Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-04-24 Agenda Packet - PC-HPCY'\r [NI L. L-r j L V 1 r/ HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A. 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairman Guglielmo Vice Chairman Wimberly Commissioner Dopp Commissioner Munoz Commissioner Oaxaca B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The 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 individual 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. C. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non -controversial. They will be acted upon by the Commission at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed for discussion. C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of April 10, 2019 Page 1 of 5 f-%V rwI1- 4.-ry A+V 1 V HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA D. DIRECTOR'S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chairman may open the meeting for public input. D1. DIRECTORS REPORT OF THE CITY'S 6-MONTH REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2018-00471 - GOLDEN PROPERTY LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC - at an existing restaurant located within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay located at 11560 4th Street; APN: 0229-411-04. D2. STATUS UPDATE ON THE PREPARATION OF DRC2015-00751 -- ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION PLAN (EHNCP) - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A Planning Commission update and review of the Specific Plan for the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan generally described as approximately 4,388 acres (including 4,088 acres to be annexed into the City), which proposes to maintain the northerly 3,176 acres as a "conservation area" with limited rural development, and to allow development in the southerly 1,212 acre "neighborhood area" with land uses to include conservation, residential, commercial, and civic for a project area extending from Haven Avenue, easterly to the City's boundary with Fontana, and from the northerly City limits to the San Bernardino National Forest boundary in the City's Sphere-of- Influence--APN's: 0201-033-32, -35 through -40, -43, and -44, 0201-191-27 and -28, 0201- 272-14 through -18, 0201-281-02, -04 through -10, -13, -14, -16 through -22, 0225-091-03, - 05, and -06, 225-092-01, 0225-101-32, 0225-152-06 through -11, and -17, 0225-161-42, 0226-061-03, -07, -16, -20, -26, -27, -28, -33, -47, -56, -57, -61 through -71, -73 through -78, 0226-082-08, -19, -20, -21, and -30, 1074-351-01, -04, -05, and -06, 1087-051-02 through - 14, -16 through -27, 1087-061-01 through -21, and 1087-071-01 through -14, and -16 through -21. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00749, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2015-00752, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00750, Municipal Code Amendment DRC2019-00288, and Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan Annexation DRC2015-00732. Page 2of5 /-Ar [%I L. Km-ri f. v 11/ HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA E. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after speaking. E1. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018-00605, Planned Community Amendment DRC2019-00232, Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230 -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend Title 17 of the Municipal Code, the Victoria Community Plan, the Town Square Master Plan, the Victoria Arbors Master Plan, the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan to amend requirements and standards for the development of Hotels. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. CONTINUED FROM APRIL 10, 2019. F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES: COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS; G. ADJOURNMENT I, Valerie Victorino, Executive Assistant of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 18, 2019 seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10600 Civic Center Drive. Page 3 of 5 /"►rf%IL L.—ri LL/ ICI HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 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. 11 111 11010 1 If] I;W;a 11.11 Alit -I 4 h TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments," There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. 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. Page 4 of 5 r\r !\IL f=Zi fLV I %# HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER AGENDA COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 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 $3,037 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.CltvofRC.us. Page 5 of 5 Vicinity Map Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting April 24, 2019 r••— 1 '_••'�0 rl a► � ai E = t 1 U Q 2 c. 1 � I Base Line Church Foothill Arrow c d Je 8th s— N N C7 6th } OF Base Line Church = Foothill N Arrow Ica � 3 j LLi j 6t h umj � 4th D1 >+r Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers "- 10500 Civic Center Drive Item D1: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2018-00471 Item D2: ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION PLAN (EHNCP) DRC2015-00751 Item E1: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018-00605 APRIL 10, 2019 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10600 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA A. 7:00 P.M. --- CALL TO ORDER 7:02pm Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairman Guglielmo X_ Vice Chairman Wimberly X Commissioner Dopp X� Commissioner Munoz X Commissioner Oaxaca _X� Additional Staff Present; Candyce Burnett, City Planner; Nick Ghirelli.. Assistant City Attorney; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner; Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer; Valerie Victorino, Executive Assistant; Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Vince Acuna, Associate Planner; Perry Banner, Contract Planner, I B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS I This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The 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 individual 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. Gwyn Frost and Luana Hernandez spoke to the Historical Preservation Commission to note all of the historical landmarks within each of the Council Districts. District 3 this evening included the following landmarks: Chaffey Garcia House, Chaffey Isle House and the Regina Winery including the Canyon Page 1 of 14 Cl— Pg1 r\r t%1LL I V) LV 1 J HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Live Oak tree that 2 weeks ago came down (off Fire Court north of Base Line Road). Asked for a dedicated landmark plaque for the tree to commemorate it. Don Cape with Theraldson Hospitality expressed gratitude to staff that he has worked with for 4 years. He stated that he is interested in Item D11 that will be discussed later in the meeting Rich Carlson with Intercontinental Hotel Group and IHG Group. Spoke regarding Item D11 that will be discussed later in the meeting on extended stay hotels. Brandon Fiegner with CBRE Hotels spoke regarding demand for hotels 1n the area. The demand for extended stay hotels is the strongest ever, especially in this area. Closed ublic communications. C. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non -controversial. They will be acted upon by the Commission at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed for discussion. C1. Consideration to adopt the Regular Meeting Minutes of March 27, 2019. Five minor changes noted by Executive Assistant Victorino Two changes on page 3 and one change on page 5 (copy on Me) - Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca: carried 5-0-0 to adopt the minutes as amended. D. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after speaking. Page 2 of 14 C1— Pg2 ■ •s ■ww� ■ rI ^— . HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Items D1, D2, D3 and D4 were taken simultaneously. D1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00326 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A request to demolish an existing metal industrial building of approximately 13,000 square feet in conjunction with a request for site plan and architectural review to construct a 58,130 square foot industrial office, manufacturing and warehouse building on 2.76 acres of land within the Industrial Park (IP) District located at 10234 4th Street; APN: 0210-371-01. Related Files: Variance DRC2018-00760, Minor Exception DRC2018-00761 and Minor Exception DRC2018-00762. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2018-00760 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A request to reduce the required amount of truck trailer stall parking from 4 stalls to 1 stall related to a proposed project consisting a 58,130 square foot industrial office, manufacturing and warehouse building on 2.76 acres of land within the Industrial Park (IP) District located at 10234 4th Street; APN: 0210-371-01. Related Files: Design Review DRC2018-00326, Minor Exception DRC2018-00761 and Minor Exception DRC2018-00762. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D3. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2018-00761 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A request to reduce the required amount of vehicle parking from 96 parking stalls to 74 parking stalls related to a proposed project consisting a 58,130 square foot industrial office, manufacturing and warehouse building on 2.76 acres of land within the Industrial Park (IP) District at 10234 4th Street; APN: 0210-371-01. Related Files: Design Review DRC2018-00326, Variance DRC2018-00760 and Minor Exception DRC2018-00762. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2018-00762 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES — A request to reduce the required minimum 5 foot side yard building setback to 4 feet 6 inches related to a proposed project consisting a 58,130 square foot industrial office, manufacturing and warehouse building on 2.76 acres of land within the Industrial Park (IP) District at 10234 4th Street; APN: 0210-371-01. Related Files: Design Review DRC2018-00326, Variance DRC2018-00760 and Minor Exception DRC2018-00761. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Page 3 of 14 Cl— Pg3 I"11-F%IL I v9 6v I J HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Mike Smith, Senior Planner_ gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file)_ After questions on access from the Commissioners, Applicant Chuck Buquet spoke regarding this in -fill project that had an old building on it and said that there were many moving parts to this project. He stated that 5 Star Foods is now relocating its headquarters to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The applicant has ensured there will be enough room for both parking and moving trucks as necessary. He thanked staff for their great job even with several changes of staff. Mr. Smith noted that there was one change on the trash enclosure in the Standard Conditions (#18) and that correction has been provided to the Commission on the dais and the applicant is aware of and agrees to the correction. Chairman Guglielmo reopened the public hearing as this was continued from the March 27, 2019 meeting. Hearing no public comment, Chairman Guglielmo closed the public hearing. The Commissioners thanked staff and liked the design including the decorative arch Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Oaxaca; carried 5-0-0. D5. TIME EXTENSION DRC2018-01015 - WSI HIGHLAND INVESTMENTS, LLC - A request for a 1- year time extension for previously approved Tentative Tract Map SUBTT14749 to subdivide 168.77 acres into 269 residential lots located in the Low (L) Residential District and Flood Control (FC) District within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, at the northeast corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Etiwanda Avenue -APNs: 1087-081-04 through -11 and -14. Related files: Annexation DRC2003-01051, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003- 00409, General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00410 and Development Agreement DRC2003-00411. Staff finds the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report certified by City Council in June 21, 2004 (State Clearinghouse #2003081085) by Resolution 04-240 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report. Page 4 of 14 C1— Pg4 n1 1\11- 1 v' s.V I V HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Mike Smith, Senior Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Commissioner Oaxaca asked if regulatory framework requires the Commission to approve tonight or if it was discretionary. Attorney Nick Ghirelli noted that it is discretionary and explained the legal extensions. John Shafer, representing the applicant, thanked staff. Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing, and hearing none, closed. Commissioner Munoz noted it was a fairly routine extension with the chart on page 5 being explanatory with Vice Chairman Wimberly concurring_ Commissioner Oaxaca stated that it is a project that has been on the books for 15 years and it might be time to look at the project differently with land use expectations in the city. Commissioner Dopp agreed and wants to look more deeply in the future for these type of extensions_ Commissioner Munoz stated that they can look at it in the future more critically in the next year but that it warranted legal extensions at this time, Chairman Guglielmo clarified that one more extension would make this the 4" extension and that it could be reviewed in the future. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly; carried 4-1-0. Oaxaca opposed. D6. TIME EXTENSION DRC2018-00966 — YOULiTA AND KIRYAKOS, LLC - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT18823) to subdivide 3 parcels of land totaling 12.93 acres into 19 lots for the future development of single-family residences in the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (.1 to 2 dwelling units per acre) located on the west side of Wardman Bullock Road, south and east of Blue Sky Court - APN: 0226-081-15, 16 and 17. Related files Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18823, Variance DRC2012-00135, and Minor Exception DRC2012-00513. On January 23, 2013, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental Impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map Page 5 of 14 Cl— Pg5 1-%9-1%1L 1 vI L.V I W HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA SUBTT18823_ California Environmental Quality Act Section 15162 provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to the project within the scope of the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. Tabe vanderZwaag, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file), Commissioner Dopp asked about the 2 houses that are currently on the property. Mr. vanderZwaag noted that the houses would need to have a determination whether they can be sold or not when the project is submitted. The applicant is working with Community Improvement as the houses have issues at this time_ Applicant Carlos Cueva stated he is meeting with the Engineering Department foradditional biologicals to be completed. He will be working with the Building Department in the near future regarding the houses on the property Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing, and hearing none, closed. Commissioner Munoz was in favor of the time extension and Vice Chairman Wimberly concurred. Commissioner Oaxaca stated that since there is visible progress on moving forward with a project, he had no issues. Commissioner Dopp and Chairman Guglielmo concurred. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca; carried 5-0-0. items D7 and D8 were taken simultaneously 07. DESIGN REVIEW MODIFICATION DRC2018-00902 — DOUGLAS PANCAKE ARCHITECTS FOR COYNE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request for a site plan and architectural modification for a previously approved Residential Care Facility to accommodate a change in the number of units from 92 to 97, within the Mixed Use (MU) District, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street; APN: 1077- 881-13. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2018-00901. The project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA section 15332 — In -Fill Development Projects. Page 6 of 14 C1— Pg6 r1 I I\ I L ■ v' LL V I V HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA D8. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2018-00901 — DOUGLAS PANCAKE ARCHITECTS FOR COYNE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - A request to modify the number of units on a previously approved Residential Care Facility from 92 to 97 units within the Mixed Use (MU) District, located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street; APN: 1077-881-13. Related Files: Design Review Modification DRC2018-00902. The project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA section 15332 -- In -Fill Development Projects. Vince Acuna, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Chairman Guglielmo asked what the reason for the design change was since they had such a recent project approval. Mr Acuna stated that it was due to the increase from 92 to 97 units_ Applicant Doug Pancake stated that the project had a recent approval but due to fine tuning by the future operator, there was an adjustment to add additional units and to become a more efficient project. Generous parking that exceeds the city standards would still be provided. Vice Chairman Wimberly noted that the major concems raised in Design Review meeting was the lighting next to the neighborhoods_ Mr. Pancake stated that there would be no changes to increase lighting. Chairman Gughelmo opened the public hearing_ Rosa Asencio, with the Alicante Homeowners Association, was concerned with the parking and the possibility that parking might impact their residents, who are next door to this project. Nancy Bracken, President of Alicante Homeowners Association, stated that they were the neighbors immediately east of the project and were enthusiastic with the services that it will offer The Board has worked with the developer and it should be a wonderful project. Property line issues are being worked out now and they support the project_ Chair Guglielmo closed the public hearing. Page 7 of 14 C1— Pg7 P1ri%IL 1 Vi f v 1 ZwF HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION M►iVUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Chair Guglielmo asked staff regarding the project parking_ Mr. Acuna stated that the parking does exceed the parking required by the City. A parking study has been provided and it does meet the requirements. Since they are targeted for those 65 years of age or older there will be enough parking for them and for visitors and staff. Mr Ghirelli noted that the Council just passed an ordinance regarding parking districts throughout the city. Commissioner Munoz noted that this special facility for senior care doesn't normally add additional parking issues. Mr. Pancake. the applicant, returned and stated that it was targeted for people 65 years of age but caters to someone that averages 83 years of age. He stated that visitors and staff will take parking spaces, but that the reality is not many residents will use them. Commissioner Dopp asked about the employee and guest parking. Mr. Pancake noted that during holidays it might be busy and possible valet parking could be used but that the operators. Cadence, would review that. Commissioner Munoz noted that the senior living facility satisfies our State goals for housing in the city, Rosa Ascencio came back to speak to the Commission and added a personal story regarding additional parking and using the street. Chairman Guglielmo stated that the applicant has taken steps to meet the parking requirements and the possible additional requirements during holidays and will discuss options when the new operators take over - Mr. Ghirelli stated there can be parking districts established that are required to be approved by Council - Commissioner Munoz stated that would only be if a problem arises and is required, Moved by Munoz: seconded by Wimberly; carried 5-0-0. Page 8 of 14 C1— Pg8 /--t 1 V %I L ■ V' A. M ■ V HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Items D9 and D10 were taken simultaneously. D9. