Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-09-09-Agenda Packet-PC-HPC THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WORKSHOP OF RANCHO THE PLANNING COMMISSION CUCAI4lONGA September 9, 2015 — 7:00 p.m. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center RAINS ROOM 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Chairman Wimberly_ Vice Chairman Oaxaca _ Munoz_ Macias _ FletcherF= _ II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises,or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. FIF� III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00466 — OAKMONT OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA-A request for a Planning Commission Workshop review of a conceptual site plan for a facility that provides independent, assisted living, and memory care housing on a vacant parcel of 3.21 acres within the Mixed Use (MU) District located at Haven Avenue and Church Street - APN: 1077-881-13. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 kaivcHO Page 2 Gi;CAMONGA IV. ADJOURNMENT !, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission 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 3, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. F you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, ease contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 urs prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to sure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. 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." . Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP SEPTEMBER 9, 2015 j�nrvcHo Page 3 cn�oxca APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,486 for all 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, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us VicinityMap PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP September . 9 , 2015 f---•------•- -i i-._..._.� _ - _-- -..�- --- --•- I L c c -a 1 -•—�-•—••tea-�---� •- •--•- r1 L m £ M O C 1 d U !• I Q U = 4 2 = L 1 I iU 1 { 1 � m 1 19th St A ZA0k i Base Line YBaseLine TCrch urc Foothill•! , Foothill N E Arrow 1 Arrow Ji rs ey 3 1 8th Woeo i W O t N C7 6th y 6th w O Y 4th Q = _ 4th 7k Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chamber: 10500 Civic Center Drive Item A: Pre-Application Review DRC2015-00466 STAFF REPORT PLANNING DEPARTMENT RANCHO C UCAMONGA DATE: September 9, 2015 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director BY: Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00466 — OAKMONT OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. - A request for a Planning Commission Workshop review of a conceptual site plan for a facility that provides independent, assisted living and memory care housing on a vacant parcel of 3.21 acres within the Mixed Use (MU) District located at Haven Avenue and Church Street -APN: 1077-881-13. GENERAL: A. Pre-Application Review Process: The Pre-Application Review process is intended to promote quality development and to facilitate the development review process. Although a Pre-Application Review is not required, it allows an applicant to present conceptual plan designs to the Planning Commission during the early stages of concept plan preparation prior to the formal application and to receive broad, general comments and direction from the Planning Commission. The meeting is not a forum for debate and no formal decision is made. After the meeting, staff prepares general minutes of the meeting that are sent to the applicant. B. Site Description: The project site is located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street. The overall site is approximately 139,828 square feet (3.21 acres) in area. Immediately to the west of the project site is a residential condominium complex. To the south are the offices of Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) and the Deer Creek Channel. North of the project are single-family homes, and northeast of the project site is a residential condominium complex. To the east is a vacant parcel and the continuation of the Deer Creek Channel. C. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Project Site - Vacant Land; Mixed Use (MU) District North - Single-Family Residences; Low (L) Residential District South - Cucamonga Valley Water District Offices and Deer Creek Channel; Industrial Park (IP) District, Flood Control (FC), Respectively East - Vacant and Deer Creek Channel; Office Park (OPK) District, Terra Vista Planned Community (TVPC), Flood Control (FC) District West - Condominiums; Mixed Use (MU) District D. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Mixed Use (MU) District North - Low (L) Residential District South - Industrial Park (IP) District, Flood Control (FC) District/Utility Corridor(UC) East - Office Park (OPK) District, Flood Control (FC) District/Utility Corridor (UC) West - Mixed Use (MU) District Item A—1 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00466—Oakmont of Rancho Cucamonga September 9, 2015 Page 2 E. Proiect Description: The applicant proposes to construct a Residential Care Facility as defined in Section 17.32.020(A) (16) of the Development Code (Exhibit H). The facility will be comprised of one (1) building with 81 units. The average resident will be 80 years of age however, the facility will be available to those individuals that are 60 years of age or older and/or persons in need of memory care. The floor area of the building will be 82,661 square feet. The building will consist of a mix of unit types as follows: • 49 studio units between 376 and 594 square feet • 25 one-bedroom units between 751 and 950 square feet • 7 two-bedroom units between 1,124 and 1,391 square feet Among the 49 studio units, 23 will be dedicated to memory care, all of which will be located on the first floor. Studio unit types (non-memory care and memory care) do not include kitchen facilities. One bedroom and two bedroom unit types include kitchen facilities (Exhibit E). ANALYSIS: A. General Plan and Zoning: Per Table 17.30.030-1 of the Development Code, Residential Care Facilities are permitted within the Mixed Use (MU) District (Exhibit G) with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Because the site is Master Planned under the Mixed Use land use designation for future office and residential development, the proposed land use may require a General Plan Amendment and/or a Development Code Amendment. Per State law, local governments may not amend any one of the mandatory elements of the General Plan more than four times in one calendar year. The schedule for future General Plan amendment(s) is currently tentative; however, staff is currently reviewing and researching the Development Code and General Plan text in order to move the project forward upon formal submittal. B. Land Use Compatibility: The site is surrounded by multi-family residential development to the west, single-family development to the north, vacant land and a flood channel to the east, and offices and a flood channel to the south (Exhibit B). The proposed residential care facility, as with facilities that are similar in purpose, is expected to have operating characteristics that will have a minimal impact, e.g., noise and traffic impacts are expected to be low. Therefore, staff believes that the facility would be generally compatible with the surrounding residential and office developments. The most significant impact will likely be related to the availability of parking. Per Table 17.64.050-1 of the Development Code, the required parking for congregate care facilities is based on a ratio of one parking stall per four (4) beds. Using this ratio and assuming 94 bedrooms (one bed per studio or bedroom), the facility requires 24 parking stalls (94 x 0.25 = 23.5). The applicant is providing 56 parking stalls. To ensure that parking will be sufficient, the applicant will be required to submit a parking study. The proposed facility is similar to other residential care facilities that are in predominantly residential areas in the City that were approved at the following locations: • 9519 Base Line Road (Sunrise at Alta Loma) • 6729 Hermosa Avenue (Valencia Commons) Item A—2 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00466—Oakmont of Rancho Cucamonga September 9, 2015 Page 3 0 9428 19th Street (Sunrise Gardens) C. Site Layout and Technical Characteristics: The design guidelines and policies established by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission stress the importance of having the buildings dominate the project site. Historically, when the opportunity is available to do so, i.e., when there are no significant site and/or vehicle circulation constraints, both the Committee and the Commission favor having the buildings close to the street. This, in turn, results in a parking area that is either behind the buildings relative to the street or in a less prominent area of the site. The building will be located toward the middle of the property with parking areas to the south and north. The building height will be 26 feet to the top of the structure and about 35 feet to the top of the tower elements. The massing of the buildings will be compatible with the surrounding properties. The buildings within the condominium complex to the west are two-story structures. The proposed building setback at the west property line is, approximately 53 feet while at the south property line it is approximately 74 feet. The proposed building (measured from the curb face) is approximately 138 feet and 40 feet from Church Street and Haven Avenue, respectively. In recent years, development standards for mixed use sites have been evaluated on a case-by-case basis as part of design review; however, development standards are currently being established and this project will be subject to these new development standards upon review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The parking lot layout of the proposed project minimizes the effects of vehicles on the neighboring residential development to the west and provides easy access to the entrance of the building facing Church Street. Parking will be provided on the north and south sides of the building. Of the 56 parking stalls provided, 12 within the south parking lot will be in carports. The principal entrance for the building will face the north parking lot. There will be a square shaped landscaped courtyard of approximately 18,000 square feet surrounded on all sides by the building structure. An additional landscaped area of approximately 1,000 square feet will include a small orchard, residence garden and chef's garden located at the southwest corner of the property. The remainder of the site will be landscaped per City requirements. Vehicle access to the site will be via two (2) new driveways, at the northwest and southeast corners of the subject property (Exhibits D). D. Desiqn and Technical Comments: The applicant is advised that design and technical comments will be provided following the submittal of a formal Development Review application. Staff recommends that the project incorporate the following: 1. Enhancements to the architecture of the buildings including wall plane articulation, variation in the building materials and colors, building elements/features that provide aesthetic focal points, decorative stone veneer on the fagade of the elevations and other design features that create a "residential" feel instead of an "institutional" feel. 2. The applicant is advised that architectural features and details shall be present on all elevations, i.e., 360-degree architecture is required per the policy of the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission. Item A—3 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00466—Oakmont of Rancho Cucamonga September 9, 2015 Page 4 E. Formal Application Submittal Requirements: The applicant will be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit and a Development Review. The following applications/documents (and associated fees)will be required at the time of formal submittal: 1. Development Review (for review of the technical and design characteristics of the project): $10,862.00 2. Conditional Use Permit (for review of the operational characteristics of the land use): $3,095.00 3. Environmental Assessment, Initial Study - Part 1: $2,769.00 4. Sign Permit (for Notice of Filing Signs): $125.00 5. Deposit for three (3) Notice of Filing Signs (one along Church Street and two (2) on Haven Avenue for supplemental public notification purposes): $613.00 per sign 6. General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment to be determined. F. Special Studies: The following special studies will be required at the time of formal submittal: 1. Air Quality Study (including an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions and local significance thresholds) 2. Cultural Resources Report 3. Arborist Study 4. Biological Study 5. Noise Study 6. Parking Study 7. Photometric Study NOTE: Additional special studies may be required following the formal submittal of the required applications. G. Technical Requirements/Comments —Engineering: 1. The Church Street frontage of this site is planned to be part of the future Class 1 Bicycle Path and Recreational Trail, which generally follows Deer Creek Channel, but will cross Haven Avenue at the Church Street intersection. a. Dedicate additional right-of-way or expand the existing 2-foot sidewalk easement a sufficient width to provide a 10-foot shared use path, including signing and striping, along the Haven Avenue frontage. b. The existing tubular steel fence shall be removed. Perimeter fencing for the facility shall be located outside the expanded parkway. 