Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/02/13 - Minutes - PC-HPC CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting February 13, 2008 Vice Chairman Fletcher called the Regular.Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:05 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga,California.Vice Chairman Fletcher then led in the pledge of allegiance. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Frances Howdyshell, Lou Munoz, Ray Wimberly ABSENT: Pam Stewart STAFF PRESENT: Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney; Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Rina Leung, Senior Planner; Corkran Nicholson,Assistant Planning Director; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission • Secretary; Denise Sink, Office Specialist II;James Troyer, Planning Director; Tabe Van der Zwaag, Associate Planner I ANNOUNCEMENTS None - ♦ h k I APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell, carried 3-0-1-1 (Stewart absent, Wimberly abstain), to approve the minutes of January 23, 2008. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE DRC2007-00299- PETE VOLBEDA -A request to reduce the required side-yard setback from 10 feet to 5 feet in order to construct a single-family residence in the Low (L) Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at 8770 Vinmar Avenue - APN: 0207-242-18. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)as a Class 5 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15305, which covers minor alterations in land use limitations and includes variances for side yard setbacks. CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 23, 2008 Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Pete Volbeda, 615 North Benson No. D, Upland, stated he is the architect representing the property owner. Vice Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. • Commissioner Howdyshell commented that she visited the site and noted that the proposal seems to be in scale with the neighboring properties and that it looks comparable. Commissioner Munoz concurred that it is an appropriate request relative to size and that the request does not give special privilege to the property owner (applicant). He moved approval. Vice Chairman Fletcher reported that a neighbor spoke at the previous hearing (January 23) and that she questioned the close proximity of the proposed home to hers. He noted that there are many such lots that were created when the area was still under the County umbrella and that we had to find a way to deal with such lots and that a variance request is one such mechanism. He added that even the property of the person that spoke has a structure that is within 2 feet of the common property line and therefore this is a case in point; it is not an unusual situation in this particular area. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell,to adopt the resolution approving Variance DRC2007-00299 as presented. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: STEWART - carried 1 1 1 1 1 B. VARIANCE DRC2007-00396 -JALAL NOORZADY-A request to reduce the required comer • side yard setback from 27 feet to 16 feet 11 inches for the purpose of building a single-family residence in the Low (L) Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the southeast corner of Amethyst Avenue and 19th Street - APN: 0202-111-05. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 5 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15305, which covers minor alterations in land use limitations and includes variances for side yard setbacks. CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 23, 2008 Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked who the driveway to the south of the project site belongs to. Mr. van der Zwaag said belongs to the property to the east; that is how they access their garage at the rear of their house. He said the entrance to this home would be just to the north of the existing driveway. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked how how the proposed house would be set in relation to the house to the south of it. Mr. van der Zwaag said it would be about 10 feet closer to the street than the homes to the north and the east. Pete Volbeda, 615 North Benson, No. D said they worked for 6 months with staff to come up with a better solution for the site. He said they changed the direction of the garage/driveway and reduced the mass/size of the house. He said the setback is taken from the new AC curve not from the existing asphalt curve and therefore it will be wider than what is currently shown. He said the setback varies. Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 13, 2008 Commissioner Howdyshell asked what the privacy wall between the properties is made of. Mr. Volbeda commented that it will be a new 6-foot block wall. Commissioner Munoz commented that although progress has been made in reducing the size of the home, he still believes it is out of scale relative to the other neighboring homes. He asked if the client would be willing to further reduce the size of the home. • Mr. Volbeda said they are not willing to reduce the size and that if denied, they will appeal to the City Council. Vice Chairman Fletcher, opened the public hearing. Clarke Boesen, 9529 19`h Street sent a letter opposing the request as well as giving testimony. He said he owns the property to the south and to the east of the subject property. He said the lot is too small for the proposed house and that this request is only 1 foot, 1 inch less than what was requested in July of last year. He said this house will "stick out"and block the vision of drivers on the street and that the property owner should have known some of the problems with the lot. He complained that the project was supposed to return to the Commission within 60 days and did not do so. He said the proposed house is two-story and the others are single-story. Chris Boesen, 8515 Gala Avenue, said that the lot is too small with no yard to allow for a family or for room for kids/pets to play. He said there is no space for parking. He said this is not the quality of life planned for Rancho Cucamonga. Vice Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing. • Commissioner