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20240 -- TRI- POINTE HOMES, INC - A request to subdivide a vacant 4.75-acre parcel into two (2) numbered and three (3) lettered lots for condominium purposes for the development of 80 detached residential condominiums located within Planning Area S-20 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) District of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is north of 4th Street on the east side of the future alignment of the Resort Parkway; APN: 0210-102-05, Related Files: Design Review DRC2018-00851 and Pre -Application DRC2018-00434. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. D10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00851 — TRI- POINTE HOMES, INC - A request to construct 80 detached residential condominiums on a vacant 4.75-acre property located within Planning Area S-20 in the Village Neighborhood (VN) District of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues. The specific location of the project site is north of 4th Street on the east side of the future alignment of the Resort Parkway; APN: 0210-102-05. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20240 and Pre -Application DRC2018-00434. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 2015041083) on May 18, 2016, in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. Vince Acuna, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Page 9 of 14 C1— Pg9 r\r 1%iL- I v9 Lv I %F HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Dopp asked about the architectural styles next to the main street of Resort Parkway. Mr. Acuna noted that they have a variation of all of the styles along the Parkway. Applicant Stephanie Fabbri-Carter Tri Pointe homes thanked staff and was available for any further questions. Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing and hearing none, closed. The commissioners were in favor of the project including the Art Deco design elements. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Oaxaca; carried 5-0-0. D11 MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018-00605, Planned Community Amendment DRC2019-00232, Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend Title 17 of the Municipal Code, the Victoria Community Plan, the Town Square Master Plan, the Victoria Arbors Master Plan, the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the Empire Lakes Specific Plan to amend requirements and standards for the development of Hotels. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. Perry Banner, Contract Planner and Jennifer Nakamura: Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He noted that the ordinance's purpose is to guide future development in line with the City vision Commissioner Dopp asked about the issues brought up at the Focus Group meeting that was held on March 19. 2019. Mr Banner provided a summary of the focus group meeting. They have also met with another developer separately that did not attend due to not receiving the notice Ms. Nakamura stated that the City is looking for diversity within the city for the market. Staff wants to be sure that we have the best development opportunities in front of the Council and Commission. They are planning for the next 30 years. Page 10 of 14 C1—Pg10 Ar l\IV 9 v' LrV I V HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing Don Cape with Theraldson Hospitality addressed the Commission on a particular new hotel project he is involved with on 4' Street and Haven Avenue_ Richard Garcia, regional manager with Theraldson Hospitality, Shakira Helenic with Theraldson Hospitality and manager of three hotels in Rancho Cucamonga; Troy Sims, and Ritchie Meleq representing Hilton Garden Inn; Jerry Guzman, representing Homewood Suites by Hilton; and Johnny Greese, General Manager of a local hotel, all stated that they did not receive the mailers sent to the hotels and would support a continuance. Scott Brown, Design Sale Architecture for Thorelson Hospitality, stated that he is the architect of record for a project that is currently in review. He shared a video of another project that had 5 stories next to the new Raiders stadium in the Las Vegas area, Carol Plowman, Lee and Associates Commercial Real Estate, supported Theraldson's request for a continuance. Chairman Guglielmo closed the public hearing. Mr. Ghirelh restated the purpose of the Ordinance review tonight and that it would then go to Council where it will have 2 readings and not be effective until 30 days after that. New Ordinances apply to projects that have not been deemed complete, Commissioner Munoz stated that they have not received the project yet and they are not at liberty to act on it and encouraged those speaking on a particular project to continue to work with staff to get the project complete. They are required to focus on what is before them and that is the resolution_ He understood the concerns expressed by the different members of the hotel industry represented this evening. Vice Chairman Wimberly supported the code amendment and staff recommendations and concurred with Commissioner Munoz. Commissioner Oaxaca thanked everyone including staff. He echoed Commissioner Munoz' remark that the recommendation is not regarding the Theraldson project. He agreed that the ordinance is called for in several key areas within the City. Page 11 of 14 C1- Pg11 P1rRIL IVY LV I J HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Commissioner Dopp thanked everyone for attending. The theme for this is what is best for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. With the amount of land left in the City sometimes there are hard choices and they want to continue positive development. He noted that the occupancy rates quoted by the public could have some discrepancies. Ms_ Nakamura clarified new extended stay hotels will not be permitted once this ordinance is passed. Mr. Ghirelli clarified the definition of Extended Stay Hotels which are intended for longer stays, kitchen amenities for preparation of food, and self serve laundry. Chairman Gugiielmo asked staff about the noticing issue mentioned. Ms. Nakamura stated that the required legal noticing of an 1/8 page legal ad in the newspaper was completed. Staff also went through the business license data and sent mailers to all managers at all properties and all hotel ownership entities within the City. Chairman Guglilemo inquired about extended stay hotel saturation. Ms. Nakamura looked at the overall types of hotels available in the city and also what's coming up within the City. Commissioner Munoz stated he wanted to clarify that 25% are extended stay hotels. Chairman Guglielmo noted that the Ordinance allows for diversification. Most hotels have amenities such as firepits, business center and a fitness center. He asked about timing of the urgency Ordinance in effect now. Ms. Nakamura that the interim ordinance expires in August. Commissioner Oaxaca asked for a a map of the City to see parcels that might have hotels built on, Commissioner Dopp noted that trends change and we have 5 extended stay hotels in the region already_ Page 12 of 14 Cl— Pg12 r-%r FA I- I V I A6+ V I V HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Munoz suggested voting at what staff is recommending since he has not heard a consensus, He noted that Council has asked for a decision and the Commission has had a year to review this_ Mr, Ghirelli re -stated the motion and that it was to adopt approval for the Code Amendment to go to City Council for further action. Moved by Munoz, second by Wimberly; motion failed, 2-3-0, Oaxaca, Dopp and Guglielmo opposed. Oaxaca made a motion to reopen the public hearing and continue the item to the April 24, 2019 Planning Commission meeting. Moved by Oaxaca, second by Dopp; carried 4-1-0, Munoz opposed E. COMMISSION BUSINEWHISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES: Commissioner Munoz noted that AB1568 Transportation funds have changes upcoming in the State legislature, COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: A'-,7e F. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned 10:22pm I, Valerie Victorino, Executive Assistant of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 4, 2019, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. Page 13 of 14 Cl- Pg13 APRIL 10, 2019 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view_ To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It Is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments.' There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. 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 wit[ 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 $3,037 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. Page 14 of 14 Cl— Pg14 REPORT DATE: April 24, 2019 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner M � INITIATED BY: Vincent Acuna, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DIRECTORS REPORT OF THE CITY'S 6-MONTH REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2018-00471 — GOLDEN PROPERTY LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC — at an existing restaurant located within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay located at 11560 4th Street; APN: 0229-411-04, BACKGROUND: On October 10, 2018, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2018-00471 to modify Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 to lengthen weekend operational hours at an existing Lazy Dog restaurant located at 11560 4th Street. The table below shows the operating hours from the approved, original Conditional Use Permit and the hours approved with the Conditional Use Permit Modification: Original Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 Approved Modification DRC2018-00471 Weekdays 11:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) 11:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) Saturdays 11:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) 10:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight)____ Sundays 11:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) 9:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) In addition to the extended weekend operating hours, the approval of the Conditional Use Permit Modification also allowed Lazy Dog to expand the existing on -site sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits to include take-out orders for sealed beer and wine only. Pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 18-66, Planning Department Standard Condition of Approval No. 2: This Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission to evaluate the operations of the approved subject use(s) and modifications to verify/determine compliance with this application's Conditions of Approval. The review shall occur 6 months from the date of the adoption of Resolution No. 18- 66. During this review, the Planning Commission may consider modifications to the conditions of approval, additional conditions of approval, or revocation of the approval. The purpose of this review is to verify the applicant's compliance with the application's Conditions of Approval, as well as to ensure that no issues have arisen from the modified hours of operation or the inclusion of beer and wine for take-out orders. D1—Pg1 DIRECTORS REPORT CUP DRC2018-00471 — GOLDEN PROPERTY, LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC April 24, 2019 Page 2 ANALYSIS: The City of Rancho Cucamonga Police Department was contacted in order to solicit input regarding any changes to police activity and/or crime in the area since the approval of the Conditional Use Permit Modification. Within the last six months, Lazy Dog had 20 calls for service. The majority of these are due to transients loitering in the surrounding area. The Police Department has not seen any increase in calls of service for the restaurant or the surrounding vicinity within the last six months. Furthermore, the Police Department notes that the calls of service for Lazy Dog and the surrounding shopping center remain relatively low, considering the large amount of patrons and shoppers that frequent the area. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the information provided by the Police Department, the approval of Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2018-00471 did not have any negative impacts related to public health, safety and welfare. The applicant is considered to be in full compliance with all Conditions o Approval set forth by the original Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 as well as Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2018-00471. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive and file this report. No further action is necessary. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A — Planning Commission Staff Report and Resolution of Approval No. 18-66 for Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2018-00471 D1—Pg2 DATE: October 10, 2018 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Plannetop INITIATED BY: Griffin Sproul, Planning Technician and Vince Acuna, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION ORC2018-00471- GOLDEN PROPERTY LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC - A request to modify Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 to lengthen weekend operational hours and expand the sale of sealed beer and wine to takeout orders at an existing restaurant located within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay located at 11560 4th Street; APN: 0229-411-04. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15301- Existing Facilities, RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2018-00471 by adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION: The project site is currently developed with a 9,396 square foot Lazy Dog restaurant, which Includes a 400 square -foot bar area and a 978 square -foot outdoor dining area. The restaurant is part of a developed 110,650 square -foot shopping center, called the Signature Center (Exhibit A). The restaurant currently holds a Type 47 (Bona Fide Eating Place) California Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license for the sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits for on -site consumption. The existing Land Uses, General Plan, and Zoning Designations for the project site and surrounding properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zonin Site Restaurant - Lazy Dog Industrial Paris Industrial Paris (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay North Retail - Bed Bath & Industrial Park Industrial Park (IP) District, Be and __ Cit of Ontario - Mixed Use Industrial Commercial Overlay South 41h Street - CI of Ontario Ontario Mills Specific Plan East Bank and Financial Industrial Park industrial Park (IP) District, Services - Bank of Industrial Commercial Overlay America Restaurant - Panera West Bread, Retail- Grand Industrial Park Industrial Park (IP) District, e Jewelers Industrial Commercial Overlay EXHIBIT A D1—pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00471 -- GOLDEN PROPERTY, LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC October 10, 2018 Page 2 PROJECT BACKGROUND: The existing shopping center, the Signature Center, was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on September 28, 2005 through Design Review DRC2004-01013. The approval was for the development of a 118,470 square foot retail center consisting of five buildings. However, only four out of the five approved buildings were constructed shortly after approval of the project which resulted in a combined floor area for the retail center of approximately 110,650 square feet. On October 12, 2011, the Planning Commission approved Development Review DRC2011-00456 for the construction of a 9,396 square -foot Lazy Dog Restaurant and Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 to allow the on -site consumption of beer, wine, and distilled spirits through a Type 47 (Bona Fide Eating Place) ABC License (Exhibit 0). ANALYSIS: A_ General: The applicant, Golden Properly, LLC on behalf of Lazy Dog Restaurants, LLC, proposes to modify the previously approved Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 to allow the modification of the operations of the restaurant and bar ("the restaurant"). The modification will allow them to expand the existing on -site sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits to include take-out orders for sealed beer and wine only. The applicant is also requesting to modify the previously approved operating hours of the restaurant. Currently, the operating hours are 11:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) every day. The applicant proposes to revise the respective operating hours on Saturday to 10:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight) and on Sunday to 9:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight). This will result in the restaurant opening one and two hours earlier on Saturday and Sunday, respectively (Exhibit C). The restaurant shares the parking lot with the surrounding existing shopping center. The proposal will have no effect on these parking areas. The proposed changes are limited to the restaurant's business operations. Modifications to the exterior of the site and/or the surrounding area are not proposed. Nor is an increase in the floor area of the restaurant proposed, which would require additional parking. B. Alcohol Sales and Security: Lazy Dog Restaurants, LLC has a selection of Lazy Dog branded canned beers and co -branded wines. Therefore, the restaurant is proposing to expand the on -site sate of beer and wine for off -site consumption to the existing take-out food sales. Although the purchase of a food item is not required to order take-out of these alcoholic beverages, the restaurant operator anticipates that customers will order the beverages with their take-out order. The restaurant also anticipates customers taking home these beverages after eating at the restaurant. Customers will not be limited in the amount of alcohol purchased. Lazy Dog Restaurant's request to provide the sale of sealed beer and wine for off -site consumption Is similar to that of the existing breweries and wineries within the City that provide specialty branded beers and wines, as well as other brands, for on -site and off -site consumption_ The customer will enter the restaurant where, upon ordering these alcoholic beverages for take-out, a restaurant staff member will verify the customer's age by requesting a government Issued identification, such as a passport, milltary identification, or state driver's license. The alcohol is then released at the restaurant's bar and/or take-out area inside the restaurant. The bar and take-out areas are currently monitored by security cameras. The applicant does not plan to expand security personnel or security measures at this time. However, as this is the first time this type of service has been provided in the City, staff has D l —Pg,4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DR02018-00471 — GOLDEN PROPERTY, LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC October 10, 2018 Page 3 incorporated into the Resolution of Approval a condition requiring the Installation of security cameras in the exterior of the business. The exact location of the cameras and the number of cameras will be according to the requirements/policies of the Police Department. Additionally, the Police Department has reviewed the application and with the addition of the security cameras and the Conditions of Approval had no additional concerns with the proposal. The Califomia Department of Alcohol Beverage Control allows for off -site sale of beer and wine with the Type 47 license and does not have any additional requirements and/or regulations that apply to this requested change of operation. However, staff has Incorporated into the Resolution of Approval a condition that prohibits the consumption of alcoholic beverages within the parking lot. C. Public Art: This project is exempt from providing public art as outlined in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code because the project does not propose any expansion or modification to the square footage of the existing restaurant. D. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities, as the project involves a negligible expansion of the existing use at the time the exemption was granted. The project does not Include any modification of existing structures, facilities, mechanical equipment or topographical features. Likewise, this request does not include the addition of any new structures or mechanical equipment. The proposal only modifies the services that are provided and the hours of operation for the restaurant. Therefore, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. FISCAL IMPACT: As there is no proposed construction as part of this request, no development impact fees will be collected. However, staff expects the added services of the restaurant to benefit the City due to increased sales resulting in additional sales tax revenue. Also, there Is the potential for additional employment opportunities in the City. COUNCIL GOAL ADDRESSED: Although a specific current City Council goal does not apply to the project, the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code by creating opportunities for residents and workers to have local access to a full range of retaillentertainment needs in appropriate areas. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing with a regular page legal advertisement the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all properly owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. To date, no comments or phone calls have been received in response to the project notifications. D1—Pg5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP DRC2018-00471 — GOLDEN PROPERTY, LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC October 10, 2018 Page 4 EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Aerial of Project Site Exhibit B - Floor Plan Exhibit C - Letter of Intent Exhibit D - Staff Report and Resolution No. 11-49 for Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2018-00471 D1—Pg6 K 1a, Vc aftfm C&-} IT cmwm 3AYO JOQ AZV1 I - i M4 !s-on a r Ee a i R1 On j O Pi i� i 1j"�I�� f liJMI lii 5�lip Sir;I Q 0 EK- Pc- I�I�o/h3 EXHIBIT B �� ` q 0 •a te s I j' Sao 7.7 .11 a a _ q, G9p Az- 1 l.. `i�.�+. s Jeti� � ��� �► �.. �-_ � ; �. ► fiat — .. I D1-Pg8 fwm DOG BAT. DRINK. Lazy Dog Restaurants would like to request off site sale of beer and wine at our currently operating Lazy Dog Restaurant located at 11560 4111 Street in Rancho Cucamonga, CA. This existing Lazy Dog Restaurant has been successful in providing an enjoyable full service sit down restaurant for the community and would like to continue to meet the requests of its customer base by expanding our take out services. Lazy Dog proposes to sell beer and wine for off site consumption in connection with our takeout food sales, to provide a public convenience so that customers may purchase beer/wine with their takeout food order. Lazy Dog will be seeking to add a selection of Lazy Dog branded canned beers and co -branded wines to their take out services. To meet the ever growing demand for takeout services and increase in 3=d party takeout food services (ie UberEats, DoorDash, GrubHub, etc.), Lazy Dog is proposing to include their branded beer and co -branded wines so that our customers can enjoy the same quality food and beverage that they experience in our restaurants within their own homes. In addition to selling Lazy Dog branded beers and wines, Lazy Dog proposes to offer customers the ability to purchase for offsite consumption other brands of sealed beers and wines. Customers will not be required to purchase food, but Lazy Dog's intention is that they will add alcohol as part of their takeout food order or after they have finished dinning and would like to something to take home. There is no current limitation to the amount of beer and wine a customer is allowed to purchase for off -site consumption. Beer and wine will be stored in either the Bar or the Keg Room/Liquor Room in fully sealed and contained beer cans and wine bottles. Upon ordering take out of one of Lazy Dog's select beer or wines, at either the bar or the take out service area, age will be verified and the beer or wine bought will be brought from the bar or Keg Room/Liquor Room. There are currently cameras covering the takeout area as well as the bar area. Employees will tell customers upon purchase and if any customers are witnessed drinking alcohol in their cars/parking lot that it is not allowed. No additional security measures are proposed at this time. An extra security measurement that Lazy Dog can take is to seal the packaging with tape. This service will be provided during the currently operating hours of this store: Monday through Friday l lam - Midnight, Saturday 1 Oam - Midnight, and on Sundays 92m — Midnight. Lazy Dog currently has a Type 47 liquor license with the California Alcoholic Beverage Control which allows for off sale of beer and wine as long as it is not restricted. For this particular location, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has restricted this off sale of beer and wine in the approved CUP that Lazy Dog is wishing to modify. The California Alcoholic Beverage Control has not requested any additional requirements. C, fahola EXHIBIT C DI—Pg9 STAFF REPORT 0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: October 12, 2011 RANCHO CUCAMONGA TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: James R Troyer, AICP, Planning Director BY: Mike Smith, Associate Planner SUBJECT-. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2011-00466 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. for LAZY DOG CAFE: A proposal to construct a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,398 square feet, including an outdoor dining area or 978 square feet, on an undeveloped parcel within a commercial center of approximately 504,001} square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street; APN: 0229411-04. Related file: Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00713, Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2011-00768, and Development Review DRC2004-01013_ On September 28, 2005, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Development Review DRC2004-01013. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further Environmental Review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC. for LAZY DOG CAFE: A request to provide alcoholic beverages for on -site consumption at a An proposed restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet, within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street, APN: 0229.41 1-04. Related file: Development Review DRC2011-00456, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00713, Uniform Sign Program Amendment DRC2011-00768, and Development Review DRC2004-01013. On September 28, 2005, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Development Review DRC2004-01013, The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further Environmental Review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects Within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2011-00713 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS INC, for LAZY DOG CAFE: A request to remove two trees in conjunction with a proposal to construct a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet, on an undeveloped parcel within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street; APN: 0229-411-04. Related file: Development Review DRC2011-00456, Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457, and Develoement Review DRC2004-01013. 0 IV/10 /Ii EXHIBIT D D1—Pg10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2011-00456 DRC2011-00457, AND DRC2011-00713 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFi October 12, 2011 Page 2 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Site - Shopping Center — Industrial Parts (IP) District (Subarea 12) North - Vacant - Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) South - Shopping Center— City of Ontario East - Shopping Center— industrial Park (IP) ❑lstdct (Subarea 12) West - Shopping Center— Industrial Parts (IP) District (Subarea 12) B General Plan Designations: Site - General Commercial North - General Commercial South - City of Ontario East - General Commercial West - General Commercial C. Site Characteristics: The project site is located within a commercial center at the north side of 4th Street between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue of about 504,000 square feet (11.6 acres) that is about 760 feet (east to west) by about 760 feet (north to south) (Exhibit C). The center was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on September 28, 2005 (related file: Development Review DRC2004-01013, Exhibit P). The approval was for the development of a center comprised of five (5) buildings. However, only four (4) of the buildings — three (3) retail buildings (105,050 square feet combined) and a bank (5,600 square feet) were constructed. An undeveloped pad/parcel (APN: 0229-411-04) at the south side of, and west of the principal vehicle entrance into the center was to be the location of the proposed fifth building (7,647 square feet at the time of approval). With the exception of vacant properties to the north, the commercial center is bound on all sides by commercial development. The the of the center and all properties to the west, north, and east is Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12). The properties to the south are part of the Ontario Mills shopping center in the City of Ontario. ANALYSIS: A. Genera : The applicant, on behalf of Lary Dog Cafe, proposes to construct a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet on the aforementioned undeveloped pad (Exhibit D). There will be a bar of about 400 square feet and an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet (Exhibit E). The restaurant generally will be conventional in design/layout with the public/customer areas and the servicelkitchen areas located at the east and west sides of the building respectively. The outdoor dining area and main entry will be at the east side of the building near the commercial center's principal vehicle entrance and will be 'framed' by enhanced landscaping. The service areas, including the trash bin storage areas, will be integrated into the building, i.e. not stand alone enclosures. All existing parking areas, circulation and access drive aisles, and lighting in the general vicinity of the proposed building will remain as -is unless modifications are needed to comply with ADA access. The most significant structure that will be removed Is a shade feature on the west side of the vehicle D1—Pg11 • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2011-00456, DRC2011-00457, AND DRC2011-00713 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFt October 12. 2011 Page 3 entrance that Is not physically compatible with the outdoor dining area. Where it is not possible to preserve the existing landscaping, new landscaping, including trees will be installed following the completion of the project, Existing landscaping comprised of trees, shrubs, and ground cover located in the public parkway and at the south side of the site will remain in place. The proposed building includes a 40-foot high tower element at the main entrance at the southeast corner of the building, a set of decorative trellises at the north and south elevations, and an overhead trellis at the outdoor dining area. There will be a variety of materials including decorative stone veneer, stucco, metal, and wood. Stone veneer will be the primary material on the tower, on the vertical element at the southwest comer of the building, and at the base of support columns for trellis at the outdoor dining area. The exterior walls of the building will have a combination of wood siding, smooth stucco finish, and weathered steel paneling. Storefront glass will be provided on the east, north, and south elevations coinciding with the Location of the publicicustomer areas of the building. The tower element will have a standing seam metal roof, the remainder of the roof wiil be screened by the parapets and will not be visible, B. Floor/Area Analysis: Per Chapter 2, Figure LU-2, the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) In the Industrial Park land use category Is 40 to 60 percent. The net area of the project site is approximately 76.455 square feet. Following the completion of the restaurant, the building coverage will be 9,396 square feet Therefore, the floor area ratio for this site will be 12 percent. C Parking Calculations; The parking calculation for the shopping center is based on the individual uses as listed below and per Section 17.12 of the Development Code_ There are 538 parking stalls within the shopping center. Part of the existing parking area will be modified in order to comply with ADA requirements. This will result in the loss of two (2) stalls. Currently, the required parking is 255 stalls which results in an excess of 283 parking stalls. Fallowing construction of the restaurant. the required parking will be 377 stalls and an excess of 159 parking stalls. Type of Use Floor Area S Parking Ratio # of Spaces Required Shoppina Center Lexisting buildings) 110,650 Building 1, furniture retail 93A50 1/500 187 Buildings 2 and 3, retail 11,600 1/250 46 Building 5, bank 5,500 1/250 22 Total Parking Required(existing buildings) 255 Total Parking Provided 538 Shopeing Center with proposed building) 120.046 Buildin 4 restaurant 6 000 11100 60 Building 4, restaurant (floor area in excess of 8,000 square feet 3,396 1/55 62 D1—Pg12 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2011-00456 DRC2011-0D457, AND DRC2011-00713 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE October 12, 2011 Page 4 D. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (Munoz, Wimberly, and Granger) on September 6, 2011 (Exhibit 0). The Committee reviewed the application and deemed it acceptable for forwarding to the Planning Commission for review and action. During the meeting, the applicant representative indicated that they were still deliberating two (2) changes to the architecture. The first change would be to reduce the overall height of the building and the tower element. This change would ensure that visibility of the retail building at the rear of the shopping center would not be hindered. The second change would be to use stucco finish at the areas where rusted torten steel panels is currently proposed. This change is the result of the applicant's dissatisfaction with the appearance and durability of the steel. The Committee indicated that both revisions, if necessary, would be acceptable. E. Grading and Technical Review Committees: The project was reviewed by the Grading and Technical Review Committees on September 6, 2011. Both Committees deemed it acceptable for forwarding to the Planning Commission for review and action. Staff has included in the Resolution of Approval each Committee's standard and special conditions. F. Conditional lj§g Permit DRC2011.00457 and D scri tion of Operations: The proposed project is a casual sit-down restaurant with an outdoor dining area. The menu will be comprised of a variety of food and drinks (Exhibit N). Included in the proposal is a bar of about 400 square feet, subject to Conditional Use Permil review and approval, where alcoholic beverages (beer, wine, mixed drinks, and distilled spirits) will be sold and served for on -site consumption. The bar will be located on the east side of the building near the outdoor dining area (Exhibit E). Operating hours will be everyday between 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. (midnight). It is expected that there will be a total of about sixty (60) employees with up to about thirty (30) employees working per shift. Entertainment such as dancing, karaoke, live performances, and amplified music is not proposed (Exhibit M). G. Land Use Compati ilit : The project will be consistent with the development district of the site, the existing uses within the shopping center (Exhibit L), and the surrounding development districts. Restaurants are common in shopping centers and there are numerous restaurants in the shopping centers surrounding the site. Restaurants with bars are common in commercial - intensive areas such as general area of the project site. Staff does not expect any negative impacts. However, in the event that there are disturbances/nuisances, there are thresholds for noise and lighting specified in the Development Code that a commercial activity cannot exceed. if this occurs, then the Code Enforcement Department can be contacted to correct the problem. If necessary, the matter may be brought to the attention of the Planning Director and/or Planning Commission for further review and action. H. Tree Removal PermC2 -0071 : The proposed project includes the removal of two (2) trees at the southeast comer of the area of work (Exhibit K). Existing trees outside the area of work and within the public parkway will remain. There are a significant number of trees within, is D1--pg13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2011-00456, DRC2011-00457, AND DRC2011-00713 —RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFt October 12, 2011 Page 5 and at the perimeter of the shopping center and in the surrounding commercial developments. Consistent with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance, incorporated in the Resolution of Approval, is a condition requiring new trees to be planted on a one-to-one basis to replace the trees that have been removed. J, Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQK) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration in September 2005 in connection with the City's approval of Development Review DRC2004-01013. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. No substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts an the environment; no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce Impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. There have been no substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project which would create new or more severe Impacts than those evaluated In the previous Negative Declaration. The overall master plan for the shopping center contemplated a restaurant at the same location of the proposed subject restaurant. Improvements such as parking, lighting, and landscaping in the general area around the site are complete parking calculation. There are no revisions proposed beyond the limits of the area of work. Staff further finds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed In the previous Negative Declaration, will not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Dally Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660 foot radius of the project site No comments have been received. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review DRC2011-00456. Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00713 through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions. Respectfully submitted, • V�Ijv James R. Troyer, AICP Planning Director JRT:MS/dh D1—Pgl4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2011-00456, DRC2011-00457, AND DRC2011-00713 -- RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFI October 12, 2011 Page 6 Attachments Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Aerial Map Exhibit C - Site Utilization Map Exhibit D - Overall Site Plan Exhibit E - Detail Site Plan and Floor Plan Exhibit F = Roof Plan Exhibit G - Building Elevations Exhibit H - Building Cross -sections Exhibit I - Grading PIan and Sections Exhibit J - Photometric Plan Exhibit K - Landscape Plan Exhibit L - List of Tenants Exhibit M - Correspondence from the Applicant Exhibit N - Restaurant Menu Exhibit 0 - Design Review Committee Action Comments (September 6, 2011) Exhibit P - Staff Report Site Plan for Development Review DRC2004-01013 Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2011-00456 Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00713 • • D1—Pg15 RESOLUTION NO. 11-49 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457, A REQUEST TO PROVIDE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES FOR ON SITE CONSUMPTION AT A PROPOSED RESTAURANT WITH AN OVERALL FLOOR AREA OF 9,396 SQUARE FEET, INCLUDING AN OUTDOOR DINING AREA OF 978 SQUARE FEET, WITHIN A COMMERCIAL CENTER OF APPROXIMATELY 504,000 SQUARE FEET IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICT (SUBAREA 12) LOCATED BETWEEN RICHMOND PLACE AND BUFFALO AVENUE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 4TH STREET: AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0229411-04. A Recitals. 1. Resource Solutions, Inc-, on behalf of Lazy Dog Caf6, filed an application for the approval of Cond-tional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application " 2, On the 12th day of October 2011, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. 3 All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption o` this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows-. 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A of this Resolution are true and correct_ 2, Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced meeting on October 12 2011, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a commercial center at the north side of 4th Street between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue; and b The commercial center is approximately 504,000 square feet (11.6 acres) that is about 760 feet (east to west) by about 760 feet (north to south); C. The shopping center is comprised of four (4) buildings with a combined floor area of approximately 110.650 square feet; and d. The center was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on September 28, 2005 (related file: Development Review DRC2004-01013). The approval was for the development of a center comprised of five (5) buildings. However, only four (4) of the buildings consisting of three (3) retail buildings (105,050 square feet combined) and a bank (5,600 square feet) were constructed: and D1—Pg16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-49 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC FOR LAZY DOG CAFt October 12, 2011 Page 2 e. This application is in conjunction with Development Review DRC2011-00456 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457; and f. The specific location of the project site is at the south side of and west of the principal vehicle entrance into the commercial center (APN: 1076-481-35). The "area of work" is an undeveloped pad/parcel of approximately 76,455 square feet (1.76 acre); and g. With the exception of vacant properties to the north, the commercial center is bound on all sides by commercial development; and h. The zoning of the center and all properties to the west, north, and east is Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12). The properties to the south are part of the Ontario Mills shopping center in the City of Ontario; and i. The proposal is to construct a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet on the aforementioned undeveloped pad. There will be a bar of about 400 square feet and an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet; and j. This application is in conjunction with Development Review DRC2011-00456 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00713; and k. The proposed restaurant will operate everyday between 11:00 a.m, to 12:00 a.m. (midnight); and I. The proposed restaurant will have a total of about sixty (60) employees with about thirty (30) employees working per shift and m. The alcoholic beverages available for on -site consumption include beer, wine, mixed drinks, and distilled spirits; and n. Entertainment such as dancing, karaoke, live performances, and amplified music is not proposed. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above -referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located The proposed project is a casual sit-down restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet with a bar of about 400 square feet and an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet. The underlying General Plan designation is an Industrial Park (IP) District. b. The proposed development, togetherwith the conditions applicable thereto, WH not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or Improvements in the vicinity. The project site is vacant and is part of a commercial center of about 504,000 square feet (11.6 acres); the proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within the shopping center where it is located, and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the center and all properties to the west, north, and east is Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12). The properties to the south are part of the Ontario Mills shopping center in the City of Ontario. D1—Pg17 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-49 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC FOR LAZY DOG CAFt October 12, 2011 Page 3 C. The proposed development complies with each of the app'icable provisions of the Development Code. The proposed development meets all standards outlined In the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City 4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration in September 2005 in connection with the City's approval of Development Review DRC2004-01013. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. No substantial changes are proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances underwhich the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts; no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered: and no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts There have been no substantial changes to the project or the circumstances surrounding the project which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the previous Negative Declaration, The overall master plan for the shopping center contemplated a restaurant at the same location of the proposed subject restaurant. Improvements such as parking- lighting, and landscaping in the genera I area around the site are complete parking calculation. There are no revisions proposed beyond the limits of the area of work. Staff further rinds that the project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Negative Declaration not have more severe effects than previously analyzed, and that additional or different mitigation measures are not required to reduce the impacts of the project to a level of less than significant 5 Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the construction of a restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, including a bar of 400 square feet and an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet, on an undeveloped parcel within a commercial center of approximately 504,000 square feet in the Industrial Park (IP) District (Subarea 12) located between Richmond Place and Buffalo Avenue on the north side of 4th Street - APN: 0229- 411-04. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 3) The restaurant shalt be operated in conformance with the performance standards as defined in the Development Code Including, but not limited to, noise levels. If operation of the restaurant causes adverse effects upon the shopping center, the tenants of the commercial center, and/or adjacent Wsinesses or operations, then the Conditional Use D1—Pg18 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-49 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ❑RC2011-00457 -- RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE October 12, 2011 Page 4 Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for consideration and possible revocation of the Conditional Use Permit 4) The addition of entertainment including, but not limited to, danc-ng, karaoke, live performances, and amplified music, shall require the submittal of an Entertainment Permit application and fee forreview and action by the Planning Commission. 5) The hours of operation shall be between 11:00 a.m to 12:00 a.m. (midnight) everyday. 6) Any modification or intensification of the existing uses including a change in operating hours; any improvements including expansion of the floor area of the bar, outdoor dining area, and/argeneral floor area of the restaurant; and/or other modifications/intensification beyond what is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit shall require the review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to submittal of documents for plan check/occupancy, construction, commencement of the activity, and/or issuance of a business license 7) Outdoor storage of equipment, supplies, materials, and trash is prohibited. 8) All patrons who appear under the age of 30 shall be required to show some form of identification or they will not be served an alcoholic beverage. A sign indicating this policy shall be prominently posted in a place that is clearly visible to patrons. Only the following forms of identification will be acceptable: a. Valid driver's license b. Valid State identification card c. Valid passport d. Current military identification e. U.S. Government immigrant identification card 9) All forms of out-of-state identification shall be checked by the authorized representative of the owner of the licensed premises in the Driver's License Guide. Upon presentment to the authorized representative of the owner of the licensed premises, the patron's form of identification shall be removed from the patron's wallet or any plastic holder and inspected for any alterations through a close visual inspection and/or use of a flashlight or "Retro-reflective viewer." 10) Patrons who appear obviously intoxicated shall not be served any alcoholic beverages. 11) The licensee(s) or an employee of the licensee(s) Wit be present in any Patio at all times when alcoholic beverages are being served or consumed. An alternative is to have at least two (2) cameras monitoring the patio, one at each end, and should be capable o` D1—Pg19 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 11-49 CONDIVOVAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFt October 12, 2011 Page 5 distinguishing unauthorized persons in the patio including underage persons consuming alcohol or alcohol being removed from the premises via the patio Monitoring of the cameras shall be In an active area where employees are always present and can easily view these cameras. 12) There shall be no `stacking:' of drinks, i.e., more than one dnnk at a time, to a single patron 13) When serving pitchers exceeding 25 ounces of an alcoholic drink, all patrons receiving such pitcher, as well as all patrons who wall be consuming ali or any portion of such pitcher, shall present an ID to the server If appearing to be under the age of 30, if not previously checked at the entrance to the licensed premises 14) Except for wine bottles, oversized containers or pitchers containing in excess of 25 ounces of an alcoholic drink shall not be sold to a single patron for their sole consumption. 15) The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises is strictly prohibited 16) Employees and contract security personnel shall not consume any alcoholic beverages during their work shift 17) A file containing the names and dates of employment of every person serving alcoholic beverages for consumption by patrons on the licensed premises, and every manager, shall be kept on the premises. The file shall also include a copy of each person's certificate of completion of the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control L,E.A.D. course (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs). Upon request said file shall be made available for review to representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Police Department. New employees will have 90 days from date of employment to obtain L,E.A.D. certification. 1 S) There shall be a Designated Driver Program wherein there is an incentive to the person not drinking alcoholic beverages, who is in a group of three or more, to be the designated driver for that group of patrons- 19) There shall be a taxi -ride program where the establishment wHI offer to call a taxi for patrons when it seems appropriate, Phone numbers of local taxi companies shall be posted for viewing by patrons. 20) Except in case of emergency, the licensee shall not permit its patrons to enter or exit the licensed premises through any entrancelexit other than the primary entrance/exit, excluding entrances/exits from patio areas. Steps shall be taken by the licensee to discourage unauthorized exiting D1—Pg20 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 11-49 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 — RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR LAZY DOG CAFE October 12, 2011 Page 6 21) All Conditions of Approval for Condil7onal Use Permit DRC2011-00457 shall apply. Engineerin-q Department 1) If valuation of project exceeds $100,000, a Diversion Deposit ($5,000) and a related administrative fee ($250) shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program, The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50 percent of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Division when the first building permit application Is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.ci rancho-cucamonga.ca.us, under the Department of Engineering/Public Works, Division of Integrated Waste Mgmt/NPDES. 2) Development Impact Fees- bldg info: 6,124 square feet (FEES SUBJECT TO CHANGE) a. Transportation: ($6,976 per 1000 square foot j b. CALC: S6,976 x 8.12 = S56,645.12 C. Drainage: paid under A.D. 82-1 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2011. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY:r- Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: .lames tyTroyer, AICP, Secretary I, James R. Troyer, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 12th day of October 2011, by the following vote -to -wit: D1—Pg21 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO 11-49 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 - RESOURCE SOLUTIONS, INC FOR LAZY DOG CAFE October 12, 2011 Page 7 AYES; COMMISSIONERS: rLETCHCR,. HOWDYSHELL; MUNOZ, OAXACA, WIMBERLY NOES. COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSFNT: COMMISSIONERS. NONE ABSTAIN COMMISSIONERS- NONE Di-Pg22 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD PROJECT M DRC2011.00457 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: _RESOURCES SOLUTIONS. INC FOR LAZY DOG CAFt- BETWEEN RICHMOND PLACE AND BUFFALO AVENUE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF FOURTH LOCATION: STREET; APN: 0229.411-04 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL, CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorneys fees which the City its agents, offices, or emp'oyees maybe required bye court to pay as a resuft of such action The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his ob igations under Ws condit.on. 2 Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 1149, Standard Condit ons, and all environmental m b9attons shall be included on the plans (full size) The sheet(s) are fc; information only to all parties nvolved In the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealedrstamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any appl cable Fish and Game fees as shovm below The project piannerwil! confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning D rector hearing a) Notice of Exemption - $50 X 1 Win/PingC0mm12011P.oso?AS1(Rp:1DRC2011-00457STr1DCOHDSCUPrNAL DOC gomptelion Dare 1 / —1-1- 1 1 D 1--Pg23 Proect No 013r,2211• a 57 Completion Date B. Time Limits 1 Conditional Use Permit approval shall expire i' buElding permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval No extensions are allowed C. Site Development 1 fhe s to shall be developed and maintained in ac,ordance with the approved plans ch include 1 / site plans architectural elevations exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program. and grading on file in the Planntng Department, the conditions contained herein and the Deve'opment Code regulations 2 Prior to any use of the protect site or business activity be.ng commenced thereon all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction -it the Planning Director. 3 Occupancy of the faciltties shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Bu Iding Code a d 1 / State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with Prior to occupancy plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safely Department to show compliance The build ngs shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy 4 Revised site plans and buildmng elevations =orporat ng all Conditions of Approval shal be 1 I _ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits 6 All site grading, landscape, rngation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment building etc ) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdiv.sion. or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first 6 Approval of th:s request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all ` /—/,,,,, other appl cable City Ordinances and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of but ding permit Issuance. A I ground mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers. AC condensers, etc,, shall be 1 l located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry wails berming_ and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. For single-fam ly residential developments, transformers shari be placed in underground vaults 8 All building numbers and individual units shal be identified in a clear and concise manner, 1 / including proper illu0natton D. Shopping Centers 1 Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. 2 The entire site sha'. be kept free from (rash and debris at all times and in no event shall trash and debris remain for more than 24 hours. 3 Signs shall be conveniently posted for "no overnight parking" and for "employee parking only 4 All operations and businesses shall be conducted to comply with the following standards which shall be incorporated into the lease agreements for all tenants a Noise Level - All commercial activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an exterior noise level of 60 dB during the hours of 10 p.m. until 7 a.m. and 65 dB during the hours of 7 a m until 10 p m 2 k /FinaVFingCornm;201 I ResoBS:rRpVDRC2011.00457STNOCONDSCUPFINAL DOC D1-Pg24 '.o,ect Ma ORC20I t .. compht q Uwe Loading and Unloading - No person shall cause the loading, unloading opening, closing, or other handing of boxes. crates containers building materials, garbage cans or other s milar objects between the hours of 10 p.m and 7 BA unless otherwise specified herein in a manner which would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area I B. Building Design All roof appurtenances including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment andlor projections shall be screened from at sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Department Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with [lie color scheme of the building Details shal be in--luded in building plans For commercial and -ndustrial projects, paint rol'-up doors and service doors to match main bui ding colors F. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long When aside or any parking space abuts a bonding, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a m;n+mum of i 1 feet vide All parking 'ol landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. G. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans The applicant shall follow at of the arborisl's recommendations regarding preservation, transplant'ng, and trimming methods H. Signs The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shaJ comply with the Sign Ordinance and steal require separate application and approval by the Planning Department prior to installation of any signs. 11Finai 17119camm12011Resc85trRpL;DRC2Gi 1-31:57STNOCONUSCUPWIAL OOC __ �_ 1 / 1 I 1 / 1 1 D1—Pg25 f rojw No DRr..201 I U4�57 Comp'ation Bata I. Other Agencies 11 The applica qt sha I contact the US Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mat boxes Multi -family residential developments shal' provide a solid overhead structure for ma boxes with adequate lighting The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of budding permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, 1909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE. ANY REVISIONS KAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) J. General Requirements 1 Submit f-ve complete sets of p°arts including the following a S!lelPlot Plan, b. Foundation Plan. c Flo. r Plan d. Celing and Roof Framing Plan IS Electrical Plans (2 sets detached) Including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors panel schedules, and single lire diagrams. F Plumbing and Sewer Plans. including isometrics, underground diagrams water and waste diagram sewer or sepl.c system location. fixture units, gas piping and heating and aev condition -ng, and g Planning Department Project Number (te . DRC2011-00457 clearly identified on the I outside of at plans, 2 Sub'ri; two sets of struclura, calculations, energy conservation calcu'alions and a so;;s report 1 1^ ArchitectslEngineer's stamp and 'wet'signature are required prior to plan check submittal 3 Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to 1 1_ the City prior to permit issuance 4 Separate permits are required for fencing aiWor walls 1 1 5 Bus ness shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Building and Safety Department K. Site Development 1 Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction AN pans shall be 1 1 marked with the project file number (i,e . DRC20011.OD457) The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Cal-fornia Codes and all other applicable codes ordinances. and regulations in effect at the time of permit application Contact the Budding and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts 2 Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial deve opment project or 1 major add lion, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include b A are not limited to, C!ty Beautification Fee, Park Fee. Drainage Fee Transportation Development Fee, Permit and P an Check Fees Construction and Demolition Diversion Program 4 i:,rinarlNngComrr12411Ros3sStfRpUDRC2011 7C45?STND-XNDSCUPr1Na DG.: D1—Pg26 P%3'3"t;ar3'!c20I1 o 'Sr Cornatet^o_n Date deposit and fees and School Fees Applicant sF-al; provide a copy of t--e school fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permits issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Build ng and Safety Offic.al after IracVparcel map I I recordation and prior to issuance of bu Id:ng permits. — - 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8 00 p.m and 6.30 a m Monday through Saturday, with no construct on on Sunday or hol'days. L. Now Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for accessibility to public buildings. / 1 2. Provide compliance v4th the California Bulding Code (CBC) for Ca'ifornia Building Energy Efficient Standards. 3. Provide compliance with the California Build ng Code (CBC) for property line clearances considering use, area, and fire -resistive construction."'- 4. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations... YI l 5. Provide draft stops in attic areas. !_! 6. Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating in accordance with CBC 7. Openings in exterior walls shall be protected in accordance with CBC ! ! 8. Upon plan check submittal, additional requirements may be needed 1 M. Grading 1 Grading of the subject properly shal. be in accordance with Cal:forn'a Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan 2 A soils repot shall be prepared by a qualif ed engineer I,censed by the Slate of California to / 1 perform such work — — 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qual fied eng neer or geologist and submitted at the 1 / time of application for grading plan check -"- 4 The Fna, grading plan, appropriate cert fications and compaction reports shall be completed, _I 1 submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits 5 A separate grading plan check submittal Is required for all new construction projects and for / 1 existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and Fill The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a Califomia registered Civil Engineer Pi i lFwa1'PIn,Cam-rr201 IFtesz85ttRp' DR02:71 1.9C457STNDCONC)SCUPFINAL DOC D1—Pg27 Projacl No ORC201 � 57 APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS- N. Security Lighting 1 All parking common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-fool candle power These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell 2 Al I build ngs shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings with direct lighting to be provided by a°. entryways Lighting shall be consistent around the entire . development. 3 Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal -resistant fixtures. O. Security Hardware 1 One -inch single cylinder dead bolls shall be installed on ali entrance doors. If windows are within 40 ,nclles of any locking device. tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used 2 All roof openings giving access to the buRding sha'1 be secured with either iron bars. metal gates or alarmed. P. Windows Q 1 Storefront windows shall be visible to passi ng pedestrians and traffic 2 Secur ty giazing is recommended on storefront windows to resist window smashes and Impede entry to burglars Building Numbering i 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall the reflective for nighttime visibility R. Alarm Systems 1 Install a burglar a'arrrl system and a panic alarm if needed. Instructing management and employees on the operation of the alarm system will reduce the amount of fa'se alarms and in turn save dollars and lives 2 Alarm companies shall be provided w-lh the 24-hour Sheriffs dispatch number. (909) 941-1488 APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED 6 I IFinallPingCon'mr2011Reso3SlrRpVDRC2011.Oo457S9rNOCONDSCUPFINAL DOC _f ! —J ---{ I fl! —1—1 DI—Pg28 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS May 23, 2011 Lazy Dog Cafe 11560 4u' Street DRC2011-456 & 457 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT Two separate exits are required from the Patio d-ning area The project must comply In design and constructed in accordance with the 2010 California Building & Fire Codes the RCFPD Ordinance FD50 and the RCFPD Standards. The RCFPD ordinance, procedures & standards wh ch are referenced in this document can be access on the web cit orrc US FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply Ez sting reference the RCFPD Standard 5-10 FSC-3 Prerequisite for submittal of Overhead Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Prior to submitting plans for an overhead automatic fire sprinkler system, the applicant shall submit plans, specifications and ca culations for the fire sprinkler system underground supply piping Approval of the underground supply piping system must be obta;red prior to submit[-ng the overhead fre sprinkler system plans FSC-4 Requirements for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems Automatic fire sprinklers are required and sha'I be i .sta;led with the 2010 edition of NFPA 13 FSC-5 Fire Alarm System & Sprinkler Monitoring 1 The 2010 Cal fornia Building Code. the RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard 9-3. Ordinance FD46 and'or the 2010 Ca;ifornia Fire Code require that the fire sprinkler systems to be monitoring by Central Station sprinkler monitoring system A manual and or automatic fire alarm system fire may a'so be required based on the occupant load of the bui'ding Plan check approval and a building permit are required prior to the installation of a fire alarm or a sprtnk:er monitoring system Plans and specifications shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services in accordance w th RCFPD Fire Alarm Standard FSC-6 Fire District Site Access Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets and highways, as well as private roads, drive aisles andeor designated fire lanes. Please reference the RCFPD Fire Department Access Roadways Standard 5-1. 1 Location of Access, All portions of the structures Vstory exterior wall shall be located vr;thin 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measure on an approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas. unpaved changes In elevation, gates and fences are deemed obstructions. 2 Specifications for private Fire District access roadways per the RCFPD Standards are, a The minimum unobstructed w dth is 26-feet. b The maximum inside turn rad,us shall be 24-feet. c The minimum outside turn rad'us shall be 50-feet d The minimum radius for cu-de-sacs is 45-feet. e The minimum vertical c earanc-s is 14-feet, 6-inches. D'I —Pg29 f At any p,iva to entry median, the m!n-mum w-dth of traffic lanes sha l l be 20 f :et on ea{ ' sAe g The angle of departure and approach shall not exceed 9 degrees or 20 percent h The maximum grade of the dr ving surface shalt not exceed 120/, i. Support a m nimum load of 70,000 pounds gross veh cle weight (GVW). I Trees and shrubs panted adjacent to the fire lane shall be kept Ornmed to a minimum of 14-feet 6-inches from the ground up Vegetation shall not be allowed to obstn.cl Fire Depa, tment apparatus 3 Access Doorways Approved doorways accessible without the use of a ladder. sha I be provided as in buildings without high piled storage, access shaI be provided in wco-dance with the 2001 California Build-ing Code, Fire and/or any other applicable standards. 4 Access Walkways Hardscaped access walkways shall be provided from the fire apparatus access road to all required building exterior openings 5. Building Access Knox boxes for site and budding access are required in accordance w1h RCFPD Standard 5 9 6. Fire Lane Identification Red curbing and/or signage shall Identify the fire lanes A site plan illustrating the proposed delneation that meets the min1mum Fire District standards shall be included in the archileclural plans submitted to B&S for approval. 7. Roof Access: must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard " There sha`I be a means of fire department access from the exterior walls of the bui dings on to the roofs of all commercial industrial and multi -family residentlas structures with roofs less than 75 above the level of the fire access road a This access must be reachable by either fire department ground ladders or by an aerial ladder. b A minimum of one ladder point with a fixed ladder shalt be provided in buildings with construction features_ or high parapets that inhibit roof access. c The number of ladder points may be requred to be increased depending on the building size and configuration d Regardless of the parapet height or construction features the approved ladle- paint shall be identified in accordance to the roof access standard e Where the ent-re roof access is restricted by high parapet walls or other obstructio ;s a permanently mounted access ladder is required f Multiple access ladders may be required for la ger buildings g Ladder construction must be in accordance with the RCFPD Roof Access Standard Appendix A h A site plan showing the locations of the roof ladder sha'i be submitted during plan check, Ladder points shall fa^e a fire access roadway(s). FSC-10 Occupancy and Hazard Control Permits Listed are those F re Code permits commonly associated with the business operations and/o building construction Plan check submittal is required with the permit application for approval of the permit, field inspection in required prior to permit issuance. General Use Permit shall be requred for any activity or operation not specifically described below, which in the judgment of the Fire Chief is likely to produce cond tions that may be hazardous to 'ife or property Candles and open flames in public assemblies Compressed Gases Public Assembly • Refrigeration Systems • Tents. Canopies and/or Air Supported Structu-esLPG or Gas Fuel Vehicles in Assembly Bui':dings Chronological Summgy of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS -- Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any building permits: Construction Access The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard. All temporary utilities over access roads must be insta led at least 14 6" above the finished surface of the road. PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF TEMPORARY POWER The building construction must be substantially competed in accordance with Fire Construction Services' 'Temporary Power Release Checklist and Procedures" DI--Pg3O PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1 Hydrant Markers An L:e hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant ;ocation on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard P an 134, 'Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers' On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the f re access road, at each hydrant .ocation 2 Fire Sprinkler System Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shal. be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services 3 Fire Sprinkler Monitoring. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler monitoring system must be. tested and accepted by Fire Construction Sery ces The fire sprinkler monitoring system shall be installed, tested and operat onal Immediately following the completion of the fire sprinkler system (subject to the release of power) 4 Fire Suppression Systems and/or other specia' hazard protection systems shall be inspected, tested and accepted by fire Construct on Services before occupancy is granted and/or equipment is placed in service 5 Fire Alarm System Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire alarm system shall be installed, inspected tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services 6 Access Control Gates Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, vehicular gates must be Inspected, tested and accepted in accordance with RCFPD Standards by Fire Construction Services 7 Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance w th the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. The CC&R's the reciprocal agreement and/or other approved documents shall be recorded and contain an approved fare access roadway map with provisions that prohibit parking, specify the method of enforcement and identifies who is respons-ble for the required annual inspections and the maintenance of all required fire access roadways 8 Address: Must be in accordance with the RCFPD Standard 5-7, 5-8 and/or 5-5. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy commerciallindustrial and multi•famtiy buildings shall post the address in accordance to the appropriate RCFPD addressing Standard. g Confidential Business Occupancy Information- The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confident al Business Occupancy Informal on" form. This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the subject building or property. This form must be presented to the Fire Construction Serv.ces Inspector. 10 Mapping Site Plan Must be in accordance with the RCFPD Standard 5-11. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a 8 Y:" x 11" or 11" x 17" site plan of the site in accordance w,th RCFPD Standard shall be revised by the applicant to reflect the actual location of all devices and building features as required in the standard The site plan must be reviewed and accepted by the Fire Inspector D 1—Pg31 RESOLUTION NO. 18-66 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. DRC2018-00471. A REQUEST TO MODIFY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2011-00457 TO LENGTHEN WEEKEND OPERATIONAL HOURS AND EXPAND THE SALE OF SEALED BEER AND WINE TO TAKEOUT ORDERS AT AN EXISTING RESTAURANT LOCATED IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK (IP) DISTRICT, INDUSTRIAL COMMERICAL_ OVERLAY AT 11560 4TH STREET AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APN: 0229-411-04 A_ Recites. 1. Golden Property LLC, on behaif of Lazy Dog Restaurants LLC, filed an application for the Issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. DRC2018-00471 as described in the tide of this Resolution. Hereinafter in thls Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 10th day of October 2018. the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred_ B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on October 10, 2018, including written and oral staff reports, togetherwith public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located within the commercial center located at 11560 4th Street; and b. The property is bound on all sides by commercial development; and C. The zoning of the center and all neighboring properties, with the exception of the property to the south, is Industrial Park (IP) District. The properties to the south are contained within the jurisdiction of the City or Ontario. The southern Ontario properties are designated as Mixed Use by the Ontario General Plan and are further governed by the Ontario Mills Specific Plan. d. The existing shopping center, the Signature Center, was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on September 28, 2005 through Design Review DRC2004-01013. The approval was for the development of a 118,470 square foot retail center comprising of five buildings. However, only four out of the five approved buildings were constructed for a combined floor area of approximately 110,650 square feet. On October 12, 2011, the Planning Commission approved D1—Pg32 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-66 DRC2018-00471— GOLDEN PROPERTY, LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC October 10, 2018 Page 2 Development Review DRC2011-00456 for the construction of a 9,396 square -foot Lary Dog Restaurant and Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 to allow the on -site consumption of beer, wine, and distilled spirits through a Type 47 (Bona Fide Eating Place) ABC License: e. The Conditional Use Permit which this resolution aims to modify (Related File; DRC2011-004557) was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on October 12, 2011. The approval was to provide alcoholic beverages for on -site consumption at a proposed restaurant with an overall floor area of 9,396 square feet, which includes 400 square foot bar area and an outdoor dining area of 978 square feet. f. The proposal governed by this resolution has two parts: I. Existing: All sales of beer, wine, and distilled spirits are limited to on -site consumption per Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457. Proposed: Allow the sale of sealed beer and wine for off -site consumption in conjunction with the restaurant's take-out orders. All alcohol sold for off -site consumption will be held to the same legal standards as on -site sales determined by the California Alcohol Beverage Control. ii. Existing: Restaurant operating hours are between 11:00 am and 12:00 am (mldnlght) per Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457. Proposed: Extend the restaurant's weekend operating hours for a total addition of 3 morning hours, Proposed Saturday hours are 10:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight). New Sunday hours are 9:00 am to 12:00 am (midnight). Restaurant hours would remain 11:00 am to 12:00 am midnight Monday through Friday. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accordance with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The project support's the General Plan's goal of creating opportunities for residents and workers to have local access to a full range of retail/entertainment needs in appropriate areas. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or Improvements in the vicinity. The project is ancillary to the operations of the existing restaurant on - site and is compatible with the existing uses within the shopping center surrounding the project site. C. The proposed use compiles with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The project is compatible, and ancillary to the existing restaurant use on -site. Restaurant uses which serve beer and wine are permitted within the Industrial Park (IP) District, Industrial Commercial Overlay. There are no modifications to the existing restaurant that would require, for example, additional parking to be provided. 4. The Planning Department Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA D1—Pg33 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 18-66 DRC2018-00471 — GOLDEN PROPERTY, LLC FOR LAZY DOG RESTAURANTS, LLC October 10, 2018 Page 3 Guidelines. The project qualities under the Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301- Existing Facilities because the project involves a negligible expansion of the use existing at the time the exemption was granted. The project does not include any modification of existing structures, facilities, mechanical equipment or topographical features. Likewise, this request does not include the addition of any new structures or mechanical equipment. The proposal only modifies the services that are provided and the hours of operation for the restaurant. Therefore, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption, and based on its own independent judgment, concurs in the staffs determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subjectto each and every condition set forth in th e Conditions of Approval, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10th DAY OF OCTOBER 2018, PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Rich Macias, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary 1. Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City or Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10th day of October 2018, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES. COMMISSIONERS; ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS' ABSTAIN. COMMISSIONERS: D1—Pg34 Conditions of Approval Community Development Dapartment Project M DRC2018-00471 Project Name: EDR - Lary Dog Restaurant Location: 11560 4TH ST - 022941104-0000 Project Type: Conditional Use Permit Modification ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. The Lazy Dog restaurant employee selling alcohol to customers must be at least 21 years of age or must be supervised during the sale by an employee that is at least 21 years of age. 2. Approval is for the modification of Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00457 to lengthen weekend operational hours from 11:00 am. to 12:00 a.m. midnight to 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. midnight Saturdays and 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. midnight on Sundays. Additionally, the sale of sealed beer and wine to will be expanded to include alcohol sales for takeout orders. 3. with the exception of the Conditions of Approval numbered 5 and 15 in Planning Commission Resolution No. 11-49, all conditions of approval from Planning Commission Resolution No. 11-49 as approved by Conditional use Permit DRC2011-00457 shall remain In full force and effect. 4. Consumption of alcohol outside of designated areas approved by Conditional Use Permit DRC2D11-00457 is prohibited. This Includes the adjacent parking lot for the restaurant and surrounding shopping center. 5. Any modification or Intensification of the approved use, including revisions in the operations of the business including changes to the operating days/hours; change in the location on -site or within the building of the use/activity that is approved by this Conditional Use Permit; improvements including new building construction; and/or other modificationslintensification beyond what Is specifically approved by this Conditional Use Permit, shall require the review and approval by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check/occupancy, construction, commencement of the activity, and/or issuance of a business license. The Planning Director may determine that modifications or intensifcations of use require the submittal of an application to modify this Conditional Use Permit for review by the City. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. A minimum of 8 surveillance cameras shall be installed at the exterior of the business, with the intent to capture digital images of subjects entering, exiting, and vehicle and pedestrian traffic approaching the business. The placement and exact number of cameras shall be determined by the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department (San Bernardino County Sheriff) prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. The applicant shall contact the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department for an inspection of the security cameras. Pdnted 101412016 www.01yoiRC.us D1-Pg35 STAFF REPORT DATE: April 24, 2019 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager Candyce Burnett, City Planner Mike Smith, Senior Planner TITLE DIRECTOR'S REPORT - REVIEW OF THE ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION PLAN SPECIFIC PLAN RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission review and discuss the Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan Specific Plan. THE CITY'S VISION The City's Vision emerged from a planning process that included extensive analyses, a thorough review of the goals and policies described in the General Plan, directions from City Council, and, most importantly, the participation and input from the overall community. This vision is to maintain and conserve large areas of rural and natural open space in the northern part of what is referred to as the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI). This large area of rural and natural open space will be fiscally supported by, and in balance with, high quality residential neighborhood development in the southern part of the SOI that is already surrounded by existing residential neighborhoods. This Specific Plan was developed from the above -noted input to help guide and develop the guiding principles that set the foundation of "the Plan". They balance the primary goal to conserve the large quantities of natural open space in the northern area of the Plan with high -quality neighborhoods in the southerly areas of the Plan where there are existing neighborhoods. Guiding Principles include local control, open space conservation, active healthy living, fiscal responsibility, public safety, and a unique sense of place. BACKGROUND —ANNEXATION PROPOSALS In 2007, the County of San Bernardino (the County) informed the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) intended to sell up to 1,070 acres of a surplus property on the northern edge of the City. The area had an overall area of 1,212 acres that had previously been needed for flood control purposes. In 2008, the City offered to assist the County and distributed a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for developers who wished to be considered for a potential joint venture with the County to entitle the land partially located within D2—Pg 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 2 the City Limits and partially within the SOI, i.e. the unincorporated area of the County. However, the County discontinued the potential joint venture in 2009 due to the economic downturn that occurred around that time period. City leadership recognized that development on the County's land would occur in the future and wanted to be prepared for the eventual sale of this surplus property by the County. Therefore, in January 2015, the City Council reaffirmed the goal of pre -zoning and annexation the 4,088-acre portion of the City's SOL This land is currently regulated by the County's zoning and, therefore, allowed residential and commercial development that would be subject to the County's, and not the City's, development standards. In May 2015, the City Council approved a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Sargent Town Planning (STP) to prepare the North Eastern Sphere Annexation Proposal (NESAP). Between the summer of 2015 and the fall of 2017, the City developed an initial plan for the 4,388- acre NESAP area. This initial plan included maintaining the northerly 3,176 acres as a Conservation Priority Area (CPA) and focused potential development in the 1,212-acre Development Priority Area (DPA) in the southerly portion. BACKGROUND — COMMUNITY OUTREACH During the fall of 2017, the City conducted a series of four Community Meetings that were held during a month -long period to provide the public information on the development of the NESAP. It became clear in these meetings that the community wanted to be more involved and to provide more input on the development of the project area. On December 20, 2017, after reviewing the plan to -date and the public's comments, the City Council directed Staff to go back and engage the community to evaluate whether or not to continue the project, and if the recommendation is to continue the project, to revise the density of the project, i.e. the number of dwelling units per acre; the type and character of the residential component of the project; and amount of commercial floor area within the project. Staff paused further development of the NESAP and EIR and embarked on extensive public engagement to grapple with these issues. On May 16, 2018, after extensive outreach (discussed below), the City Council directed Staff to work with the community to develop a community -based plan. Directions from the City Council included 1) incorporating large -lot residential development with a "banded" component that would match adjacent residential densities, 2) incorporating local and Community Trails for consistency with the Equestrian Overlay (as described in the General Plan, Figure LU-2 - Land Use), 3) incorporating a traffic circulation component that connects existing streets (i.e., Wilson Avenue, Milliken Avenue, and Rochester Avenue) and is compatible with the surrounding community; 4) limiting commercial uses; and 5) incorporating any necessary public facilities (e.g. a school and parks). At this time the City also established a name for the future Specific Plan: "Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan" (EHNCP). The name reflects the City's intent to balance the community priorities for conservation in the rural northern portion of the planning area and appropriate development in the southern neighborhood area. After the May 16, 2018 meeting, Staff continued the community engagement process, received and evaluated the community's input, and began to draft the plan. D2—Pg 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 3 PROJECT STATUS A. Community Outreach: In the fall of 2017, the City conducted four community meetings to solicit comments from interested individuals and community groups on the initial planning concepts. Participants had many questions and concerns about the process, the preliminary concept, including the number and type of residential units proposed, particularly multi -family units, and the amount and type of commercial uses. In addition, there were concerns about fire safety and habitat associated with the configuration of open space in the heart of the neighborhood. Due to the level of concern, the City set aside the preliminary concept and conducted further outreach to better understand the priorities of the Rancho Cucamonga community. During early 2018, the City gathered further input through small group and large community meetings along with online and paper surveys to determine the next steps. These additional community meetings and surveys confirmed that 1) local control of this area was preferred by the community, and 2) some level of development under City zoning standards was acceptable. Respondents overwhelmingly supported local control through annexation and agreed that planning a new neighborhood would be the preferred method of providing local control to set the standard for high -quality development and cover the cost of habitat conservation. On May 16, 2018, the City Council directed staff to continue working with the community on a plan for neighborhoods and conservation in the northeastern area of the City (Exhibit B). B. Community Engagement Summer 2018: In the Summer of 2018, after receiving direction from the City Council to create a community -based plan, the City hosted a community -based planning process to learn more about priorities and how to best balance them. The extensive community engagement process included small group meetings, pop-up events, multiple online surveys, and a large, well -attended public open house where attendees provided feedback on an initial concept plan. The EHNCP was developed in response to the community's feedback received during this period. The following highlights the engagement efforts: • July, August, and September 2018 — Nine (9) pop-up outreach events were held with over 800 members of the community engaged. At each pop-up, participants were provided an opportunity for questions and answers, informational materials, Dot Survey, and children participated in a drawing exercise; August 21-29, 2018 — Small group meetings were held with four community groups including Campeones para la Comunidad (Community Champions), Healthy Rancho Cucamonga Steering Committee, Healthy RC Youth Leaders, and a small group meeting with a home owners association (HOA) that included residents who live in a residential area located to the west of the project area; September 21, 2018 — An open house was held open house attracted approximately 200 peopl e D2—Pg 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 4 October 2018 - February 2019 — Staff engaged over 200,000 digital impressions and reached nearly 89,000 through various digital survey tools such as Facebook LIVE, Facebook posts, Twitter, Instagram, Nextdoor, videos, and eNews. C. General Plan: As noted previously, the majority of the project area is designated as Flood Control/Public Utilities, Conservation, Hillside Residential, and Open Space per the General Plan, Figure LU-2 - Land Use. With the exception of a 33-acre parcel located south of Banyan Avenue and west of the Deer Creek flood control channel, the majority of the proposed Neighborhood Priority Area (NPA) is currently designated as Flood Control/Utility Corridor. An amendment to the General Plan is required to change the land use designations within the NPA (related file: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00749). The remaining 3,532 acres of the project area is within the Rural/Conservation Area (RCA) and the EHNCP would rezone this area consistent with the existing Open Space Land Use designations in the General Plan. Other minor clarifying amendments will be required, including a new text amendment to allow the clustering of homes within the RCA. The amendment to the General Plan will be included with the project for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council at a subsequent public hearing. D. Etiwanda North Specific Plan: Most of the project area (approximately 3,494 acres) is within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP). This Specific Plan was adopted in April 1992. The project area that is located between the northward "extension" of Milliken Avenue and the existing neighborhoods on the project area's western boundary, are outside the boundary of the ENSP and would, therefore, be regulated by the Development Code (if they were within the City's boundaries). The ENSP was adopted to establish pre -zoning and development standards for the Etiwanda area of the Sphere of Influence (SO]). Doing this was an effort to ensure that when development of properties within the ENSP was proposed, such development would follow the City's standards and, therefore, be in conformance with the pre - zoning document and be consistent with the goals of annexation. However, there are properties within the ENSP that were developed prior to this proposed annexation project and, therefore, were not designed to the standards described in the ENSP. The ENSP permits a significant amount of residential development in the proposed Conservation Priority Area (CPA) and permits a limited amount of residential development in the proposed Development Priority Area (DPA) while maintaining a substantial portion of this area as Flood Control. The ENSP also established two "floating", i.e. approximate, locations for commercial uses. The size and scope of such development would be determined based on a market analysis of the number of households that would support commercial uses. During the preparation of the annexation, it was determined that a new specific plan was necessary as the ENSP does not provide for conservation, does not "pre -zone" the entire project area, permits a significant amount of development where it should not occur, and does not adequately address development where it could occur. Thus, the ENSP needs to be amended to remove the EHNCP from that Specific Plan (related file: Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00750). E. Previous Project- NESAP: The 2017 proposal, the North Eastern Sphere Annexation Project, or NESAP, was shelved in the winter of 2018 when the City Council directed staff to return to the drawing board and work with the community to determine a vision for the planning area. D2—Pg 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 5 F. The Current Project - EHNCP: As directed by the City Council, the EHNCP was developed with direct input from the community to help guide and develop the guiding principles that set the foundation of "'the Plan". The Community Vision and Guiding Principles were developed from community input, City Council direction, and policies of the General Plan. They balance the primary goal to conserve the large quantities of natural open space in the northern area of the plan with high -quality neighborhoods in the southerly areas of the Plan where they would complement the existing neighborhoods. Guiding Principles included local control, open space conservation, active healthy living, fiscal responsibility, public safety, and a unique sense of place. Based on the Vision and Guiding Principles site studies were explored that in - turned informed the drafting of the Development Standards in the EHNCP. The plan establishes two areas: The Rural/Conservation Area (RCA): The primary focal components of this area are: conserving as much open space land as feasible; generating conservation funding; prioritizing the conservation of lands adjacent to the existing North Etiwanda Preserve; permitting limited quantities of rural housing; extending open space corridors and trails from foothill open space down into the neighborhoods; and providing a variety of parks, greenspaces, and playfields adjacent to every neighborhood. The City has had a long-standing vision for the foothills between the City boundary up to the National Forest line and through the implementation of the