2. Both of the existing drive approaches are 35 feet wide. If onsite aisle widths are less, provide adequate transitions. Item A—4 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00466—Oakmont of Rancho Cucamonga September 9, 2015 Page 5 3. Show the channel access road and drive approach immediately south of this site on the Site Plan. 4. Provide Landscape plans that comply with the existing designs along Haven Avenue and Church Street. Said plans also need to consider the bike path and accesses. 5. Provide the number of units proposed for this assisted living development on the plans. 6. There is an existing bus stop along the Haven Avenue frontage. If the Planning Department requires a bus shelter it shall be located outside the public right-of-way. 7. Haven driveway gate shall be a sufficient distance from the curb to allow vehicles not gaining access to maneuver without backing onto Haven Avenue. 8. Haven Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: a. Protect or repair existing curb and gutter, street lights, drive approach, bus bay /right turn lane, traffic signal equipment, signing and striping as required. b. Dedicate right-of-way or provide an easement for a 10-foot wide shared use bicycle and pedestrian path, to be installed with this development. 9. Existing 72-inch storm drain has two (2) manholes on this site that will need to be adjusted to grade. All proposed structures shall be located outside the 25-foot storm drain easement. Portions of the Care Center building appear to be just outside the easement. Calculations shall be provided to demonstrate the structure will not place loads on the storm drain. 10. Street trees on Church Street shall be installed per Drawing 2136, approved with Tract 17435. 11. Haven frontage shall conform to the Haven Avenue beautification master plan. Private landscape plans will require Engineering Department review during plan check. 12. Church Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Secondary" standards as required and including: a. Protect or repair existing curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drive approach, traffic signal equipment, signing, and striping as required. H. Technical Reguirements/Comments— Building and Safety: No Comments at this time. Item A—5 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00466—Oakmont of Rancho Cucamonga September 9, 2015 Page 6 I. Technical Requirements/Comments—Building and Safety (Grading): A conceptual grading and drainage plan and a preliminary water quality management plan shall be submitted for review. J. Technical Requirements/Comments-- Fire Construction.Services: 1. The fire lane concept looks acceptable. A break on any barrier between Haven and the building around the center access door on the east elevation of the building would be required for building access from Haven. A 3-foot wide gate with a Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) padlock would be sufficient or if the gate is going to be used by the facility staff or clients and they want to have a lock set, we would accept a 1600 series Knox box next to the gate on the exterior surface of the fence; both options are per RCFPD standard 5-9. 2. Roof access is required to the buildings flat roof per ordinance FD54 Chapter 5 and Standard 5-6. This is more of Planning Commission issue but they can start to consider the ladder points on their design. Fire would also recommend that on their formal submittal they provide an allowable area calculation based on the building data such as occupancy, type of construction and number of floors. The review of their approach early in the process can avoid any disagreement down the road. 3. The applicant will be required by RCFPD and Building & Safety to provide a fire flow letter from the CVWD to confirm the available fire flow. CVWD will ask for the required fire flow before they issue the letter; the applicant then can reach out to RCFPD when the type of construction (such type V-A)'and the total square footage of the facility for all floors combined is known and RCFPD will provide an a=mail with the required fire flow and will include CVWD in the notification. Respectful) submitted, Candyce umett Planning Director CB:NC/jp Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B Aerial Photo Exhibit C - Preliminary Project Data Exhibit D - Preliminary Site Plan Exhibit E - Preliminary Elevations and Floor Plans Exhibit F - Correspondence from the Applicant Exhibit G - Table 17.30.030-1 —Allowed Land Use and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District(excerpt) Exhibit H - Section 17.32.020'—Allowed Use Descriptions (excerpt) Item A—6 I I1 Pre-Application DRC2 1 - � pp 0 5 00466 -- -------- t�1ff - - tNMI ,•H��.S — , _ '-y iLai Yi,tt.•iftl u p it: �,:..F •t •, .-�i. SAI. _ :,;,TA" Project Site -'- ... <, -- ,• D - ... : r- hill&M •66 :.:-n.- •.;tea��: J i it C• , �•-1..... ... .. -_ 1....• Ir w Ala I .�Y.T _ - I, I .air v.f IST t/� �/ �4 N Ln 13 II I ■� ;i i LI I { I I I � . FtMr i�rrr 1 ii CL Q. jf [ r, 4r f !. II I Ir , EXHIBIT A ItemA OF µ►t �1 m Ida$ lejailtit �� n r:�_�!�► 1 w C-tel 'f'1 Y 1 k17M - Irl' Mi rr7n. rl It ^ ist m X W Pre-Application Review DRC2015-00466 Ali � — �' ' o � t • �n w� 7pE � I r 1 '1 il• r 1 ► � rF ' Project Site s J L, F h 11 Ak 41,1 loll ' f / a M. r% A.Ff-kNC;HO 45515TEE) LIVING CUCAMONGA LNIT i lj\,I,T TYF-;: 50 FTG i5T -�L' R 1 2ND OTAL I 9, 0 455 22.4% A-33 I 5TUDio 4,30 I S 11 L;D:0 534 -3&x I -5_UDio 2 2 AA-31 AA-33 5 7iJ'D:0 420 3 I 2 5 5.b% 0 N. --33 ONE 5-DRIOCYI' 13 30 ONE 5=-DRIOON 2 24 c-c 10-RIN-=R. ON= ------------------------------------------- C;2-39) ON= 519 i 2 2 2 D-33 TUiO 2 2 4 1 D-3a TLO BEDROOI- i 13 4578 i .0-0.0% ALD4EIMER'S �Nl :-1 T i 5- --LR 2-ND FLIR Tl)';AL I 510 A�A7 u D.10 261% 4 Z-33 101 400 AAZ-40 1 5TUD[a 2 2 ------------- 3 I 5TUDio 1 30.4t, AZ-3o i STUDIO 3 13;9, 73 23 2NQ ELR TOTAL 4 5, I OTAL SQUAR-E FOOTAGE 42,451 r 40,204 5209,1 EXHIBIT C Item A-9 rn >C . 00 VAIthING ANALVSI1 4 1:1t.1;11<I1t .... 1: �` _ .�� 1 t4,.,�'•.�I•'`�I I '1 P~ .` ---' --'~'----- - -'— _ l..n .i til'I_I':II:\TA - - �x i111:,RIA ctltnl I .;.I;_[ 7('_:.! _..:[%.'-,�}�._ t�e-'""" . .,� ."I•_-•_-h�-.•r"-"_.....I'•` _ _ 'j Rllll)INI;(OVI.IAI& I�1,, �.:.r._ 1 nNu,( \rl t uvl.R:\t.l a;eI .I r. si-At I '_� Jt �j: � ro t I'Itl\'\IItR•I\11'\t'1� id 1� r i O j1 4 .. . ILL I I , IIAVFN AVENUE �1 (),vin-R )NT Or RANCHO CUCAM( )NGA L1 .IIRIII I 11.l\1111t 11\I.M. --- t.R R\\1 111 11:1'1 I I1 x .r LL4 EM EE Qil IV—mud�f1}}}I1•TII� oo . - NORTH ELEVATION I �•r+rT-r•r, F'rOL: :1 y I;. :I... .': '.I "1 I. ';l 03, I:I''' I ,im ox Lol n , - - rr!i� n�rt �rj. _ ' �? ` r � +1�1 � WEST ELEVATION 3. 0 ! 1 II y al b J LM I I I Y.i... „ ,1. _IIi.,L,fl:l nr n Ili S SOUTH ELEVATIGN u� o Z XILI l cl i' :ilk :I•1.� r;:l � ,....I.;...,i 1-,.. .,epi. ^u .. �. i y J , r , ! I In�:r7 n 11 � n i In„i:�-r rt"III'11� :1 rll rl I� Il�,r nlu null n n ±1 nr � n n ��i Aj ����n�n�•�� � .,1 � i r EAST ELEVATION I Al Z l-d Wall PIT -� I� r. I� I �I !Z m' — I�= - -' ' ° �i o r LOWER FLOOR PLAN OAKMONT aoLlracausaw. N a OAKMONT or RANCHO CUCAMOW%A •amu ! ! C..a„GvpiE•RONOtl aC3"IMCA CA i'/r'rrir•I' r'i/.�. /�/� 14 101-0]!lm0 FL—y wall ice' I ,E it — la z I _ C2F c 44 iA Tj E; I EI : � r �7 ♦ — F ,� A~ � o o EIR ILE ; ;e ALI 105AL CAN��orRArkoCUOW-A A +oa cPPER FLOOR PLANOAKMONT i m faca.cc a w. vnrr �u•ii��. til-d wall I[x--- ---- --- -------------- ------ ----- ------------------------ -------------- ------------ I A -j jl I ° � i Ij ° a i i '71 L 'n Ai of I A 1z I it jq. ......................... FD is -di 0 > :17 --- - --------- - -------- -- -- -- ----- .......... ---------- - -- - t ROS PLAN ALI GBAL ]> OAKMONT WWA 111M 2140 OAKMONT or RANCkO CUC-411OWsA C.&fW-W AVDLE.RAW�C=Ar4WAA CA Y L l .___._._,qua - /��... A. ✓�' Y J L , .�f4 : y � �Y J �f F �i •jr 9 r •. `r } V M1r i OAKMONT of RANCHO CUCAMONGA PROJECT.bESCRIPTION Oakmont Senior Living is submitting an application to develop an 81 unit assisted living and memory care community in the City of Rancho Cucamonga at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Church St. The surrounding land uses are: To the east of the site is Haven Avenue and a vacant parcel. To the west is an existing two story multi-family residential complex. To the south is the Deer Creek drainage channel and offices of the Cucamonga Valley Water District. To the north is Church St and a single family residential neighborhood. We believe this 3.34 acre site will be an ideal location for our residents to enjoy close proximity to all the amenities that the City of Rancho Cucamonga has to offer. This two story structure will be designed architecturally from the ground up to provide for the special needs of our seniors. All the resident rooms will be supplemented with common areas to promote friendships and create a sense of open community. The proposed project will offer a wide range of services within a gracious and secure environment. All the units of this senior health care facility will be licensed by the State of California Department of Social Services as a Residential Care Facility for the Elderly, classified as "Assisted Living'. This community will provide amenities such as private and formal dining rooms, a cafe: entertainment and activity rooms, beauty salon, library, outside courtyard and more. There will be an in-house fitness center, and a private surround-sound theater. Luxurious comfort will be defined by the fine woodwork, elegant furnishings, arlwlork, fireplaces, and fresh flowers. Conversation areas are strategically located throughout the building to promote socializing. In this fully licensed residential care community, residents will receive healthy meals in our dining room, housekeeping, assistance from knowledgeable staff, an emergency response system, programs and health screening. The dining room and exhibition kitchen will be operated like a restaurant directed by a chef. Breakfast will be served from 7 to 9:30 AM, lunch from 11:30 AM to 1:30 PM, and dinner from 5 to 8 PM. Progressive care needs of the residents will be addressed by providing high levels of assisted living in their individual units. This will fulfill our aging-in-place philosophy allowing our residents to stay in their chosen unit. At move-in. the majority of our residents are in their early to mid- 80's. They utilize a myriad of assisted living services offered within the community such as medication management, our in house concierge doctor program and diabetes management. EXHIBIT F Item A—16 In addition; twenty three (23) of the units are set aside for memory care. The memory care program will be offered in a specifically designed area for residents with Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia. Being that few residents drive, we tape care of their transportation needs by providing a 20+ passenger bus with a qualified driver along with a smaller vehicle for local trips. Our staff will take residents to shop, doctor appointments and other community activities. Housekeeping services; residential and grounds maintenance; and 24-hour on- . site management are among the many amenities that provide peace-of-mind to residents and their families. In addition to our personal service philosophy, we promote intergenerational opportunities and work closely with the community to develop ongoing programs. Being that this is a licensed facility, the property will be open and operating on a 24-hour basis, seven days a week. The number of employees will fluctuate throughout the day from a high of 30 employees during the morning and afternoon and 4-6 employees through the evening and night shift. The morning shift starts at approx. 