Munoz commented that although good progress has been made on the design, he believes the house is still not to scale with its surroundings, and more could be done,that a smaller home is possible on this small lot. He said he is not denying the owner use of the property but that a smaller building would be more appropriate and that he is opposed to the variance request. Commissioner Wimberly concurred, that the proposed home is oversized for the size of the lot. Commissioner Howdyshell concurred. She commented the proposed house does not fit the parcel nor the neighborhood. Vice Chairman Fletcher remarked that it is a problematic lot, a remnant parcel. He asked staff what the rear yard set back is. He asked if the Code requires a 15 foot rear yard setback: Mr. van der Zwaag explained that the rear yard is where the garage is and the area exceeds the minimum requirement; it would be concrete rather than grass as part of the driveway and would be large enough to play basketball. Vice Chairman Fletcher asked if that is in conformance with the Code. Mr. van der Zwaag stated it is. Vice Chairman Fletcher said the owner has tried to do a lot to mitigate the size of the house by diminishing the building mass. He remarked that the home to the east has no view windows facing the west and there are two-story homes to the west of Amethyst. He said there is a home to the south that is also two-story. He commented that with the limited setback, the house will be very visible but the stepped second story does help. He said if we tell the owner he cannot develop the property it will reduce the value. He said that there was a difference of opinion shared during the Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 13, 2008 Design Review Committee discussion and they decided to bring it to the Commission. He said the owner did what they could. He remarked that it is not fair to ask them to build a 900 or 1,000 square foot house because of the limitations of the lot. He said he would approve the request but it is up to the Commission. He said there is the option of sending it back to Design Review. Commissioner Munoz stated the applicant already rejected the offer to alter the project any further. Kevin Ennis; Assistant City Attorney, commented that the Commission has only been presented a resolution of approval. He said that if the Commission wishes to deny the application then a resolution of denial will have to be brought back to the next meeting for the Commission to review and act upon. He said once it is acted upon, it can be appealed. Commissioner Munoz clarified the action. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell,to deny the Variance request(3-1-1). Staff will bring a resolution of denial to the meeting of February 27,2008 for signature. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, WIMBERLY NOES: FLETCHER ABSENT: STEWART - carried C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2006-00635— RANCHO WORKFORCE HOUSING — A request to amend the General Plan land use designation from General Commercial (GC) to Mixed Use (MU) for approximately 17 acres of land, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Center Avenue and Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1077-601-02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 11, 13, and 14. Related Files: Development District Amendment DRC2006-00634, Development Review. DRC2006-00633, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00636. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for consideration. This item and the Environmental Impact Report will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 23, 2008 D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT DRC2006-00634 — RANCHO WORKFORCE HOUSING — A request to amend the Development District from Community Commercial (CC), Foothill Boulevard District, Sub area 3, to Mixed Use/Retail (MU) for approximately 17 acres of land, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard between Center Avenue and Hermosa Avenue-APN: 1077-601-02,03,04, 05, 06, 11, 13, and 14. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2006-00635, Development Review DRC2006-00633, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00636. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for consideration. This item and the Environmental Impact Report will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 23, 2008 E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2006-00633 — RANCHO WORKFORCE HOUSING —The request to develop a 166-unit apartment complex on 10.5 acres of land in the Community Commercial District (the associated General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment applications propose a Mixed Use District), located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard and west side of Center Avenue. APN: 1077- 601-02, 03, and 04. Related Files: Development District Amendment DRC2006-00634, General Plan Amendment DRC2006-00635, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2006-00636. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for consideration. CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 23, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 13, 2008 Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He reported that he received several phone calls from persons that misunderstood the noticing; they believed there had been prior meetings on the project for which they did not receive notice. He clarified that this is the first public hearing held by the City for this project. He said in addition, the mailing radius was expanded to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the project boundaries for the notices. He said he had received two letters and a petition with 57 signatures opposing the project. Commissioner Howdyshell noted that on Exhibit A, that 17 neighbors are directly affected by the project along the north boundary. She asked for the height of the north boundary wall. Mr. Grahn reported that it is a 6 foot block wall along the north project boundary. He added that the developer will be required to work with the property owners to eliminate the"double wall condition." He said the wall would be built on the project boundary not on the neighbors' property. Commissioner Howdyshell referred to Exhibit B and asked for the height of the units along the north boundary. Mr. Grahn stated they are single-story. Commissioner Howdyshell asked if the parking is opened or assigned. Mr. Grahn stated that because there are garages, it is likely those will be assigned to the tenants and then there will be some open parking as well as guest parking spaces. Vice Chairman Fletcher remarked that this is an affordable housing project and he asked counsel to comment on the State requirements. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, said that the City has certain obligations noted in the General Plan and required by the State. He said the Housing Element notes that we are to provide land and space for a variety of housing types. He said by charge of the California Association of Governments,all types of housing should be developed in each community to maintain a balance of economy. He said that we still need to develop this type of housing in order to meet the target required by State law. He noted that the Redevelopment Agency has had a great role in the development of Victoria Gardens and 20%of the revenues received from that must be used towards the development of affordable housing. He added that the State legislature has determined that there is a critical housing problem and that California has the most expensive housing in the nation and that there is a lack of affordable housing. He said the legislature adopted statutes to compel cities to provide and approve affordable housing. He noted that affordable housing projects can only be denied if 1)the city has already achieved their required share of affordable housing units or 2) if the project would create significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated. He remarked that there are other laws that also limit the ability to deny these projects and fines/penalties and attorney fees can be imposed. He said the City and the Redevelopment Agency are under pressure to develop this type of housing. Tony Mize,Workforce Homebuilders LLC, 8300 Utica Avenue, Suite 173,said they have worked on this project for about 3 years. He then gave a powerpoint presentation. He commented that the project meets or exceeds the quality of anything built in the last five years and will exceed all new standards for"green"building instituted in 2007. He said the project would meet or exceed the fire codes. He noted that the intersection of Church Street and Hermosa Avenue is considered substandard and that as part of the development, a new intersection signal will be installed. He noted that for noise mitigation, units along Foothill Boulevard will have plexiglass installed. He said construction noise will most likely occur for about 15 months. He added that the development also pays school fees that are used by the school district to build facilities. He said that with the layout of Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 13, 2008 the project, the two-story units are far enough away that someone will not be able to see into the back yards of the single-family homes to the north. Commissioner Howdyshell commented that she would like to see smart controls added that conserve water used for maintaining the landscape. She said she is glad to see that the development is using low flow showers and toilets. Vice Chairman Fletcher opened the public hearing. Rhonda Carter, 7740 Center Avenue, commented that the notice for tonight's meeting was the first she had received. She expressed concern that her backyard would be visible from the workforce units. She expressed concern about water usage. She said that many of the residents will have more than two cars and that there is not enough parking. She said the schools are not as close as depicted on the exhibit and that she is concerned about"stray"teenagers. She said the line of sight will be blocked by development and that could be dangerous for drivers and pedestrians. She said there is a lack of open space for that many units. She said the garages would be targets for thieves and there would be a crime problem. She said she had never been asked to sign a petition so obviously not everyone was asked to sign. Eddie Lakkees, 9086 Hillside Road and Robbie Lakkees, 6818 Darby Court, stated they own the Twins nightclub and the property immediately to the west of the club. They said they would consider the idea of redeveloping their property in the near future. They expressed support for the proposed project and said Mr. Mize is doing a great job and that they foresee the possibility of working with him in the future. Norm MacKenzie, President of the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce, commented that he is tired of those that try to stereotype this type of development as being magnets for undesirables and crime. He expressed support for the project and said it is a quality development. He commented that their leadership agreed that in the next five years, workforce housing would be a major challenge. He said this is a good thing to provide housing closer to places of employment which will minimize freeway congestion and will help employees get to work safely. He added that 30 years ago Rancho Cucamonga was far more affordable than it is now. He said the business community supports local control and that this project is good for the community overall. Sharon Capella,7994 Center Avenue, a 30 year resident, expressed displeasure for the Twins bar. She stated that they awaken her at 2:00 a.m. night after night. She commented that there are other available sites in the city that could be used for affordable housing. She said single-family homes do not mix well with apartment living. Dan Aylworth, 10259 Stafford Street,said the noticing for the hearing was irregular. He objected the change in zoning to Mix Use. He said shame on us for not dealing with our quota for low income housing before it came to this. He objected for reasons of increased traffic. He objected to the project because the single-family homes will have a view of three-story rooftops. He added that there are safety