy We appreciate your senous consideration of this matter Sincerely, GV~oalas c. ~Lir%n Charles C Rich 8930 Balsa St Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 cc Donald J Kurth, Mayor Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem Rex Gutierrez L Dennis Michael Sam Spagnolo LIFEWAY CHURCH Pastor Chris A. Esteves, Ph.D. C6iY OF RR~C;~~ v~C~~(®~~~ ~~ ~ ,_~ 200 September 5, 2007 City of Rancho Cucamonga Attn Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive P O Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 ~~C~e~~~~- - p~~,h~Slq~~9'~ SUBJECT STATUS OF PORTABLE CLASSROM BUILDINGS AND EDUCATION BUILDING USE DRC2001-00439 AND DRC2006-00926 - 7477 VINEYARD AVENUE Dear Planning Department This letter is in reference to changes and requests concerning the following • Lnfeway Church would like to withdraw it's submitted DRC-2007-00544 non-construction CUP for K-12/Daycare • Lnfeway Church request to correct master plan CUP DRC 2006-00926 into a development request for the classroom building, gymnasium, and fellowship hall • Lifeway Church will provide a detailed schedule • Lifeway Church will provide complete architectural drawings (site plan, elevations, floor plans, ect ) Iafeway Church would ltke to thank the planning commission and the City of Rancho Cucamonga in advance for it's concern, cooperatton, and consideration If you should have any questtons about the information provided, please feel free to contact myself at (909) 948-5557, Monday through Thursday from 9 00 a m to 5 00 p m Sincerely, .~ Dr Chris A Esteves, Senior Pastor Lifeway Church 7477 Vineyard Ave, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Business Office (909) 948-5557 Fax (909) 948-5598 E Mail: lfwychurch a(~o~com v~ ~ Planning Commission Meeting of ~-~ a~~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION SIGN-UP SHEET Please print your name, address, and city and indicate the item you have spoken regarding Thank you NAME 3 /L~- ITEM 4 ~ ~,,~V~U VAS l~ ~1~/'~ ~ ~~(~ ~j~~S~ //'~ ~ -_ 6 _/ ~ ~ ~~--1 ~ ~ Ste- `-i Z.~ ~- ~.c~ ~---~, 10 5~~~,C~,~S~, rZ '31L~2. V ~-L ~©~vre, ~,. ~~-~~, C~,,~,~~~~ C` 11 12 13 14 z 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 - 27- -- - - - - -- - - - ADDRESS CITY ~ ,