6 AM. the afternoon shift will start around 2:00 PM and the night shift at 10PN1. We are proud to say that at most of our facilities over fifty percent of the employees are residents of the local community. Our facility will have little or no impact on the surrounding community with regard to: • Traffic: Low impact. and would not affect the AM.;PM peak commute times. • Schoois: Aii residents are senior citizens: therefore schools are not affected. • Noise: Probably the least noise of any type of development. • Parking: Our current site plan includes 56 parking spaces that far exceeds the number required by ordinance_ Socially and economically, our proposal provides much needed high quality services for seniors. full time jobs for the local community and will support the local economy. Item A—17 ANCILLARY SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE LOCAL COMMUNITY Construction Phase • Subcontractors, such as -Framing Landscaping -Grading -Masonry -Concrete -Plumbing -Painters -Electrical -Drywall -HVAC -Roofing Materials suppliers -Concrete and gravel -Lumber -Landscape and nursery • Industrial equipment rental Physical Plant • Landscaping service • Service companies and supplies • Pest control • Windovi cleaning • Commercial cleaning services • Fire sprinkler and alarm maintenance • Elevator/HVAC maintenance • Kitchen and culinary supplies Personal;Business Services • Food service • Doctors • Banking and financial services Florist • Commercial laundry Bottled water T Item A—18 • Medical prescriptions • Chemical and housekeeping • Massage therapist supplies • Hairdresser • Exterminator • Entertainment • Personal care supplies • Moving services • Medical equipment purchase and • Cable TV rental • Auto and van purchase and • Newspaper advertising maintenance EMPLOYMENT NEEDS �A'e anticipate that the majority of our employees will be hired from within the community. • Caregivers • Housekeeping • Culinary staff • Nursing staff • Business Manager • Office staff • Marketing • Maintenance personnel • Concierge • Activity Directors a Item A —19 Article III,Chapter 17.30 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code TABLE 17.30.030-1 ALLOWED LAND USES AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS BY BASE ZONING DISTRICT Land Use/Zoningn, = vs a v v District > J -j 2 = 2 O z 0 0 W � 0 — O � � O z U. M Residential Uses Adult Day Care P PP P P P P N N N N i N N N I N N N N N j P N N Home Caretaker Housing C C C -C C C C P 'P P I N N NJ N I C I C C C P ' C' P P Dwelling, Multi- N i N P I P P P P N N N N : N N N N N N N N N N N Family Dwelling, Second Unit�'� P I P P , P P P N N N N N ! N N. N N N N N P P N N i Dwellin Family g g Sin le- PiP P P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N PIP N N Dwelling, Two-Family N I N P ; P P P P N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Emergency Shelter N I N N i N N N N N N P N I N N N N C N N N I N N N Family Day CareC C C ' C C C C N N N NIN N N N N N N N I 'C N N Home, Large0"' Family Day Care P I P P P P P P N N N N ! N N N N N N N N j P N N Home, Small j I Guest House P j P P ; N I N j N N N N I N N ! N N N N N N N N % N N N Group Residential C C C j C C C C C C C C I N ; C N N N N N N j C N N Home Occupation �-'� P P P : P P P P N N N N N N N N j N N N P I P N N Live-Work Facility N N N I N N i N P N N N N N N N N N N N N j N N N Manufactured Home i3 P i P P I P N N N N I N I N N N N N N N N N N I P N N Mobile Home Park(" C I C C I C C C N N N N N N N N N N N N N I N N N Residential Care_ j FacilityNIN N ; C C C C N N N NiN N N N N N N NI N N N Residential Care Pip PIP N N N N N N N N N N N N NIP P N N P p Home i Single-Room N I NLpil P P P N N N N { N N N N N N N N N N N Occupancy Facility I Transitional Housing P P P I P P N N N N !. N N N N N N N N P N N Agriculture and Animal-Related Uses Agricultural Uses N I N N ; N N N N N N N N I N N N N N N N P N P P Animal Keeping, P p P I P P P P NJ N N N N N N N N N N N P N N Domestic Pets ;' ! Animal Keeping, C jI C C :I C C C C N N N NiN N N N N NIN N C I N N Exotic Animals .7.30-4 X HIBIT G Item A—20 Article III,Chapter 17.32 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code lease, or were formerly held out for rent or lease and later converted to a subdivision, cooperative,condominium, or other form of resident ownership, to accommodate mobile homes used for residential purposes. 16. Residential Care Facility. Consistent with the definitions of state law, a residential care facility provides 24-hour nonmedical care for more than six persons 18 years of age or older, or emancipated minors, with chronic, life- threatening illness in need of personal services, protection, supervision, assistance, guidance, or training essential for sustaining the activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual. This classification includes, but is not limited to, rest homes, residential care facilities for the elderly, adult residential facilities, wards of the juvenile court, and other facilities licensed by the State of California. Convalescent homes, nursing homes, and similar facilities providing medical care are included under the definition of Medical Services, Extended Care. 17. Residential Care Home. Consistent with the definitions of state law(Health and Safety Code §1502), a residential care home is a home that provides 24 hour nonmedical care for six or fewer persons 18 years of age or older, or emancipated minors, with chronic, life-threatening illness in need of personal services, protection, supervision, assistance,guidance, or training essential for sustaining the activities of daily living, or for the protection of the individual. This classification includes rest homes, residential care facilities for the elderly, adult residential facilities, wards of the juvenile court, and other facilities licensed by the State of California. Convalescent homes, nursing homes, and similar facilities providing medical care are included under the definition of Medical Services, Extended Care. 18. Single-Room Occupancy(SRO)Facility. Multi-unit housing for very low-income persons that typically consists of a single room and shared bath and also may include a shared common kitchen and common activity area. SROs may be restricted to seniors or be available to persons of all ages. Subsidized versions may be supervised by a government housing agency. 19. Transitional Housing. Consistent with Health and Safety Code §50675.2, transitional housing is defined as buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated under program requirements that call for the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which shall be no less than six months. B. Agriculture and Animal-Related Uses. 1. Agricultural Uses. This use category includes farms, orchards, vineyards, livestock grazing, and hydroponics, including on-site sales of products grown on site. 2. Animal Keeping. Care and maintenance of animals on private property. The listing below provides a distinction between various types of animals related to allowed use provisions in Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District). This classification is distinct from EXHIBIT H Item.A =21 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF ;RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION September 9, 2015 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER . Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Wimberly_ Vice Chairman Oaxaca _ Munoz Macias Fletcher II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general.public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of Regular Meeting Minutes dated August 12, 2015. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA C ov September 9, 2015 Page 2 B. Consideration of Workshop Minutes dated August 12, 2015. C. VACATION OF A PORTION OF HELLMAN AVENUE, LOCATED SOUTH OF FERON BOULEVARD (V-228)— ERIN MADISON, INC. —A REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF HELLMAN AVENUE, LOCATED SOUTH OF FERON BOULEVARD—APN: 0209-032- 57 RELATED FILE: DRC2014-00745. IV. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS/PLANNING COMMISSION D. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 15-66 EXPRESSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S SUPPORT OF MEASURE A, THE WEST-SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND STREET LIGHTING MEASURE, TO BE ON THE NOVEMBER 3, 2015 ELECTION BALLOT. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION E. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES F. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS VI. ADJOURNMENT 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission 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 3, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, 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 prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. P HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA September 9, 2015 Page 3 INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC 10 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. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. 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 to 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$2,533 for all 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, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CitvofRC.us. i THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCA-M' OAIGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION i AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION i AUGUST 12, 2015 a 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 7:03 PM Roll Call Chairman Wimberly_X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X i Munoz_X Macias _X Fletcher_X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney; Rebecca Fuller, Administrative Secretary; Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner; Tom Grahn, Associate i Planner, Dominick Perez, Assistant Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; j Mike Smith, Associate Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner i i II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS i This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain i from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None I Item A —1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ;Y AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES l Ho AUGUST 12, 2015 CUCkeIGINGA Page 2 III. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. PRESENTATION OFA RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION HONORING THE SERVICE OF COMMISSIONER FRANCES HOWDYSHELL, RETIRED Presentation by Chairman Wimberly B. OFFICIAL WELCOME TO COMMISSIONER RICH MACIAS Announcement by Candyce Burnett, Planning Director IV. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION C. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES DATED JULY 22, 2015 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 3-0-0-2 (Munoz, Macias abstain) V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. D. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00111 —PULTE HOMES—A request for the architectural and site design of 5 single-family residential homes on 5 lots in the Low(L)Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Golden Prairie Drive — APN: 1087-281-01, 02, 03, 04 and 05. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines,the City adopted a Negative Declaration on July 12, 1989 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map 14139 and no further environmental review is required. E. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2015-00580 — PULTE HOMES - A request to increase the allowable wall heights for a total height of 8 feet along the side yards of Lots 1 and 5 in connection with the proposed development (Design Review DRC2015-00111) of 5 residential homes located in the Low(L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan at the southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Golden Prairie Drive—APN: 1087- 281-01, 02, 03, 04 and 05. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") Item A—2 f HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES A.\CHO AUGUST 12, 2015 Page 3 and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration on July 12, 1989 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map 14139 and no further environmental review is-required. Dominick Perez, Assistant Planner presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Steve Ford, Pulte Homes said he would answer any questions. I Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Seeing none, he closed the public hearing. iThe Commissioners all voiced their general support of the project. Moved by Munoz; seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolutions approving Design Review DRC2015-00911 and Minor Exception DRC2015-00580 as presented. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2013-00961 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC —A request to change the General Plan land use designation for an 8.32 acre parcel of land within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area from Very Low(VL) Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre)to Low(L) Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue -APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related Cases: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962 Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936, Variance DRC2014- 00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2013-00962 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC — A request to change the Etiwanda Specific Plan zoning designation for an 8.32 acre parcel of land within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area from Very Low(VL) Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre)to Low (L) Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. i Related Cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936, Variance DRC2014-00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113.This i item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936-STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC —A request to subdivide 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots (Lots #1-16 for residential purposes and Lot #17 for an existing church) for a site located within the Very Low(VL)Zoning District(.1 -2 units per acre)of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - i APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Item A —3 j. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION } AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Co� AUGUST 12, 2015 Page 4 environmental impacts for consideration. Related Cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, Variance DRC2014-00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2014-00219 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC—A request to increase the maximum permitted property line wall heights from 6 feet up to 11 feet related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 for a site located within the Very Low(VL)Residential District(.1-2 dwelling units per acre)of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue-APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Related Cases:.General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2014-00113 — STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. -A request to remove up to 50 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 for a site located within the Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 dwelling units per acre)of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue; APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 and Variance DRC2014- 00219. ' Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He stated that an additional petition was received 2 days ago and a letter was received today from Fish and Wildlife, all of which have been placed before the Commissioners for their review. In response to the letter from Fish and Wildlife, he said staff has drafted additional conditions to address the possible impacts to Burrowing owls. Corrections to resolution 15-62 for the Tentative Tract found on page F-J 239 of the agenda packet were also placed before the Commission (copy on file). The secretary read into the record the recommended mitigations as follows: 1) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFM and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: i Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D(Breeding and Non-breeding Season Surveys and Item A—4 i HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION - i } . AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 G'L;CA. Page 5 j Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre- construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre-construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If j burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during j the pre-construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks i from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground-disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre-construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. • During the non-breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non- migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre-construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. i • During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they should be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction"area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. i 2) Perform a bat survey prior to removal or relocation of the on-site palm trees. Retain a qualified bat biologist to perform appropriate, species- specific surveys to determine if bats are occupying the trees slated for removal. If bats are found to be roosting in the trees-, tree removal will be limited to between October 15 and February 28 to avoid the bat maternity season. If removal is proposed outside of this date range the applicant will work closely with the qualified bat biologist to implement i additional avoidance and minimization measures(for example, removal of the tree skirt between October 15 and February 28, followed by removal of the tree at a later date). Item A -5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES j��,� AUGUST 12, 2015 Ct1'i'N ovrct;ocA Page 6 Jay Wallea of 22323 Normandy representing the applicants thanked staff for the report and accepted the proposed additional mitigations. Chris Nielsen expressed opposition to the GPA and ESP amendments and said he supports Layout 3. He presented a lengthy letter supporting this layout as a compromise (copy on file) stating a GPA is not needed; the lot sizes would be the same as the Toll Brothers development, and the Emergency Vehicle Access could be added off of Pinon and street access could be gained from Carnesi. i Chris Nielsen (Mrs) continued with their support of Layout 3 and concluded that the current proposal does not meet the General Plan. Regina Johnson said she attends Cross and Crown Church and that the proposal is a big opportunity for the church and community. She said the project allows them to clear debt and to help others. She said the Developer has done a great job to consider the neighbors and their concerns. Raybir Husson said he is opposed and the proposal is unfair as it will affect the value of their homes, access is not the residents'problem. His objections included losing equestrian lots, traffic concerns, pollution, loss of 100-year old trees, and moving utilities. Hai Lin 6790 Di Carlo Place agreed with the prior speaker. A severe, change in zoning/change in infrastructure is not justified. She said there will be a safety issue with the access and their homes will lose value. Kevin Johnson said he is a 20-year resident and a member of Cross 8 Crown. He expressed support and said we should look for the greater good. He supports expanding community engagement. Lorraine Meng, a resident of the To// Brothers development did not see the compelling reasons to change the General Plan nor allowing a variance and cutting trees to accommodate the developer. She strongly objects. David Long said he is not member of the church but cared for the vacant acreage for 40 years. He said he dislikes the trees and never saw a burrowing owl there. He expressed support as these homes will go for a million and won't hurt anyone's values. He said he has i seen many changes to the ESP; we have good schools and good people; this would be good for all. Jerry Bredlaw, said the homes on Pinon were built under County standards which are lesser standards; they have been there for 48 years. The developer agreed they should not go through Pinon. He said this development will increase all home values. Manning homes Item A—6 i HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RAINcFao AUGUST 12, 2015 �[M 3fONGA Page 7 was given a variance and he did not see a problem there. He offered his support. Mya Thona said the church's-problems should not be corrected at the expense of the Toll Brothers home owners. Hakan Ozsomer, 13010 Pinon Street expressed concern about a large tree that he fears will fall on his house when they start to put in the footings. He asked that the tree be cut down. Shereece Monroe stated she has been selling real estate in the community for 10 years. She said people buy there because it is exclusive and secluded and she understands the homeowners'concerns. She said when the wall is broken through on Carnesi, buyers will not.want to purchase homes there because of possible accidents. She said the project will negatively affect home values. Marlyn Diaz 13190 Carnesi said the wall has been there over 12 years; she objects to destruction of the wall, she fears an increase in traffic and lower property values. Pedro Diaz objected because of increased traffic and property devaluation. He said he would consider going through the church property for access. Patrick Lee objected citing traffic, safety issues and breaking the wall. David Liu said the developer should satisfy the entire community. Maggie Trin objected to breaking the wall, and cited traffic concerns. Jacqueline Littlejohn said property value is affected by comps, therefore the wall needs to remain. She said the Church should have sold their driveway. Norris LittleJohn said he bought into Tot/ Brothers because of the community- it's ideal because of the wall. He said he paid over one million for the home because of the seclusion, I separation, privacy, and less traffic. Tammy Kolarik said she is part of Cross and Crown church and they need their parking to grow; they value their home too. Raymond Grigolla cited fears about drainage; he said they will have to import a lot of dirt. He had concerns about the elevation and he opposed the wall being broken. Sharon Huey thanked Storm for their integrity. She said she attends all community activities and would love to see it grow. Robert Ramsdale said he lives north of the Carnesi tract. He said the Commission has done a great job in Rancho Cucamonga;he trusts the work and wisdom they put in and it is Item A—7 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST.12, 2015 C[;UMONGA