concerns regarding crime and that Stafford Street will be used for egress from the project. He complained that his tract has no sidewalks or street lighting and that they are the "forgotten ones." He said the current zoning of the property should be left as commercial and that we should respect that and not "change the game." He said there would be an increased demand on all the utilities and water. He suggested that if the developer make all the units single-story and keep the trees and mature landscaping, and remove the fence, then he would support the project. Vice Chairman Fletcher closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -6- February 13, 2008 Commissioner Howdyshell commented that we do not always have our choice and that we have to look at the mandates and needs of the community. She said when there are mandates in place we have to think smart and build smart. She added that the project is close to public transportation. Commissioner Munoz commented that we are fortunate to have the Redevelopment Agency and that we have reaped many benefits as a City from their efforts. He said we cannot be limited to just building places such as Victoria Gardens, we also have to have affordable housing. He noted that the rise in prices has priced many out of our community. He added that crime has gone down per 1,000 residents which is a 39%decrease. He said the State requires us to build a certain number of affordable units and we have less than /z of that goal. He said if we do not do this, the State could do it for us and we would lose control. He said there have been great improvements made to the project design and that it meets the Code for parking requirements. He said the developer has worked with the Design Review Committee and the design meets all the requirements. He recommended approval of all facets of the project subject to final approval by the City Council. Commissioner Wimberly had no comment. Vice Chairman Fletcher expressed appreciation to the residents that presented their views and concerns. He commented that the City does not have much leeway in this matter other than to do its best to get a quality project and see that it remains as such. He reported that he had recently visited 8 different communities of this type and that without exception were all nice, quiet and affordable. He said most have a 1-10 year waiting fist. He said there is a huge demand and need for this type of housing. He said people have to qualify to move in. He commented that it is difficult for the developers to build these in Rancho Cucamonga because the property/land value is so high, that they are hard to pencil out. He said the Redevelopment Agency, (RDA) assists with this. He noted that the developer went with a lower density than what they could have asked for and ' received. He said that the developer listened to the neighbors concerns. He remarked that water Concerns rests with the CVWD, they sign off that they can service these developments. He commented that the units will not be housing multiple families and therefore the parking should be sufficient. He reiterated the need for affordable housing as emphasized by the Chamber of Commerce representative. He said this development may have a mix of people including young couples/families and the elderly. He commented that Planning has not received any calls from the neighbors regarding noise issues from the Twins club. He suggested the neighbors let the Planning Department know if that is occurring. He remarked that the irregular noticing of the meeting was not intentional nor intended to deceive anyone that there was a problem with the newspaper advertising. He commented that the western portion of the property is not for consideration tonight and that any plans for that property will be presented at a later date. He noted that there will be more traffic on Foothill Boulevard with the new development and that as noted in the EIR, can be mitigated and that the installation of the new traffic signal will improve the traffic conditions. He added that the development should not contribute to crime and that there is often more crime in open vacant lots/areas and older neighborhoods rather than new development. He commented that new development often forces out that element. He reported that the requirements to become a resident are stiff and that some agreements and checking is done. He commented that all the utilities will be verified. He noted that generally, he does not like to see commercial zoning changed to a residential use but that the need for affordable or senior housing supersedes this. He commented that the City is 90% entitled and that because a piece of property is empty does not mean it is available for this type of development. He said many changes were made to help it be attractive for the neighborhood. Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell, to adopt the Resolutions recommending approval for General Plan Amendment DRC2006-00635 and the Development District Amendment DRC2006-00634 and also forwarding the EIR for certification. The Commission also adopted the Resolution approving the Development Review DRC2006-00633 and certifying the EIR with respect to the Development Review. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -7- February 13, 2008 AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, WIMBERLY NOES: NONE ABSENT: STEWART - carried PUBLIC COMMENTS Dan Alyworth, 10259 Stafford Street, commented that the developer said as part of his presentation that the apartment units will not see into his backyard and that he wanted that as part of the record. He added that he would be willing to offer his house at fair market value for affordable housing and that he is putting it up for sale. Norm MacKenzie of the Rancho Chamber of Commerce expressed his thanks for approving the project on behalf of the business community. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Munoz, seconded by Howdyshell, carried 4-0-1 to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully submitte , 726:440.-) t?, James R. Troyer, AICP • Secretary Approved: February 27, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes -8- February 13, 2008