Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/05/14 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting May 14, 2008 Chairman Stewart called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:26 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Frances Howdyshell, Lou Munoz, Pam Stewart; Ray Wimberly ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Candyce Burnett, Senior Planner; Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney; Larry Henderson, Principal Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Rina Leung, Senior Planner; Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner; Corkran Nicholson, Assistant Planning Director; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Denise Sink, Office Specialist II; Mike Smith, Associate Planner; James Troyer, Planning Director;Tabe Van der Zwaag, Associate Planner IANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Stewart presented a Resolution of Commendation to Kevin Ennis,Assistant City Attorney, and thanked him on behalf of the Commission and staff for his service to the City and the Planning Department. Brad Buller, (former City Planner)commented on Kevin's great service and friendship in the course of giving legal counsel for nine years. Commissioner Munoz commented that Mr. Ennis makes the "untutored" look really smart. Commissioners Howdyshell and Wimberly thanked him for his great training and responsiveness to their questions. Vice Chairman Fletcher said Mr. Ennis always made him feel like he never asked a stupid question and that sometimes the Commission would use Kevin to educate themselves and sometimes to educate the public. Mr. Ennis said that we have a powerful combination of quality staff and a great Commission that work together and that he takes great pleasure in being part of the City's growth. Chairman Stewart welcomed Steven Flower as the new Assistant City Attorney. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0, to approve the minutes of April 9, 2008. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Stewart abstain) to approve the minutes of the Special Joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting of April 16, 2008. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE- DRC2007-00871 -MDS CONSULTING-A request to reduce the lot area average requirement for an approved 56 lot subdivision (SUBTT17651) from 25,000 square feet to 24,985 square feet in order to construct a public street for a site located on the south side of Banyan Street and west east of East Avenue - APN: 0225-191-12. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on August 9, 2006 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT17651. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, noted a correction to the description and said that the property is located east of East Avenue, not west of East Avenue. He then proceeded with the remainder of his report. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing. Scott Allen, Tava Development stated he concurs with the conditions and would be available for questions. Chairman Stewart closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wimberly commented he visited the site and concurs with staff's recommendation and moved for approval. Chairman Stewart commented that it is a straightforward request, and is only a minimal reduction and does not affect the equestrian requirements for the property. Motion: Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Howdyshell, to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2007-00871 as corrected by staff. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18872-6TH& HERMOSA JP/DF, LLC: -A proposal to subdivide a property of 4.87 acres in conjunction with a request to construct two industrial warehouse/office buildings with a combined floor area of about 100,000 square feet in the General Industrial (GI) District, Subarea 5, located at 9212 Hermosa Avenue; APN: 0209-211-41. Related file: Development Review DRC2007-00696. 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 for exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315, Class 15, Minor Land Divisions, and Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects C. DRC2007-00696 - 6TH & HERMOSA JP/DF, LLC: - A request to construct two industrial warehouse/office buildings with a combined floor area of about 100,000 square feet on a parcel of about 4.87 acres in the General Industrial(GI) District, Subarea 5, located at 9212 Hermosa Avenue; APN: 0209-211-41. Related file: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18872. 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 Planning Commission Minutes -2- May 14, 2008 Guidelines. The project qualifies for exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315, Class 15, Minor Land Divisions, and Section 15332, Class 32, In-Fill Development Projects. 1 Mike Smith, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He noted that regarding the environmental assessment,the project needs no further environmental review under this exemption because it a) is consistent with the General Plan,b) is less than 5 acres, c) has no habitats that may be threatened, d) does not have significant water, air, traffic or noise impacts and d) is served by utilities. He added that a new condition has been proposed to be added to the resolution and it shall read: 12) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low pressure spray. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked for a description of a chamfered reverse cornice. Mr. Smith presented a sketch on the overhead of this architectural element. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing. Katrina DeArmey, 23 Corporate Plaza #120, Newport Beach, stated she represents the applicant and that they concur with the conditions of approval. Commissioner Munoz commented that the applicant worked hard with Planning Staff and the DRC and presented new designs and they now meet all of the City requirements. Vice Chairman Fletcher commented that it is an appropriate structure and design, including the chamfered reverse cornice. Commissioner Wimberly remarked that it is architecturally sound for the region. I Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell, to adopt the Resolutions of Approval. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM18710 - CHARLES JOSEPH, ASSOCIATES—A request for a 4-lot subdivision for property within the Community Commercial zone, Subarea 4, located on the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue -APN: 1100-161-02 and 1100-161-03. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00344 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2007-00914. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E.' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2007-00344-CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES—The development of a retail commercial center consisting of 5 buildings totaling 63,000 square feet within the Community Commercial zone, Subarea 4, located on the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue-APN: 1100-161-02 and 1100-161-03. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18710 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2007-00914. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. I F. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2007-00914 - UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL AND ETIWANDA (FOOTHILL GARDENS) - A Sign Program for a retail commercial center consisting of 5 buildings totaling 63,000 square feet Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 14, 2008 within the Community. Commercial zone, Subarea 4, located on the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue-APN: 1100-161-02 and 1100-161-03. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18710 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00344. Larry Henderson, Principal Planner, reported that this was the site of a historic garage and that a historic plaque would be placed in the courtyard of the development. He commented that a letter was received from a resident that attended the neighborhood meeting and is attached to the report. He mentioned that the City Traffic Engineer also made a request that condition 2-e found on pages D, E, F 154, 191 and 232 of the agenda packet be deleted because the condition has been met and is no longer considered relevant. He reported that businesses such as adult businesses are not allowed, although bars, lounges, and liquor stores would be allowed only with a Conditional Use Permit. He noted self service laundry is a permitted use. Chairman Stewart clarified that bail bonds and check cashing businesses would not be a permitted use. Mr. Henderson confirmed that they are not listed uses (and therefore not permitted). Chairman Stewart commented that because many uses are subject to Conditional Use Permits,this development is not open to blanket review. • Mr. Henderson commented that these are "spec" buildings, restaurant pads and retail spaces and that when they get tenant interest, uses that are subject to a Non Construction Conditional Use Permit will be subject to review by the Planning Commission and can be appealed. He said conditions can be tailored, and that the City can ask for security and other controls. Chairman Stewart asked where the historic plaque would be located. 111 Mr. Henderson said there would be one at the northwest corner of the property and another located within the development. Vice Chairman Fletcher remarked that the letter submitted by the resident states that this part of the City has been ignored. He commented that this development will help improve the area. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing. Chuck Buquet, Charles Joseph and Associates, 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395, thanked Mr. Ennis for his service. Mr. Buquet commented on the resident's letter and said that many items mentioned are not relevant to this project as noted in the neighborhood meeting comments. He pointed out there will not be any direct interface issues with the residents of that neighborhood because they are located to the south of Foothill below another area of development that is not yet built. He concurred with the request of the Traffic Engineer to delete condition 2.e. He commented that all improvements would be installed before completion of the project. He reiterated that bail bonds and tattoo parlors would not be permitted in this center. Kenneth Van Horn, 13050 Chestnut Avenue, stated he lives south of the property site, below Foothill Boulevard. He said he lives in a family neighborhood. He reported the neighborhood is surrounded on 3 sides by development and that any tenants allowed in the center should be a complement to families and their quality of life, i.e. no late hours, truck noise, delivery trucks and parking lot loitering would not be acceptable. He mentioned the traffic situation that currently exists. He said he is not opposed to the development, but to the possible uses/tenants such as bail bonds, tattoo parlors, check cashing, bars/adult entertainment, and self-service laundry. He said his comments also relate to the approved development on the south side of Foothill Boulevard, just • Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 14, 2008 north of his residential neighborhood. He said they do not want to attract gang activity or loitering persons and therefore want high class tenants. Angie Avilon, 8206 Cornwall, said their neighborhood is seeking environmental justice. They have been disappointed and feel they have had to bear social burdens for the City. She reported problems with existing businesses, traffic, waste management, transients, Wal-Mart, hazardous waste, and the "projects"approved to be built to the east. She said they do not want liquor stores, bail bonds, or more traffic. She said they want respect and to claim what is theirs. She said they want the City to respect them. Seeing and hearing no further comment, Chairman Stewart closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Fletcher expressed appreciation for the residents' comments. He said he did not hear specific objections to the development and he noted that the Cornwall neighborhood was developed by the County prior to the City's incorporation and therefore at their standards/requirements at the time. He said the developer realizes that with quality design and development, the center will attract quality tenants. He noted that the Commission is sensitive to the uses and they will require a CUP. He said there is a need for good services on the far-east end of town and this development will help provide that. He remarked that the DRC was also sensitive to the historic nature of the site. Commissioner Munoz concurred that the quality of the design will raise the bar for this end of town. He said the developer worked hard through many changes and that this will enhance the area. He then recommended approval. Commissioner Wimberly concurred that this is quality development that will improve the area and that it is unlikely the types of tenants the residents expressed concern about would be going into this development. Commissioner Howdyshell commented that she is pleased the residents came out to express what they would and would not like to see in terms of development and tenants. She said the community deserves the good types of services and tenants. Chairman Stewart echoed the Commission's comments. She noted that this is a 50 million dollar project and that there are stop gap measures in place to help control the tenants and uses within the development, and combined with the high standards of the Design Review Committee;she expects this project will improve the area. She said that when good development goes in and the bar has been raised for the area, the problems they are experiencing tend to get pushed out. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, to adopt the Resolutions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18710, Development Review and Conditional Use Permit DRC2007-00344 with the deletion of Engineering Condition 2e as noted by staff, and by minute action, approval of the related Uniform Sign Program DRC2007-00914 with the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried G. DRC2007-00495 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -Consideration of an ordinance pertaining to temporary signs and amending Sections 14.08.350, 14.16.010(p)and 14.16.020 and adding Chapter 14.25 to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. This item is exempt per Planning Commission Minutes -5- May 14, 2008 Section 15061(b)(3)of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)because the ordinance will impose greater limitations on uses to reduce potential significant adverse impacts. Rina Leung, Senior Planner presented the report noting that revisions have been made to provide for flexibility with controls. Vice Chairman Fletcher commented that some of the items mentioned in the staff report seem contrary to what they previously discussed regarding the legal issues for the consistency of sign standards. He asked why there are differences in the number of days allowed for the removal of political signs versus an event sign. He also asked about the provisions for directional signs. He asked if we are excluding all signs except temporary directional signs from being posted in the right of way. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, responded that he is correct in that the more consistency of the duration for the various types of signs over another would be best. James Troyer, Planning Director, commented that for political campaigns, it is possible that the rationale was that because of absentee ballots,the candidates are likely to place their signs 45 days prior to the election and since they will have been up for a longer period of time, that it might be desirable to have them removed sooner whereas for other types of events,the signs will have been up for a shorter period of time overall and therefore a longer period for removal following the event could be allowed. Vice Chairman Fletcher commented that there really is no purpose for a sign to be up after an event and therefore did not follow the reasoning for the difference in the provision of the number of days allowed for them to remove the signs. He said that the rationale seems flawed and that he believes it should be consistent. Mr. Ennis commented that if the Commission feels they would like to have this distinction and to have that evaluated as part of their recommendation to the Council,then that would be appropriate. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked about directional signs and political signs in the right of way and how that considers these types of signs as being the same/content neutral. He added that political signs are very content specific. He said he is ok with it if there is no legal problem with it. Mr. Ennis commented that they have evaluated this issue and strived for consistency. He said they have tried to make it as content neutral as possible and with that, came up with this particular exemption. He noted that on Page 2, Section 3#6 of the Ordinance, there is a restriction placed on political signs by the Engineering Division regarding their placement on public property. Vice Chairman Fletcher commented that he is not opposed to the provision, he just thought it was contrary to what they thought was the legal preference before. Mr. Ennis said there are a lot of policy issues involved and that the subcommittee has looked for balance. Commissioner Munoz asked if this was going to be forwarded to Council for re-evaluation. Mr. Troyer indicated that the item has been advertised for the next City Council meeting. Commissioner Howdyshell said that the Commission had spent a great deal of time hammering out the details of the provisions and commenting on the draft and that the Commission believed they had done a great job to send back to the Council a great product. She said she is unsure as to why it was hashed over the way that it was. Planning Commission Minutes -6- May 14, 2008 Mr. Troyer said this draft has been under review for 15 months and that they want something on the books even if it needs to be tweaked later. U Commissioner Howdyshell commented that the members of the real estate community did not come to comment but that it is her impression that they are comfortable with this draft and with what they can and cannot do. Chairman Stewart opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment and then closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz said that he would support the ordinance the way that it is unless the rest of the Commission does not have a reservation to the contrary. Chairman Stewart commented that she understands the timing and that we are faced with a political season. She said she would like to tweak it later and that she agrees with Vice Chairman Fletcher in the area of consistency. She said the temporary signs on private property, particularly the two signs per parcel issue should be addressed again. She agreed with Commissioner Munoz in that we should move forward. . Vice Chairman Fletcher commented on the limitation of one sign per parcel. He remarked that we have the potential of having politicians realizing that if they want to have a political sign at Haven and Foothill, they will only be allowed one sign at the corner because of the single sign per parcel limitation. He said that in the past, political candidates would have as many as six signs on one corner. He noted that a private property owner could put one sign on each street. He added that the real estate agents wanted to be able to have a sign on a property that backs up to a boulevard as well as a sign in front of the property and there was good reason for their request for two signs per parcel. I Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell, to recommend the draft Temporary Sign Ordinance be forwarded to the City Council for final action and that their comments be communicated to the Council verbally at their Council Meeting as part of their recommendation. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, STEWART, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried • H. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2008-00307 - City of Rancho Cucamonga - Consideration of an ordinance prohibiting the establishment and operation of medical marijuana dispensaries in all land use zones within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and adding Chapter 1744 to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17 of the Municipal Code. This item is exempt per Section 15061(0(3)of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) because the ordinance will impose a greater limitation on uses,which includes a prohibition on establishing medical marijuana dispensaries to reduce potential significant adverse impacts. Rine Leung, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked where the dispensary owners get the marijuana to be sold. I Ms. Leung commented that there are guidelines for growers and that she would have to report back on how that is done. Planning Commission Minutes -7- May 14, 2008 James Troyer, Planning Director noted the problem is the regulation of it in that we don't know where it comes from; the street, or a regulated grower. He noted it is considered a threat to the public health and safety and therefore a push to ban it altogether. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, commented that there are regulations that allowed a certain amount to be grown by an individual or caregiver and that the dispensaries operate as a collective/pool to stock the dispensaries. He added that a doctor it required to prescribe it but the problem is the difference in Federal and State law. He said this is allowed on the State level but not on the Federal side because the Federal law does not consider marijuna a medical drug. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked if the legislature considered this and how it could be legal to have marijuana prescribed if it is not a legal use. James Troyer, Planning Director noted that this State law was approved by voter initiative and not by legislation thereby creating this problem. Commissioner Wimberly asked if there was any reaction from the community regarding this information and if there was any data regarding what the community need might be for medical marijuana. Ms. Leung commented that the only comment she has heard from the public is in support of a ban in general but that she does not have the statistics he asked for. Commissioner Howdyshell commented that no representation in support came to tonight's meeting for or against the ban. Chairman Stewart noted there was no one in the Chambers from the public to comment and therefore no testimony would be taken. Commissioner Munoz recommended the approval of the ban as recommended by staff. Vice Chairman Fletcher commented that the idea of marijuana dispensaries has a lot of problems and criminal activity is associated with them. Chairman Stewart reported that the City of Claremont addressed this issue and that they are dealing with a dispensary. She remarked that it appears Claremont may now be seeking a full ban as well. She added that throughout her husband's difficult battle with cancer, not one doctor recommended he smoke marijuana to relieve the pain, that there were many legal drugs available as options instead for pain relief. She said it is definitely problematic for law enforcement. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS I. PRESENTATION REGARDING SUSTAINABILITY James Troyer, Planning Director, gave a PowerPoint overview of sustainability and reported on where the City is in this process of developing programs for sustainability. Vice Chairman Fletcher expressed appreciation for the efforts and sees it as a benefit to the public and the community. He said he did not want to see the City get caught up in the sense that capital dollars are committed to this over necessary budget items. He said he believes the public sector should be a leader in promoting green programs and he liked the incentive programs for private residents and developers. He said the City ordinance should be efficient and fair and not just a Planning Commission Minutes -8- May 14, 2008 reaction to a popular concept. He remarked in response to an article that he read regarding environmental movements and stated that if there is a global warming problem, it should not be the United States alone responsible for the solution but that does not mean we should not establish programs supporting the effort. He asked if antibacterial soap is being used in all City facilties because of various diseases that can be passed on. . Commissioner Wimberly commented that the County has passed a green initiative and that he supports the cooperative effort with the County but also suggested we be wise in what we do. He concurred with Vice Chairman Fletcher's comments. Commissioner Howdyshell commented that she attended a conference last week at Victoria Gardens (Inland Empire Economic Partnership) dealing with green building, and efforts towards putting a plan and a team together. She noted that all the entities have to work together on this with a common ideology. Commissioner Munoz remarked that our community has much in place already with all of our green space and that we have done many things correctly for the past twenty years. Chairman Stewart said she looks forward to the joint meeting on May 28 and that the report should be accepted. k R f ! • •PUBLIC COMMENTS Kenneth Van Horn commented that he does not agree with the global warming issue and that this has been the coldest year on record. He asked if the San Sevaine project had received State I environmental clearances and when would the groundbreaking be. James Troyer, Planning Director, commented that they do have environmental clearance from the State and that he would report back to him on the ground breaking. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, commented that it is his understanding that the flood control portion of the improvements required will not be finished until the end of this year and the development project cannot proceed until its completion. COMMISSION BUSINESS Commissioner Munoz thanked Kevin Ennis for his service and welcomed Steven Flowers as Assistant City Attorney. He thanked Mr.Troyer for the opportunity to attend the National American Planning Association conference and he stated that it was helpful to receive information regarding Sign Ordinance, Inclusionary Housing and green building. He also thanked staff for their hard work. James Troyer, Planning Director, thanked Kevin Ennis for his service and passion for planning and expert legal counsel over the years. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney officially introduced Steven Flower and said that Steven Flower will be an excellent advisor to the Planning Commission. He expressed his thanks for all the kind words. Planning Commission Minutes -9- May 14, 2008 ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0, to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Troyer, AICP Secretary Approved: May 28, 2008 I • I Planning Commission Minutes -10- May 14, 2008