Page 8 in the best interest of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Kurt Ajata said he opposes breaking the wall for reasons already stated, the General Plan is already in place, this is not really a transition zone and the proposal is not fair. Rick Swartz objected to the wall being taken down;he bought because of the wall and it is an injustice to take it down. Patrick Thona said he bought because of exclusivity. He said compromise is needed. He asked the church and builder to consider the current homeowners. Rogelio Hernandez said the Commission has not considered all options. June Beamon said she has lived on Vista Street since 1969. She offered support; the developer has done a lot to consider everyone. She said the older tract streets are narrower and more traffic in the older tract would not be good. She said it makes sense to open to Carnesi and it is not fair to the church to access from their driveway. Luis Garcia questioned the fire access location. Paul Russel from Cross and Crown said the developer spent a lot of money and time to make everyone happy. He suggested the church has the property rights to tear down the wall. He said he is in favor of the project. Catherine 'unintelligible/unknown"* said they compromised 25 years ago to let To// Brothers in. She said the first plan took 460 feet of the wall down and now it is only 60 feet. She said the traffic impact will not be significant and she thinks this will improve property value and the community. She expressed support; it is a win-win. She said Storm has worked hard to compromise; it's good for community. Tina Reddix said only % inch lies on church property and the wall was in the price of the homes. The Applicant stated in rebuttal that they are aware of the many concerns from the surrounding community and they compromised with all of them. He said the project meets the intent of the ESP, similar design of the street exists all over the City, there is a provision whereby they can ask for zone changes for some flexibility, and new home sales typically bring in 15% over existing house product. He said everything has been reviewed by staff and it is acceptable. He said they have reduced the length of the wall section to be removed. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said there has been much concern about possible impacts related to traffic and storm water. She said all was analyzed by specialists in their Item A—8 i HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION i AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PAkNCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 Ct-aa:Nioxca Page 9 fields and they concluded there would be no impacts if mitigations were imposed. Dan-James, Senior Civil Engineer said the assigned class of streets will accept the level of anticipated traffic. With respect to drainage-only the southerly portion will have drainage to retaining the wall; the current flow is southerly and it will continue to flow southerly, nothing will drain to Carnesi, it will drain to the new street and southerly and then east to Pinon then south to Victoria. Ms. Burnett said with respect to the GPA and ESP amendments that there is a process to consider amendments when there are inconsistencies. She said the General Plan is a guiding document and living document-there are inconsistencies therefore these proposals i can be considered. She said the Applicant gave many options to review and there are complications with all the options. We consider many factors and there is more consistent development if the amendments are considered. She said Option 2 has more good planning principles, and still meets the goals of the General Plan. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked about the Emergency Vehicle Access off of Pinon and the suggestion to shift that location. i Mr. James said Pinon Street predated incorporation of the City. Fire trucks have to back up to Pecan and do a 3 point turn. He said that if the area was vacant and a new subdivision was to be built, the City would not approve that layout with current our standards. He said for the alternate layout, he did not look to see if that would have the proper turning radius. Steven Rower, Assistant City Attorney said with respect to the claim that the wall was constructed on the church's property; staff has determined that the wall straddles the property line between the church and city property. He said the wall was built voluntarily by Toll Brothers. He said we cannot require Toll Brothers to maintain the wall and there was no formal legal agreement for the church to maintain it. There was no easement that ran with the current homeowners. If it is the church's wall it is their prerogative not to maintain it. Commissioner Munoz said he appreciated all comments/concerns-everyone will have to give as there is no perfect plan. The developer bent over backwards trying to find a solution i for everyone. impacts regarding traffic, the wall, etc. can be mitigated and everyone has rights. With respect to the General Plan change, a basis must be provided and all things considered he said he supports the project as presented. Commissioner Macias said he reviewed all the materials. He thanked staff for the comprehensive review and found the report very straightforward. He offered support and moved for approval. Commissioner Fletcher thanked the Director for the explanation for the process of the amendments. He said he personally does not like applications with many changes that Item A -9 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MiNUTES r RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 G'MA,NIONGA Page 10 need to be made. He said it happens with infill projects and in order to bring a conventional project that makes sense then these need to be considered. He said the developer has done the best he can to accommodate and make a viable project. i remember.when Toll Brothers was in process; the value goes with the name. He said he did not think property value changes will be major as comps to the east would not be considered. If Toll Brothers wanted a walled community they should have put it on their own side of the street. He noted the reduction of wall section being removed from 642 feet to 60 feet and even with the break in the wall it will still offer the feet of seclusion. He said there is no housing product yet but he said they should be sure it is of high grade and design. Vice Chairman Oaxaca thanked all who stayed to comment and for the detailed report and responses. He said the Commission must evaluate based on facts, not opinions, feelings, or emotions. He said he lives down the street from Carnesi Drive and he experiences the same traffic issues. He concurred with his fellow Commissioners that the Developer came up with the best possible solution in this scenario. He said it is unfortunate the Toll Brothers owners were led to believe the wall belonged to them. The wall belongs to the church and no arrangement was made for its maintenance. He said he has not heard compelling arguments that overcome the applicant's efforts to make this work. He said he understands property values-we still have anxiety with the real estate market with respect to property values and they are complicated and many things contribute to property values. To/i Brothers owners are fortunate-you invested. He said he believes this project will not affect but enhance the community. He said the Applicant still has to come back with housing i product that will have to meet our standards; we will hold to those standards and they will not be relaxed. Chairman Wimberly offered thanks to everyone for coming. He agreed that the facts are compelling. He thanked the Director and Attorney for clarifying the issues about the wall and he thanked the developer for making concessions. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher carried 5-0 to adopt the resolutions approving Tentative tract Map SUBTT18936, Variance DRC2014-00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113 as corrected and amended with the additional mitigation with respect to owls and bats and to adopt the resolutions recommending approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961 and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962 to be forwarded to the City Council for final approval. Chairman Wimberly announced a short recess at 9:23 PM. At 9:32 PM, Chairman Wimberly reconvened the meeting with all commissioners present. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00421 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA-A supplement to Development Code Update DRC2010-00571 amending Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to provide development standards for the Mixed Use development district, development and land use standards for the industrial districts, and to clarify definitions, Item A—10 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION 0ANC110 AN® PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 12, 2015 CUc MONGA Page 11 administrative procedures, and correct prior errors and omissions. Related Files: CEQA Review CEQA2015-00018. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Mike Smith, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) followed by Tom Grahn, Associate Planner and then Mayuko Nakajima, i Assistant Planner and then Dominick Perez, Assistant Planner. I Mr. Smith noted that Staff has scheduled a study session with the City Council on September 16 and tentatively scheduled a public hearing before the Council on October 7. Commissioner Fletcher asked if there are any examples with respect to allowed uses in the Industrial Parks in Rancho. i Mr. Smith said the JC Penney outlet at Haven and Civic Center Drive; the Code currently only allows for one major tenant to occupy the entire space. Chairman Wimberly mentioned a similar re-use in Pasadena. Commissioner Munoz asked if commercial repurposing applications would come to the Commission. Mr. Smith said all factors are still considered. i Commissioner Munoz asked if allowed uses would still come to the Commission for review. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said the process for approving these projects is found on pages 66-68 of the agenda; the table indicates the level of review. A 'C' still means discretionary review at the staff level. Mr. Smith said they would still have to gel a business license but for something like the Anaheim Packing house, further review would be required. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing none, closed the public hearing. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director noted a change on the resolution found on page K-48. She noted the reference to the Negative Declaration. She said the Commission is the recommending body and the City Council will adopt the Negative Declaration. Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution recommending the City Council approve the Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00421 with the noted change. Item A-11 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ;�-- AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES LraHo AUGUST 12, 2015 GLcMMON`A Page 12 VI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION L. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES None M. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Chairman Oaxaca thanked staff for prepping him for this meeting. He said a few weeks ago he was contacted by a descendent of the first owner of the historic Minor House. He had an opportunity to meet with them and the family appreciated our actions over the . years to encourage the preservation of the property. VII. ADJOURNMENT 110:04 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 6, 2015,at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, 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 prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. 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 Item A—12 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA R�EHo AUGUST 12, 2015 G:c_tMoNG-k Page 13 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. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. 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. I , APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,533 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). I Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. i Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. I i 'i Item A—13 Item A—14 i TIDE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA j WORKSHOP OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 12, 2015 - 3:30 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center TRI-COMMUNITIES ROOM 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 3:33 PM Roll Call I Chairman Wimberly_XL Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias _X Fletcher_X Additional Staff Present: John Gillison, City Manager;Linda Daniels,Assistant City Manager; Nettie Nielsen, Community Services Director;Candyce Burnett, Planning Director;Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development; Karen Peterson, Planning Manager; Christen Mitchell, Mgmt Analyst ll; Erika Lewis-Huntley, Mgmt Analyst ll; Francie Palmer, Communication Manager; Rebecca Fuller, Administrative Secretary, Jennifer Pa/acios, Office Specialist ll; Jason Wel/day, Traffic Engineer; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Tom Grahn, Associate Planner;Dominic Perez,Assistant Planner; Trang Hyunh, Building Official; Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner; Rob Ball, Fire Marshall: Van Rojer, Deputy Fire Chief; Don Cloughesy, Deputy Fire Chief; Eric Noreen, Battalion Fire Chief; Rob Seymour, Battalion Chief; Mike Costello, Fire Chief; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Valerie Victorino, Planning Secretary F� II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for theeneral ublic to address g p ss the Historic Preservation Commission or the j Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity Item B —1 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP AUGUST 12, 2015 RANCH Page 2 cnMo_0 which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION REGARDING THE INITIAL PLANNING CONCEPT FOR THE NORTH EASTERN SPHERE ANNEXATION PROJECT OF 4,115 ACRES, GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF THE 210 FREEWAY AND EAST OF HAVEN AVENUE TO THE CITY'S EASTERLY BOUNDARY. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director introduced the project and provided a broad overview of the history of the project. She noted that although the project was put on hold in 2006, the City Council reaffirmed their desire to pursue the project in their Council Goals. The goal includes the development of a specific plan to redesign and what to look at for conservation efforts. She said the purpose of the workshop is to show where we are, the existing site conditions, the original proposal within the General Plan incorporating new concepts such as the CMP and Healthy RC initiatives, the future planning of the sphere area, conservation, existing and future trails. David Sargent, Principal of Sargent Town Planning, gave a PowerPoint presentation that discussed the initial planning concepts for the project and presented an initial concept plan and imagery for the character of the project. Commissioner Fletcher asked about respecting existing property rights in conservation areas. Mr. Sargent said that if the Planning Commission is comfortable with the overall concept for the project, the next step will be to evaluate the feasibility of transferring development rights to areas where development is preferred. Ms. Burnett noted that the area north of the 1200 acres is being considered for conservation. She noted that she does not see much more of the development that is already there and explained that homes to the west are in a high fire area. The idea is to look at the highest and best use of developable land to the south and conservation to the north and make sure that the project is a balanced blend of uses that are feasible, buildable and self-sustaining and will be phased appropriately. Commissioner Fletcher said it is an exciting-opportunity to build this as it is nice and unique and conceptually agrees with all of it if it can happen as presented. He asked that the team make sure nothing is lost in translation. He asked if there are any objections from the controlling jurisdictions. Item B —2 POR PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP AUGUST 12, 2015 Gic Page 3 � Ms. Burnett said they have been included and involved. They have indicated they feel comfortable with what is proposed. j John Gillison, City Manager, said he had made a strop commitment to the Count C 9 y EO and he is keeping personally in touch to see that they are comfortable with the designs and concepts. Terry Thompson, the Director of Real Estate for the County of San Bernardino, said he is very supportive of the concepts and he reports directly to Mr. Deveraux, CEO. Commissioner.Fletcher said the mountain vistas are very important. He asked if the trails are still closed to horses. Ms. Burnett said this is still an issue, but we are working to reroute them and this proposal provides an opportunity to make connections. Commissioner Fletcher said he likes the different mixes and densities of housing types and lot sizes. He asked if there are any estate sized lots and asked the team to evaluate one acre lots. He said he likes the amphitheater idea. He asked about the fire conditions and safety. Mr. Sargent said some blocks will lend themselves for large lots. He said there will be a significant fire break between the open space area to the north and the development to the south;he also noted there will need to be effective ways to deal with the open space "fingers"that extend into the development area. Commissioner Oaxaca noted the report mentioned existing constraints. He asked if they will continue to constrain development. Mr. Sargent noted that the quality and quantity of the environment has been considered in the initial concept plan. He said resources are present; such as plants and wildlife, and strategies will need to be developed to offset them. He said the slopes are not significant at 6 to 8 percent. He noted the edges have the constraints of utility lines and flood control and they hope to enhance them. He noted there is a fault zone on the SCE corridor. Commissioner Oaxaca said he liked the edges and how they work with the adjacent existing development. He suggested they be careful with the openness to folks that live beyond these boundaries. Mr. Sargent said the amenities will attract outsiders and they will seek a balance. Ms. Burnett said staff has visited places like this and we do not want the harsh edges. Item B -3 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP AUGUST 12, 2015 j?�kNcHo Page 4 CUQkN N. Commissioner Oaxaca asked about the balance between residential and small retail and a smaller employment balance. Mr. Sargent said this development is not high on the employment scale. He said if it is made alluring, small companies may want to be there. it will be more about creating a place rather than location with respect to trade. Commissioner Macias said it was an excellent presentation and offered congratulations to the team. He said he had no problems with the concepts and concurred with everything presented, however, there are lots of players and as time goes on it will get more complex. He said he would want to see how this will be financially sustainable and how the phasing works, and what the strategies are for phasing. He said he wants it to be multi-modal and hopes to see an emphasis on active transportation, recreation, and public health. He noted that his family uses the trails every day and they add value and character to the community. Mr. Baucke of Sargent Town Planning said this is a long-term project and the team still needs to evaluate the infrastructure component in terms of phasing and costs. The team has market data but they need to find the correct balance of uses to make the project feasible. He said there are choices on financing mechanisms that will also need to be evaluated. I Commissioner Munoz said this is exciting, he likes the new concept, and he likes the central village and mixed-use idea and the safety of the defensible space. He asked that the team makes sure there is integration with the community and that sufficient outreach is conducted. Chairman Wimberly said this reflects remarkable vision. He appreciates the connectivity with other neighborhoods and the balance of the center with the rest of Rancho. He noted that we are considering active transportation and multi-modal circulation in the rest of the City and the team needs to make sure this project connects with other transportation corridors in the area. Mr. Sargent said the project site is close to Chaffey College and offers that opportunity. it is an accessible distance and there may also be an opportunity to create transit connections between the college and the project. Commissioner Fletcher noted that entertainment, restaurants, and hangouts are a good idea, but there is not much retail up the hill. He stated it would be very important to have retail neighborhood services in the project. He suggested the team look at the Winery Estates center as a good example of a project that turned out nice. Item B —4 I PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP AUGUST 12, 2015 l RANCHO Page 5 I UCAMONGA i IV. ADJOURNMENT I 5:05PM. i i i 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 6, 2015,at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, 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 prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. I INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC I 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. i If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may.do so under"Public Comments." . Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for I distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. I 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 Item B —5 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP AUGUST 12, 2015 (,_knxcHv Page 6 Cov 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 to the City Councl within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to-the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,486 for all 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, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us Item B -6 STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICE)DEP_kRT-IENT Date: September 9, 2015 RANCHO To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA From: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer By: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer Subject: VACATION OF A PORTION OF HELLMAN AVENUE LOCATED SOUTH OF FERON BOULEVARD (V-228) — ERIN MADISON INC — A request to vacate a portion of Hellman Avenue, located south of Feron Boulevard - APN 209-032-57 Related File: DRC2014-00745 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action that the proposed vacation is in conformance with the General Plan. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS DRC2014-00745 was approved by the Planning Commission on April 22, 2015 for a development of an industrial building, located at the southeast corner of Hellman Avenue and Feron Boulevard. One of the conditions of approval of the project is to vacate an excess portion of Hellman Avenue. Based on the Circulation Plan under the 1981 General Plan, Hellman Avenue, from Foothill Boulevard to 4th Street, was classified as an Arterial Street. An easement for streets, highways and related purposes was offered as a street dedication in 1989. Based on the General Plan update in 2010, Hellman Avenue, from 9th Street to 4th Street, was re-classified as a collector street. Said right-of-way that was previously offered as a street dedication in 1989 is now an excess right-of-way. Once vacated, said excess right-of-way will be part of DRC2014-00745 development. Utility companies, other agencies and various City divisions have been notified of the proposed vacation and were asked for comments. There were no objections to the vacation from any of the groups notified. The vacation is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code because said excess right-of-way is not required for street, highways and related purposes anymore and therefore will be part of DRC2014-00745 parcel. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer Attachments: Vicinity Map Legal Description (Exhibit "A") Plat (Exhibit "B") Item C —1 I. u . ... - i. - - . . � Jersey-Blvd------., r f ' t u?, F i . Y:13ar PROJECT # E y �r <!!. .i s ; I w Feron B'lv`d VICINITY MAP @2015GolW .+ SEC R Imagery Date: 4/27/2014 34005'40.62" N 117 .;5'57:27." BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 7 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, WHICH IS ALSO THE INTERSECTION OF THE CENTERLINE OF HELLMAN AVENUE AND THE CENTERLINE OF THE A.T. AND S.F. RAILROAD; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF HELLMAN AVENUE, WHICH IS ALSO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER, NORTH 00°03'41" WEST 220.51 FEET ; THENCE SOUTH 89043'45" EAST 23.00 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE BEING 7.00 FEET WESTERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE STREET DEDICATION PER DOCUMENT RECORDED AUGUST 21, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 89-305229, OFFICIAL RECORDS, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, NORTH 00003'41" WEST 187.87 FEET; THENCE NORTH 45006'30" EAST 22.69 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT—OF—WAY OF FERON BOULEVARD (MAIN ST.) (33 FEET WIDE) PER SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 89-305229; O.R.; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID EXTENSION, SOUTH 89°43'45" EAST 29.05 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 24.00 FEET, SAID CURVE ALSO BEING THE EXISTING RIGHT—OF—WAY PER SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 89-305229, O.R.; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 37.84 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90°19'56"; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT—OF—WAY OF HELLMAN AVENUE (44 FEET WIDE), SOUTH 00003'41" EAST 179.82 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUT'H'ERLY LINE OF SAID INSTRUMENT NO. 89-305229, O.R.; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, NORTH 89043'45" WEST 21.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINS: 4,279 SQ. F.T — 0.098 ACRES AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. �D�AL LAND O No. 7914 Exp. 12-31-15 Q �91F OF C ALDEN & EXHIBIT "A" SSOCIATES LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR STREET VACATION HELLMAN-FERON INDUSTRIAL PARK CIVIL ENGINEERS-LAND SURVEYORS-PLANNERS 9325 FERON BOULEVARD 2552 WHITE ROAD,SUITE B •IIRVINE,CA 9261.4-6236ANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA (949)660-0110 FAX: 660-0418 W.O.WONo.1786-480-001 Date 04/23/2015 Enar.B.i.w. Chk'd. JX Sheet 1 of 1 Item C -3 I I ! _ FE_RON BOULEVARD —I WESTERLY LINE STREET DEDICATION RECORDED AUGUST 21, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 89-305229, O.R. N 89043'45' W 174.41' 1 T 145.36' 1 I i I EXISTING R/W w¢ IR oN N30.00' 11 w � 23.00' 121.00 AREA OF m WB:: VACATION ~ z a n 7.00' wEr � i Z ¢ o n : w to a- PORTION Or SW 1/4, SE 1/4, zo m Z z co SEC. 10, T 1 S, R 7 W, o � r--: co SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN z J Z � I _ Lu o I=- I Mo I oo CO o0 ZI o I Z w ro QI o� J I Z W fn Z J =) o co q J I EXISTING R/W < < N LLILu = > ¢ , J 23.00' 21.00 7.00' I � U I�_L2_! 211.00' !— 169.50' — N 89043'45" W 190.50' TRUE POINT o OF BEGINNING p�NL LAND I � �C,5 POINT OF Qz o �� COMMENCEMENT No. 7914 s 40 20 0 40 j SOUTH 1/4 COR., Exp. 12-31-15 �Z SEC. 10, T1 S, R7W r F OF CAF� SCALE IN FEET A.T. & S.F. RAILROAD 1 inch =40 ft. EXHIBIT "B" kDEN & SKETCH FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF STREET VACATION SOCIATES HELLMAN-FERON INDUSTRIAL PARK 9325 FERON BOULEVARD CIVIL ENGINEERS-LAND SURVEYORS-PLANTNERS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 2552 WHITE ROAD,SUITE B •IRVINE,CA 92614-6236 W.O.No.1786-480-001 Date 04/23/2015 (949)660-0110 FAX: 660-0418 Engr.B.J.W. Chk'd. J.W. Sheet 1 of 1 Item C—4 STAFF REPORT CITY%­L-1NAGER'S OFFICE RANCHO Date: September 9, 2015 C;UCAMONGA To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Fabian Villenas, Principal Management Analyst Subject: CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 15-66 EXPRESSING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S SUPPORT OF MEASURE A, THE WEST-SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND STREET LIGHTING MEASURE, TO BE ON THE NOVEMBER 3, 2015 ELECTION BALLOT. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider adopting Resolution No. 15-66 expressing their support for Measure A, the West-Side Neighborhood Parks and Street Lighting Facilities District ballot measure, on the November 3, 2015 ballot. BACKGROUND Over the last 18 months, the City has engaged in an extensive effort of analysis and public information regarding the need to address funding issues in our West-side parks and street lighting districts. More than 3,500 residents were involved during this period through informational meetings, surveys, and presentations. Results from the third- party surveys indicate that west-side Rancho Cucamonga residents value safe, walkable neighborhoods with well-lit streets and clean, well maintained parks. Even with cost saving efforts over the last 2 years, existing funding is inadequate for what is needed to maintain west-side neighborhood parks and street lighting. On March 4, 2015, the City Council directed the formation of a new West-Side Parks and Street Lighting Community Facilities District to fund neighborhood parks, street lights, and landscaping in that area. At its July 1, 2015 meeting following public testimony, the City Council approved the placement of the ballot measure on the November 3, 2015 election ballot. If approved by voters, this new District would completely dissolve certain existing West-Side Districts and replace them with a single District with uniform rates. The existing LMD/SLD assessments would be eliminated, and a special tax would be levied annually against the private residential and non-residential properties that are located within the boundaries. Rates in the new district would be $89.00 per single family unit; $44.50 per residential unit for seniors 65 years of age or older; and $712.00 per acre for non-residential parcels. Studies have shown that maintaining well-lit streets and parks helps deter crime such as car thefts and vandalism, and discourages behavior such as loitering, graffiti, and littering. If approved, the new district would maintain: • Clean, maintained parks • Safe playgrounds • Graffiti removal • Park lighting • Trash cleanup • Well-maintained street lights Item D —1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT September 9, 2015 Page 2 The new measure would require that all revenues be deposited into a separate fund that, by law, can only be spent on maintaining our local neighborhood parks, street lighting, and landscaping. • Annual independent audits and review by a Citizens' Oversight Committee would also be required. The attached resolution expresses the Planning Commission's support for Measure A scheduled to be on the November 3, 2015 election ballot. CONCLUSION It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider adopting Resolution No. 15-66 expressing their support for Measure A, the West-Side Neighborhood Parks and Street Lighting Facilities District ballot measure. ` Respectfully Submitted, \ Fabian Villenas Principal Management Analyst Attachment— Resolution of Support of Measure A Item D —2 RESOLUTION NO. 15-66 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING THEIR SUPPORT OF MEASURE A ESTABLISHING THE WEST-SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND STREET LIGHTING FACILITIES DISTRICT TO BE ON THE NOVEMBER 3, 2015 ELECTION BALLOT. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga receives only five cents for every one dollar collected in property taxes; and WHEREAS, the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 allows for the formation of community facilities districts as a means of financing certain improvements such as parks, playgrounds, landscape areas, sidewalks, trees, amongst others; and WHEREAS, since its incorporation, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has utilized community facilities districts as a way to pay for necessary landscaping and lighting maintenance for new and existing development in the City; and WHEREAS, the west-side of Rancho Cucamonga currently has a number of landscape maintenance districts, PDA 85, LMDs 1, 3a, 3b, and 5 and SLD's 2 and 6, that maintain neighborhood amenities including 8 parks and more than 6,000 street lights; and WHEREAS, keeping parks, trails, and greenery well maintained and streets well-lit has a positive impact on a neighborhood's quality of life, maintaining property values, and deterring crime such as car thefts, burglaries, graffiti, and vandalism; and WHEREAS, in 1996, California voters passed Proposition 218, the "Right to Vote Act," which requires local government to have a vote of the affected property owners for any proposed new or increased assessment before it could be levied; and WHEREAS, the assessments for the landscape and street lighting districts on the west-side of Rancho Cucamonga have not had a rate increase since 1993 and consequently, are insufficient for the continued upkeep of neighborhood parks, landscaping, and street lighting; and WHEREAS, over the last eighteen months, residents have joined in a community conversation about maintaining local street lighting and parks, in which more than 3,500 residents provided feedback on community priorities; and WHEREAS, at its July 1, 2015 meeting, the Rancho Cucamonga City Council unanimously voted to place a West-Side Neighborhood Parks and Street Lighting District measure on the November 3, 2015 ballot; and WHEREAS, Measure A, the West-Side Neighborhood Parks and Street Lighting District measure, replaces the existing assessment districts and would ensure clean, maintained parks, safe playgrounds, graffiti removal, park lighting, trash cleanup and well-maintained street lights; and WHEREAS, Measure A will ensure fiscal accountability by requiring that all revenues be deposited into a separate fund that, by law, will only be spent on maintaining local neighborhood parks, street lighting, greenery, and trails, and would also require a Citizen's Oversight Committee to confirm funds are appropriately spent; and Item D —3 WHEREAS, MeasureA will offer a 50 percent discount for property owners age 65 and older. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, that the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission expresses support for Measure A to be on the November 3, 2015 election ballot. Item D —4 1 f SL J� ., Oakmont Senior Living - � "� Assisted Living -� ��. Memory Car-e i a Oakmont 3 Senior Living; Oakmont Senior Living • Based in Windsor, CA ( near Santa Rosa ) • Founded in 1989 by Bill and Cindy Gallaher • Oakmont Management Co . founded in 2011 • Have developed 40+ senior living communities • Currently manage 17 communities-all in California • Closest communities-San Antonio Heights, Palm Desert, Chino Hills, Brea, Whittier • Associates- 1350 r A d M1 •r 4 m 5wnr �- Lo t s� a ,i OY { r r I 3 • r �,r,, �„ :�-` ,vet, m"'•� : , +. , � • v � . ._.. ±y y�. I t � g� 1 ■ -14 _., v,_ _- ''� - '�,�,� ►+fir" ' 71- Fie Y�a 5 'ti # �r 4a4. y ' k \ V _' -] � 1 �1 [ � �`h..T'e_ -FA.. �Y Yom. . �q � _ �1�� ... �` _ . .Y. � .. � ' - a ' - � e � i ;. � :.-_ _.. fes_ s�a'� ,,.-'r:'�""�+1 R'�_ � 1: '� �-. '� ri .� �, � . _ .. � ,. � _ � F ..� � _ T KMS' �-.�..7. P" . � r �_^"a. '.4 ate- � � ., s .. ,' . - _ - .._ ec;:, �� ,� � K fs `'�?� tom'- r � 'f-� �•''�j �� r,� ..y c� . . .. , . _ � k is 5�� 1 —.