Goals and Policies of the General Plan, set forth specific Open Space Land Use designations devoted to the preservation of the natural resources and open space opportunities. The vision of the EHNCP builds on those Goals and Policies to enhance the efforts of conservation through Chapter 3 - Conservation Plan of the Specific Plan that identifies the value of the biological setting, establishes conservation methods including establishing a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program (Section 7.4, page 336), while allowing for appropriate limited rural development on privately owned property. The Rural/Conservation Area's (RCA) primary focus is centered around these conservation efforts. The key strategies in the plan include the continued efforts to conserve additional land and restoration of habitat. This can be achieved through developer incentives in the Neighborhood Area to underwrite conservation as mitigation to offset impacts of that development. Additionally, this can be accomplished with property owner incentives within the RCA through the TDR to the Neighborhood Area, and then setting aside their property for additional mitigation and conservation. Although there are large areas of the RCA that are currently considered Open Space or Conservation, not all properties are actively managed and do not have permanent or adequate funding to continue to maintain and manage the habitat. The plan sets clear conservation objectives for conservation management with appropriate implementation measures. The Plan also creates a set of design and development standards (Section 5.9 - Rural Development Standards, page 236) that will regulate development in the RCA. All new development will be required to comply with the regulation in the Rural Development Standards to maintain the rural feeling of the area including very low density, large lots, minimally improved streets and infrastructure as well as specific design elements (e.g. minimal lighting, massing, and location on the site). Development in the RCA is regulated D2—Pg 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 6 so as to not impact the natural terrain and habitat or conservation properties while taking into consideration potential site constraints, natural hazards, and limited services. As discussed above, the primary focus of the Plan is to maximize open space and conservation. The Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) strategy would encourage the preservation of land within the RCA and give priority to land adjacent to the North Etiwanda Preserve to provide larger contiguous conservation areas and habitat linkages without placing new tax burdens on existing residents. As outlined in Section 1.5 Guiding Principles (Topic #4 - Fiscal Responsibility, page 29) the objectives for conservation of the RCA was that new development must make preservation of natural landscapes feasible and fiscally self-sustaining. The plan has been developed with this in mind to enable enough development in the Neighborhood Area of new residential units, sale tax generating retail and restaurants, and through the process of transferring development rights. The process of transferring development rights would allow for a privately -owned property in the RCA to transfer the residential density to the Neighborhood Area voluntarily in exchange for financial or other negotiated compensation. The number of residential units would be determined on the maximum density allowed based on the regulating zone, slope, and other environmental constraints. When a parcel is abutting another permanently preserved property (e.g. the North Etiwanda Preserve), a multiplier could be applied to incentivize the transfer of density from the RCA. The multiplier would be determined by the City or a qualified entity established by the City. The total density allowed for a Neighborhood Area phase/subarea could be allowed to exceed the total as shown in Table 7.3 (below) but the Plan's total density would not be allowed to exceed the maximum permitted density. PHASE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Dwelling 117 127 154 567 478 459 281 units Commercial _ 148,569 18,277 Square Feet Parks Acres 2.25 3.5 8.6 9.3 7.5 8.5 4.5 Acres 33 50 155 117 90 87 46 8 9 NATota1 RCATotal GRANDTOTAt 15 702 2,900 100 3,000 13,154 180,000 . 180, 000 30 11 8£15 . 49 201 828 3,565 85.15 4,393 The Neighborhood Area. The primary components of this area are: neighborhoods with beautiful walkable streets; very large lot equestrian homes; homes in walkable neighborhoods; neighborhoods geared toward older individuals; neighborhoods suited to, and attainable by, families; neighborhood -serving shops and restaurants; neighborhoods that include smaller detached and attached single-family homes; and homes that reflect the heritage of Etiwanda and Alta Loma. To ensure this, the Plan is divided into "Regulating Zones". For each zone there are development standards that will regulate development in the Neighborhood Area. These D2—Pg 6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 7 standards will be applied to each project through the "Precise Neighborhood Plan" process (Section 7.7, page 344). The standards for each regulating zone are calibrated to generate the physical form and character in accordance with the Vision described in Chapter 4. They will regulate 1) allowed building types (Table 5.4A, page 1301), 21) primary and secondary setback requirements (Table 5.413, page 130); and 3) allowed uses (Appendix 1, page 1-1). Appendix 1 will be incorporated into the Development Code (related file: Municipal Code Amendment DRC2019-00288). The regulating zones follow a spectrum that is sensitive to the existing context of Rancho Cucamonga. The regulating zones are described as follows (excerpted from the Plan): 1. Neighborhood Estate (NE) Regulating Zone: The Neighborhood Estate regulating zone is for large homes on large lots, with large setbacks and yards, and expansive views of the mountains to the north and/or valley to the south. A semi -rural, equestrian design character is envisioned to provide for opportunities for equestrian living, with curbless streets that lead directly to multipurpose trails to the foothills; 2. Neighborhood General 1 (NG-1) Regulating Zone: This walkable neighborhood regulating zone includes single-family detached homes on a range of lot sizes, knitted together by a connective network of landscaped pedestrian -oriented streets, parks, and trails. Well -landscaped front yards and private rear and side yard areas for family activities surround each home; 3. Neighborhood General 2 (NG-2) Regulating Zone: This walkable neighborhood regulating zone includes single-family detached and attached homes, knitted together by a network of pedestrian -oriented streets and Paseos, and in proximity to neighborhood parks or squares for family; and 4. Shops & Restaurants (SR) Regulating Zone: This two -block area centered on the intersection of Wilson and Rochester Avenues has a classic Southern California small- town "Main Street" character with a distinctly rural twist. Neighborhood -serving shops and restaurants have large shopfronts and wide sidewalks for strolling, dining, and visiting. Parking is provided on the street and in rear parking lots that are accessed by courts and Paseos. The Neighborhood Area is divided into nine (9) sub -areas (Figure 5.3 — Sub -Area Regulating Plan, page 121). The purpose of this is to 1) phase development and 2) ensure the intended distribution of building types. To provide long-term flexibility in the layout and design of each development proposal, the Regulating Plan is conceptual and subject to refinement through the Precise Neighborhood Plan process. The first developer in each sub -area is responsible for securing approval of a Precise Neighborhood Plan through the process described in the Plan (Section 7.7 —Authority, Amendments, and Approvals, page 344). Following the City staff's review of a proposed Precise Neighborhood Plan to verify consistency with the Plan, it will be forwarded for review and action by the Planning Commission. If approved, it will be recorded as a refinement to the Regulating Plan. All subsequent development within each sub -area will be reviewed by the City for consistency with the Precise Neighborhood Plan in place. D2—Pg 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 8 Additional regulations in the Plan include standards and guidelines for topics such as architecture, commercial storefronts, landscaping, public and private open spaces, street (thoroughfare) design, and parking. The regulations are well -detailed to ensure that City staff can effectively use it, developers can follow it, and 'that the City's design/technical goals and policies that apply elsewhere in the City are implemented and fulfilled in the EHNCP. The required design and/technical characteristics for, for example, various building typologies, signs, and trails are clearly described in graphic form and demonstrated with imagery of the desired qualities that must be incorporated. Architecture is extensively discussed with emphasis on what elements must be present to reflect an architectural theme of, for example, a house. This will ensure consistency with the City's architectural standards and compatibility with existing residential development in the area surrounding the EHNCP. Regarding the multi -purpose trails, the Plan does not change the existing Equestrian Overlay as it currently applies to the area. It specifies certain design and technical requirements for them. In instances where it does not, the Trails Implementation Plan adopted in 1991 and the City's standard drawings for features such as trail improvements including surfacing, fencing, gates, and entrances will apply. Open space, views, and access to trails and recreation space was a significant priority during the public engagement process and is a primary focus of the General Plan. The plans overarching goal is to limit the amount of high -quality neighborhood development in order to support the larger goal of conserving large amounts of permanent open space and habitat conservation. The framework of "the Plan" establishes a network of trail connections building off the existing trial network identified in the General Plan and Trail Implementation Plan and already in the built environment. It also proposes to improve the trail connections where there is a lack of connection and create unique walkable neighborhoods. A design feature of the plan is that every residence is within a 5- to 7- minute walk of the Deer Creek Greenway, Day Creek Trail and/or the central greenwal which all lead to the foothill trail network. It is important to note that trails will not only be designed and permitted where they don't impact permanent conservation or habitat mitigation property or any special species that are protected within those conservation areas. Within the Neighborhood Area parks are planned to be the living rooms of the neighborhood with the paseos providing shortcuts to neighborhood parks and smaller green spaces. Special community gathering spaces are also planned in the design to create unique spaces for farmers markets and seasonal activities. With so many active and passive open and gathering spaces for residents, this will discourage these activities in the foothill open spaces where they don't belong. It's anticipated that activities in the Rural open space areas in the RCA will be controlled activities limited to educational uses, hiking on designated trails and limited bike and equestrian access on designated trails (Section 4.2, Open Space Framework, page 72). 1 The "central greenway" will be renamed by the community through additional engagement during the DEIR review period. s •. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2015-00751 EHNCP SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 9 Within the Neighborhood Area there is a hierarchy of open spaces and parks including trails, trail heads, greenways, roundabout park, neighborhood parks, play fields, paseos, and a town square. The intent of the open space framework is that every place inside the planning area, Including the streets as an extension of you., living space to encourage an active healthy lifestyle. The goal of the plan is that every home is in within a 2- to 3-minute walk of a park or open space. NEXT STEPS: Following the review of the draft Specific Plan by the Planning Commission, staff will incorporate recommended edits made by the Commission and/or the public. The draft Specific Plan is substantially complete, staff may also continue to minimally refine and enhance it where necessary for content, clarity, and/or structure. In the meantime, staff will prepare a Director's Report for the Planning Commission's review and discussion of the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The review of the EIR is scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting on May 22, 2019. Shortly afterward, the EIR will be circulated for public review and comment. The public hearings for the EHNCP have not been scheduled at this time. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of the plan preparation is expected to be neutral as the City can recover costs of preparing the plan through a specific plan maintenance fee paid for by the future development of the area. Additionally, there will be further analysis of project impacts through a Fiscal Impact Analysis and Feasibility Study prepared as part of the overall EHNCP proposal. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The City Council established the long-term objective for the entire 6,000-acre Sphere of Influence area to identify development, mitigation, preservation, and annexation potential. The EHNCP is being prepared to address this goal for 4,088 acres within the City's Sphere of Influence. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Site Map Exhibit B — May 16, 2018 City Council Staff Report Exhibit C — Draft Etiwanda Heights Neighborhood and Conservation Plan (EHNCP) Specific Plan (under separate cover) D2—Pg 9 i � 1 ' g 6 t ` 4 Yro ` p L�t • 3!F II � Y1 16. v i op vi u C EXHIBIT A - �, D 1D .�. DATE: May 16, 2018 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager INITIATED BY: Matthew Bums, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE NORTH EASTERN SPHERE ANNEXATION PROPOSAL (NESAP). RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to continue working Wth the community to develop a neighborhood and open space conservation plan for the North Eastern Sphere Annexation Proposal area. BACKGROUND: The North Eastern Sphere Annexation Proposal (NESAP) is a planning effort to investigate the feasibility of planning and annexing approximately 4,388 acres of land in the City's Sphere of Influence into the City's City Limits. Within the NESAP boundary, 300 acres are within the City and 4,088 acres are Wthin the SOI and this area extends from Haven Avenue, easterly to the City's boundary with Fontana, and from the northerly City limits to the National Forest boundary. Annexation of this land would extend the City's land use authority over the land, providing local control of the future development of that land through zoning and development standards. The catalyst for this planning process was San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) completing construction of various flood control facilities, resulting in approximately 1,212 of SBCFCD land becoming surplus land. Initial County Development Efforts In 2008, the County of San Bernardino initiated an effort to find a development partner for the development of the surplus 1,212 acres. The City distributed a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for those developers who wished to be considered in a potential joint venture with the County of San Bernardino to entitle the approximate 1,200 acres. The County's land is partially located within the City and partially within the unincorporated area of the County, but within the Citys Sphere of Influence (SO]). Seven proposals were submitted, one later withdrawn, to develop the project area. The County discontinued the potential joint venture in 2009 due to the economic downturn. As of right now, the County controls the zoning (and thus the uses and density) on approximately 900 acres of their land. Furthermore, the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plan anticipates development on the County's land following completion of the flood control facilities. If the County finds a development partner, the land could be developed and the City would have little ability to control the uses, the density, or the impacts to surrounding neighborhoods. The City would also not collect any property tax revenue to pay for the costs of services and maintenance that would come with new residents using our streets and parks. 2015 Review of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan In 2015, the City Council reaffirmed their goal of pre -zoning and annexing an approximately 4,100-acre portion of the Citys SOL If the land were annexed, it would give the City local control, the ability to achieve quality development, an ability to minimize impacts to the community, and ensure fiscal responsibility. Later that year, after a competitive bid process, the City contracted with Sargent Town Planning for the 4,388- acre North Eastern Sphere Annexation Proposal (NESAP) through the preparation of a Specific Plan, El R, and appurtenant support studies and analysis. A decision was made early in the NESAP process to establish a new specific plan as the ENSP does not provide for conservation, does not zone the entire EXHIBIT R D2—Pg11 Page351 NESAP area, permits a significant amount of development where it should not occur, and does not adequately address development where it could occur. Between the summer of 2015 and the Fall of 2017, the consulting team and City worked to develop an initial plan proposal. The early design considerations proposed maintaining the northerly 3,176 acres as a "conservation priority area", and focused potential development in 1,212 acres of "development priority area" in the southerly portion. Early concepts for the development priority area included a mix of residential product types, a central commercial "town center" with neighborhood retail and restaurants, and public uses and amenities arranged in a compact and walkable land use pattern to encourage active living. Furthermore, as the habitat adjacent to the National Forest is less degraded, initial planning concepts were oriented around directing conservation mitigation easements into the northerly 3,176 acres. In essence, the development of the County's land would help ensure the preservation of the land between the City and the National Forest through the purchase of land or conservation easements. Staff worked closely with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to discuss the NESAP and elicit their comments regarding potential environmental constraints. Because of their comments and concerns, the NESAP area was evaluated for the presence of the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (SBKR) and extensive trappings were conducted. No presence of the SBKR was found on -site. The NESAP area was also evaluated for the presence and quality of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFFSS), which determined that, due to the lack of sand and water flows across the site, the RAFFSS habitat is declining and will continue to degrade. However, the habitat concerns were given strong consideration and heavily influenced the resulting plan proposal. A restoration plan to improve RAFFSS habitat was considered in response to agency concerns. The initial design concept preserved/restored a large central portion of the development priority area, and provided for areas of residential and commercial development around what is essentially the perimeter with a large habitat area in