-� ,� ._ �o- �•. I, ice" u�_ _J. c . �. _ _ 1 — � �: w � p _ t f° ._ ,� ,. v ... ��-F. ^, •• a' Y" e a � A a x ,. .._ ,' ■ • ' i 1 F '- 1 � Vp F 6 zv !ji�,t ' s y fE #+A.r t 1 3 f }j k I b -7 A t r ry 7a�m�i II wt Ila ; f �I46� f a w r , y - 4; f I. Y k• w ' 9w S z � i - •fi y 1l i s� NY ( � � . . , � . , - : 'IV Fir _-_ 00, A 1 J fi » 1 l i I. s _. WOW— F � Jk now __. . . y._ \\ � £ � � _ , � . _ \/ . a� \�� > - \ \ \\3 \> \~ _ » ^ . � - � ., . _. �..� .... « © } Senior Housing Property Types • Active Adult Communities For-sale single family homes, townhouses, cluster homes, mobile homes and condominiums restricted to adults 55 and older with no specialized services. Not equipped to provide increased care as individual ages. Residents generally lead independent lifestyles. May include recreational amenities such as a clubhouse or golf course and a homeowner's association or condo fee. • Senior Apartments Multifamily residential rental properties restricted to adults at least 55 years of age. Properties don't have a central kitchen and generally don't provide meals, but may offer community rooms, social activities and other amenities. • Independent Living Age-restricted multifamily rental properties with central dining facilities that provide residents, as part of their monthly fees, access to meals and such services as housekeeping, linens, transportation and recreational activities. Such properties do not generally provide assistance with activities of daily living such as medication supervision, bathing, dressing and toileting. The term "congregate care," once used to describe these properties, has been dropped. • Assisted Living State-regulated rental properties that provide the same services as independent living, but also provide, in a majority of units, supportive care by trained employees for residents who are unable to live independently and who require assistance with normal daily activities. An assisted living property may have some nursing beds and a wing specializing in care for illnesses such as Alzheimer's, but it still should be considered as assisted living if is not a licensed nursing facility. • Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs) Age-restricted properties that include a combination of independent living, assisted living and skilled nursing services available to residents all on one campus, based on need. For example, residents may be transferred from independent living to assisted living if the need arises. Payment plans vary and include entrance fees, condo fees and rental programs. The majority of the units do not offer licensed skilled nursing. • Nursing Homes Licensed daily-rate or rental properties that are technically referred to as skilled nursing facilities where the majority of individuals require 24-hour nursing or medical care. In most cases these properties are licensed for Medicaid or Medicare reimbursement. They may also include a minority of assisted-living units, such as for Alzheimer's patients. d' Oakmont Senior Living , Amenities • Restaurant Style Dining • Private Family Dining Room • Bistro • Library • Movie Theatre • Fitness Center • Salon and Day Spa • Resident Gardens & Walking Paths • Pet Park • Activity and Craft Rooms • Wellness Center Oakmont Senior Living a-9 ---A Services Provided • Dining- 3 daily meals + beverages & snacks • Housekeeping, Laundry, Linens • Chauffeured Transportation • 24 hour Emergency Response • Wellness and Personal Care, Medication Management • Utilities Included • Exercise Programs • Musical Performances, Lectures • Full Social and Activity calendar • Religious Services Oakmont Senior Living Proposed project Site- 3 . 36 Acres; 146, 360 SF Building Area - 82, 661 SF; 38% common area Building Height- 2 Stories; 28 feet Units- 81, Beds- 90- 100 58 AL- 26 studio; 25 1BD; 7 2BD — 455 to 1391 SF 23 MC- 23 studio- 376 to 534 SF Licensing- RCFE, Calif. Dept . of Social Services Construction Type-VA, fully sprinklered Occupancy Groups- R2 . 1, A-21 A-31 B Y.�F Oakmont Senior Living , Rancho Cucamonga -Site P an j 1-71 I T � Y I �- oe- I � I � - -- - - - HAVEN AVENUE lint Oakmont ,inior Living Rancho Cucamonga - Proposed Exterior �a < 4 4 _ [ 777T�- 71 n i`+z2'.S'. `r { ` • 6'"'e' _'�.�� �,� * s �¢;°�a. i � N,..a' � .. K'it,-.wi i1y:..ss� .Rha4w➢3V-•++i,.54 � � �' 3 � f " Update on West-Side Parks and Street Lighting Measure A Summer/Fall 2015 Y µ A YY y it Rk cHo The Issue for West Side Neighborhoods • The City's West Side enjoys quality neighborhoods, with 10 - parks, 6,000 residential street ; . Y lights, trails, and landscaping. w • Existing funding is inadequate for what we need to maintain • neighborhood street lighting and `Y parks. ` • Continued upkeep of street lights and parks strengthens property values. Rl WEST-SIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT BOUNDARIES N > ¢ > y > Q a Q d > ¢ G C IC N Q Q N d m a > E E r � � u m U 2 Q 2 = W W r � 1 Q Hillside 1 1 1 Wilson Ave Heritage CGnnmunity Park s ."—. U 1 Banyan St — -- Beryl Park West _ i SR-210 19th St Beryl Park East Ir i Hermosa Park - Base Line Rtl Lions Park _ Base Line Rd Church Street Park i' � Red Hill Community Park — 1 Foothill Blvd �:Foothill Blvd Arrow Rte 1 Arrow Rte Bear Gulch Park 8th St � > °' LGoldien n Park Q> -x m a 6th St > o `m > Park � cN j 4th St ANCHO R Ensuring Safe , Well-Lit Streets • Maintaining street lighting assists in keeping the City's neighborhood streets safe. • Help deter crime such as car thefts, graffiti and vandalism • Improve traffic safety so that drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists can see better and be safer • Support rapid emergency response allowing sheriffs and firefighters to quickly locate a resident's home in an emergency WNcl10 G IC;1MO M-11 Maintaining Local Parks • Parks are community To keep parks well-maintained , we spaces for families and need to continue to ensure that: residents to enjoy • Park bathrooms are clean and open • Playgrounds are safe • Trash is picked up • Graffiti is removed N RANCHO - ' CITCAMONGA Community Input Process • Over the last 18 months, residents on the City's West, { Side have joined in a "A community conversation i IL • Worked to understand *_ community priorities • Explored potential solutions for maintaining streetid - lighting and parks -7"1 . RANCHO .. C UCAMON04, What We Heard - Top Community Priorities • Cleaning and maintaining park restrooms • Removing graffiti from park buildings, street lights and along trails • Maintaining street lighting for safety • Maintaining parks, and playground equipment ` g • Cleaning up trash Additionally, any funding solution will need . . to include strict accountability measures. `tet RANCHO CU AMONGA Prudent Fiscal Management to Reduce Existing Costs • To balance district budgets and be fiscally responsible, the City has instituted a series of cost-cutting measures: • Reducing staff .1 • Bidding out contracts • Updating park rental fees ' • Being more water efficient, particularly ------- necessary during drought conditions d • Partnering with sports groups to maintain West Side sports facilities • Partnering with equestrian group to maintain • equestrian facility • Temporarily draining Red Hill Lake to install more efficient maintenance systems RANCHO ACITCAMONGA What would Measure A do? • Provide sufficient funding to maintain street lights, parks, landscaping and trails in a safe, clean , operational condition • Replace the existing system of overlapping assessments, where some people pay more than others, with a new West-side District • Proposed rates: • $89 per household , per year (an increase of less than $ 5 per month for most households) • $44 . 50 per household , per year for seniors age 65+ ( 50% discount) LZ fidd Ct't:ata titin. Fiscal Accountability and Oversight • All Measure A revenues would be " + . required to be deposited into a separate fund . • By law, funds could only be spent to maintain or improve local street " lighting,g g, parks, and trails. • Annual independent audits and a _ Citizens' Oversight Committee would monitor expenditures ".000,- RANCHO Rate Calculator Wesl-side Parks and Street Lighting district i + 9588 WILSON AVE Q 9588 WILSON AVE ❑ 1061-581-01-0000 14 Current Districts : $ 31.00 New District: $ 89.00 New District w/ Senior Discount (if qualified) : $ 44.50 Return to Proposed West-Side Parks and Liahtina District Pape Q ." RM RANCHO L xN� CUCAMONGA Measure A is on the November 3 Ballot • Measure A, West-Side Parks and Street Lighting measure will be on the November 3rd ballot for voters to decide • Register to vote! Register online or visit City Hall or your local library .I i �tl LF I I{ 4 M '7 �.' � _ � ��►. ms's . _ t :- _., a r..;.... c �.A\L HU Learn more about Measure A. . . • Consider hosting an informational meeting - with neighbors, sports group, book club , etc. • Go to www. cityofrc. us/districts to sign up for email updates and see more information • Text DISTRICTS to 22828 from your mobile phone to sign up to receive email updates Questions ? Contact Ernie Ruiz, Public Works Maintenance Superintendent at (909) 477-2730 or email westsideparks@cityofrc. us. VO RANCHO CUCAMONGA WNCHO CUC"TONGA CALIFORNIA Oakmont of Rancho Cucamonga Pre-Application Review DRC2015-00466 Planning Commission Workshop September 9 , 2015 z r rPre-Application Review DRC2015-00466 R .�NCHo Residential Care Facility CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA The applicant is proposing a residential care facility at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street. The proposal includes : • A 82,661 square foot, two-story building on a 3.34 acre lot • 81 units (studio, one bedroom and two bedroom) • Services offered include assisted living and memory care • 56 parking spaces ( 12 of which are carports) • Amenities- dining room , fitness center, beauty salon, wellness center, transportation, courtyard , garden and pet park. Project Location UC.IAMONGA ♦Ar *♦Eg�`l toil��..�'!},Af {'l�AT�_/i141,4CA ., F E ice: ,sem i" J I - , m R a-� • t t . V 1 WOW Ja YI Y I — a 6 y � r r rj Lj Jr � 6 1 • NEO6E -- `-xIST.IM�EP6FOJW MST. FMZ vFILiRAnCN ST5lEM WPLl5TEW .. ...�_w N. O ...-.....�.�N I xGTINb _ _ 3 SLLPE �"JW�Yr GRLNPAD GffF5 � �y ���� n FIFE FET 150' f I vAR2 a �A� I CARE CENTER �' o sTOFrvFAIN � - EnsEtroa 61 v I f I. FIFE ,. b Vie,IN — _s--- � r e s t iL a Is,l sLGPE Is.l SLOPE o 4 m Isd SLOPE n ' Exlsnw '� NYLRNVT E%ISTIN`v F➢AJVE Ti'OF FgILl135 EXIS RNLIN6 LIEN I. MOwFENT SIGN ILA\'EN ;U ENLE I North West Elevations R • �,� �__ li��:ili��.i. .il_-.11 __.- . :�i■_ � 11 IIIA-. .-1_-..:i � iiuu mm xnn w-x uim •-iuu Mni.ii m i x4 nnn mxx a m...�.~ p� CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA r}flsq�..,.lw...-..a.ar. ...tr.....wfJ..�,.nai...-..M'r�m��Snow3Gc�....saoa...»...✓ar����wlffiiR oil` iii;;�u : -- PMEW=- G: m -- iii;;ui �TTT TTS 4rT� Tlf�_I�T� I�l�l�� �I� L RANCHO South and East Elevations CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA L� -m �� muuw iii uu.� mmuu �� .�I� mnn n nuuun unn nnn mm■ �_ ��10. 1w"a Im II ■ii■ Lim r-� III�IIIIII�III IIPIII ; PAW, d • • 1 _■ � elmL■ 1�m- : �- i I� ma JOE ® � _ - ■ 1 `ifsMIA ., ,® Will �'� � 1 1 IlI�� 1 ISI f■1 ._r� u�l 1 I ml I • • • • � , .■ � - - �■��il II- . .�.. - 1 1 1 1 1 1 • __ �� �� . ■ � . SII _... � � ice'II . �� I ..,. ., — — — — ■ �� ,,.,. .,- -- -� 1 �. 1 �li� _ 1 � �@I� �� 1 — � �i=1 ���I� i!�:� '� _I �� � '�!II ■� �Clf n _� �II�' �' �I��� '��� i���� �a ;_ I, � ' I� � �i �, � -_• V �r—� �Ih� II�1 � � Illla �=1 i��ll� ■ J ,SII � �i„�: II �r:�a! I��I� i � � SSI !, � _ _ 1 _ I .. �_ _ - ---� ' I � f o W —� __ �-- �—=11 ��, F e - ..: �t_ C770WReccommendations RANCHO UC:AMONGA CAiIFOttlVltl 1 . Land Use Residential properties surround subject property. — Property is in mixed use zoning district. R — Staff supports this type of use in this area. 2 . Architectural Design — Create a building design that is architecturally compatible with surrounding residential homes and a building design that has a "residential" feel instead of appearing to be an institution. — Add building elements/features that provide aesthetic focal points, decorative stone veneer on the fapade of the elevations and other design features. 3. Parking — Require a parking study to ensure that the surrounding properties are not impacted by an insufficient amount of parking stalls.