the central core. 2017 Community Meetings In the fall of 2017, the City conducted a series of four Community Meetings held on October 26, November 2, November 9, and November 16, 2017. These Community Meetings were held at public school sites in general proximity to the NESAP area and over a month's time to provide the greatest opportunity for public participation. Approximately 6,500 notices were mailed to all property owners north of the 210 freeway and east of Haven Avenue. All Community Meetings were well attended, with the number of persons in attendance ranging from approximately 60 to 100 persons at each event. At those meetings, staff and the consultant team presented the initial design considerations for the conservation priority area and the development priority area, and some of the reasoning behind those considerations (i.e., USFWS and CDFW comments). Those in attendance raised questions and objections to the following: • Traffic (including existing conditions and potential impacts from future development), • The proposed number and location of residential units, multi -family development (e.g., condos, apartments, attached and SFR), • Trails and equestrian use, • Commercial development, • Loss of view and open space, • Increased property taxes, and • The desire to retain the NESAP area as it currently exists. During this time, the City also engaged the community through a survey and found: ■ 64.4% of respondents like the idea of conserving Upper Sphere Area (-3,000 Acres); ■ 63.7% prioritize conserving foothills; ■ 84.7% report local control is important. Revised NESAP Outreach On December 20, 2017, following the four Community Meetings, the City Council commented on the NESAP. The City Council agreed with the City Manager's statement that comments from the public were heard, that staff would go back and look at the proposal, look at the feedback received and would further evaluate the density, housing types, and amount of commercial. Further development of the NESAP D2—Pg 12 Page 352 concept and EIR were halted while staff evaluated the comments received. In response to the community's concerns, staff initiated additional community outreach efforts to work more closely with the community in defining the future of the NESAP area. Hearing from the community that the initial proposal seemed too intense and that the community desired a greater opportunity for input, the original NESAP concept was shelved. In its place, staff brought a blank slate back to the community, summarizing that three paths are generally: Options: Do Nothing Annex, Keep as Open Space Annex with Community -based Plan Community creates plan for Outcome County develops land Community raises $$$, land responsible development before stays open space Countyfinds a development partner High: our options for None to low: little would Potential Community mitigating impacts are change, fire hazards and Low to moderate: most impacts Impacts reduced without land use circulation issues would would be offset by mitigation control remain requirements High: we will have to payfor High: we will have to tax Neutral to slightly positive: the Potential Fiscal Impacts services for new neighbors ourselves or otherwise raise right mixof land uses will be without receiving tax revenue $171 Million to payfor and fiscally neutral to slightly positive maintain land Depends on how much money High: Our city has some of the Quality & Amenities Unknown is available highest quality development in So Cal During the spring of 2018, staff met with representatives of the home owner associations adjacent to the NESAP area to explain the project process in greater detail and provide the opportunity to answer any questions. The City conducted another survey to initiate the community workshops and found: • 70.9% prefer local control and • 58.9% support some level of development under City zoning. The City then held two Community Workshops on March 22 and April 19, 2018 to work with the community on developing the direction for the NESAP area. These Community Workshops were held at the Central Park Rancho Cucamonga Hall with the intent to provide the greatest opportunity for public participation. Approximately 9,700 notices were mailed to all property owners north of the 210 freeway and east of Archibald Avenue. Additionally, understanding the future of NESAP is a city-wide concern, staff conducted supplemented outreach activities using email and social media. An additional 20,508 engagements occurred over the course of 5 Facebook Live events alone. Both Community Workshops were well attended with approximately 100 persons in attendance at the first meeting and approximately 230 persons at the second. At the March 22, 2018 Community Workshop, participants worked in groups of 6 to 8 participants each to prioritize community objectives for the NESAP area. The first activity asked participants to discuss and identify their top-5 priorities for the planning of the area. The top five priorities identified that evening were: 1) Local Control, 2) Avoid New Property Taxes, 3) Development Compatibility, 4) Preserve Open Space and View Corridors (tied). The second activity asked participants to design a conceptual land use plan for the NESAP area considering their responses from the first activity. Participants were provided a map of the area and various stickers representing different land uses (i.e., housing of various types and densities, neighborhood serving commercial, and parks and open space. As a result, participants prepared 16 maps: • 1 recommended no annexation allowing development under the County, • 1 recommended annexing and keeping the land as open space, and Page 353 D2—Pg 13 14 proposed varying ranges and mixes of residential development, neighborhood commercial uses, trails, equestrian facilities, and extending major streets (i.e., Wilson Avenue, Milliken Avenue, and Rochester Avenue). Between April 5 and April 12, 2018, the City conducted a series of 9 community Pop -Up events and asked participants to complete a survey regarding the NESAP that served as a "Virtual Workshop." A total of 262 people completed the survey, which contained questions regarding: • the Annexation Proposal, • Neighborhood Development, • Parks, Open Space, and Trails, • Streets, Traffic and Circulation, • Annexation Funding. General comments indicated support for the local control and facilitating local control through low -intensity development, with large lot single-family homes, parkland, open space trails and habitat conservation, agreement with the need to connect and complete existing streets, androughly equal support and opposition for conserving the area. At the April 19, 2018, Community Workshop participants seated around tables with 6 to 8 participants each to answer three questions about the type and nature of development that might make sense (focused on Open Space Types, Neighborhood Types, and Neighborhood Amenities) to solicit refinements to the community priorities and preferences for the NESAP area expressed in the previous Community Workshop. During that workshop, the City received wide-ranging feedback on the types of open spaces, housing, and amenities that might be appropriate for the NESAP area. Generally, the input coalesced around the idea of creating high -quality, low intensity neighborhoods that continue the equestrian trail network and are rural in character. During this workshop, the idea of finding a mechanism for purchasing and preserving this land was again raised by some community members. Open Space Survey Since the original proposal was unveiled last fall, staff have received repeated input about the possibility of the community self -taxing themselves to raise money and buy some or all of the NESAP lands for preservation as open space. Avoiding new taxes has been an operating principle from the beginning of this work effort and this principal was confirmed in the fall meetings, the March workshop, and the Virtual Workshop. However, given the repeated request to look at this option from some community members, staff initiated a FlashVote survey to better understand whether this may be an initiative the community would support. Staff estimated the costs for acquisition of the land, installation of basic infrastructure as would be required under the General Plan, such as finishing trail connections and Wilson Avenue, and providing for the long- term maintenance of the plan. For the lower 1,212 acres, costs were estimated to be $129 million. For the remainder of the un-conserved acreage of the conservation priority area, costs were estimated at an additional $42 million. Between April 30 and May 2, 2018, the City conducted a FlashVote to obtain information regarding community support for purchasing land within the NESAP using funds from a new tax. A total of 601 participants completed the vote, 486 identified themselves as local residents. Approximately 51.2 percent did not support a new tax to purchase the area and only 33.7% supported purchasing the land through a new tax. ANALYSIS: There are three options available to the City: 1. Discontinue the annexation proposal. The NESAP area would stay under County jurisdiction and any development proposals would be subject to County entitlement processing and County development standards. The City would not be able to impose its Development Impact Fees to construct new infrastructure needed to serve the new population nor collect taxes to operated and maintain its roads and parks that would be impacted by the population living in these new neighborhoods. 2. Annex the area and keep as Open Space. To respect property rights and not put the City at undue risk, conserving the area as open space would require the land be purchased specifically for Page 354 D2—Pg 14 open space. There is virtually no grant money available for the purchase of land of this scale and quality. The only feasible method identified thus far would be for the City to purchase the land. However, the City does not have the funds to purchase this land and the money would have to be raised by a local initiative. Under this option, the City would purchase the NESAP area, funded through a bond measure (such as a Mello -Roos) to be repaid through a new parcel tax. Staff has evaluated three options, which reference the Lower Sphere Area (the 1,212 acres north of Los Osos High School) and the remaining 3,176 acres generally north of the current City boundary (Upper Sphere Area). These options include the following and would distribute the parcel tax citywide: • Buy and conserve the Lower Sphere Area for approximately $129,000,000, paid for by an additional annual tax of $260 per parcel over 20 years • Buy and conserve the Upper Sphere Area for approximately $42,000,000, paid for by an additional annual tax of $95 per parcel • Buy and conserve both the Lower and Upper Sphere Areas for approximately $171,000,000, paid for by an additional annual tax of $355 per parcel 3. Annex the NESAP with a Community -Based Plan. The third option would entail the continued preparation of a community -based plan that would allow enough development to provide for the desired amenities, such as trails and parks, and open space conservation. This option would utilize feedback we have from all community meetings and continued community engagement. Of the three broad options available, discontinuation of Annexation is the least supported by the community. Throughout the community outreach process, via both surveys and workshops, the community has repeated that local control is of the upmost importance: • In the October FlashVote, 84.7% respondents supported local control • In the March FlashVote, 70.9% reported local control In the March 22 Community Workshop, local control was the top community priority and all but one of the working groups recommended plans for local control • In the April Virtual Workshop, the top priority for NESAP was again local control Thus, we believe Option 1, in which the City does not continue the effort would not be preferred by the community. Option 2, annexing the area and keeping it as open space, also appears to be a less viable option. Throughout the process, several community members have stated this option is the preferred option and the community would be willing to self -tax to raise the funds. The City does not have the funds to purchase the land from the County or other private land owners in the NESAP area. Additionally, staff has not been able to identify any outside funding sources that would facilitate the purchase of this land. This leaves the suggested path of passing a new bond measure that would be repaid through a parcel tax, but this option does not appear to have enough community support to actually pass a new bond measure: • "Avoid new property taxes" was the second most important priority identified at the first workshop and third most important priority identified through the Virtual Workshop • Only 47.7% of respondents to the Virtual Workshop agreed that the City should investigate exploring the possibility of a new parcel tax to acquire the lower 1,212 acres However, given the repeated requests for this option, staff tested this idea via FlashVote to determine how much support there might be for a new tax to fund acquisition of the land. Only 33.7% of respondent were in favor of passing bond measure and parcel tax to purchase the land. Given this input from the community, staff recommends moving forward with Option 3: Annex the NESAP area with a community -based plan for new neighborhoods and open space conservation. Through the community outreach activities this past spring, staff has heard several objectives repeatedly from the community: • Local control • High quality • Low -intensity • Rural character D2—Pg 15 Page 355 • Continue the Equestrian Overlay • New trails that connect to existing trails and open space • Safe and walkable streets • Amenity rich • Preserves open space • Does not result in new taxes or costs for existing residents As such, staff recommends continuing to work with the community to prepare a plan for the NESAP area based on this vision. Under this option, staff envisions working with the community over the course of the next several months to explore and refine the vision for open space and trails in concert with the Equestrian Overlay, high -quality low -intensity neighborhoods, and habitat conservation. This would include the development of a Specific Plan and EI R as a mechanism for facilitating local control through annexation. The time necessary to complete the NESAP will follow a path of further community engagement, Specific Plan and EIR preparation, circulation of the project EIR, Planning Commission consideration and City Council consideration, and finally submitting the annexation application to LAFCO. Staff anticipates scheduling the NESAP for City Council consideration in the first or second quarter of 2019. FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact of the plan preparation is expected to be neutral as the City can recover costs of preparing the plan through a specific plan maintenance fee paid for by the future developer of the area. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: By 2018, review the City's long-term objectives for the entire 6,000-acre Sphere area and identify development, mitigation, preservation and annexation potential. City Manager's Office and Community Development (prior year Council Goal). ATTACHMENTS: Description Attachment 1 - Community Workshop #1 Results Attachment 2 - Virtual Workshop Results Attachment 3 - Community Workshop #2 Results Attachment 4 - October FlashVote Results Attachment 5 - March FlashVote Results Attachment 6 - Open Space Survey Results Attachrent 7 - Spring 2G 1 a Media Coverage D2—Pg 16 Page 356 REPORT DATE: April 24, 2019 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner Perry Banner, Contract Planner SUBJECT: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018-00605 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend Title 17 of the Municipal Code (Development Code) pertaining to requirements and standards for the development of hotels, and associated amendments to relevant special planning areas as it relates to hotels — EMPIRE LAKES SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019-00230, ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019-00230, TOWN SQUARE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019- 00231, VICTORIA ARBORS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019-00231, AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019-00232. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending the City Council approve Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018-00605, Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230, Town Square Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231, Victoria Arbors Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231, and Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2019-00232, amending the requirements and standards for the development of new hotels or expansions to existing hotels within the City and plan areas. BACKGROUND: Timeline: On October 4, 2017, the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No. 919, an interim ordinance requiring a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel within the City to allow staff time to study appropriate development standards and regulations for hotels and draft any necessary changes to the Municipal Code, Per State law, an interim ordinance is effective for a period of 45 days from the date of adoption, unless extended at a public hearing prior to the end of the 45-day period. On November 15, 2017, the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No. 923, which extended the interim ordinance's requirement for a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel within the City for an additional 10 months, 15 days, to provide staff additional time to study the issue and draft a Municipal Code Amendment to address the impacts created by hotel development within the City. E1—Pg1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605, DRC2019-00230, DRC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 2 On August 22, 2018, the Planning Commission reviewed draft standards for new hotel development and provided comments on the standards and direction to staff to reach out to the current hotel business owners for feedback. On September 19, 2018, the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No. 940, which further extended the interim ordinance's requirement for a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel within the City for an additional 10 months, 15 days. On March 19, 2019. staff held a focus group workshop for current hotel business owners. Invitations were sent to the individual hotel properties and the ownership entities based on data derived from our business license system_ A total of twenty-two invitations were sent. Five individuals, representing three hotels within the City (Four Points Sheraton, Aloft and Best Western) attended. How Hotels are Currently Regulated, There are 11 hotels operating in the City of Rancho Cucamonga with 2 with current entitlements that are in the pre -construction phase. Most of the11 hotels have been built within the last five to ten years. In the last three years, the City has noticed increased interest for hotels in multiple categories, including business, extended stay, and general. Hotels in the City provide business travelers a convenient location near local businesses and the Ontario International Airport as well as provide weekend vacation travelers a great location to use as their base for exploring the tocal area of Southern California. These same hotels employ hundreds of people collectively and provide a small, but valuable contribution to our local economy. The table below identifies Rancho Cucamonga's existing hotels. HOTEL NAME ADDRESS DESCRIPTION ROOMS Holiday Inn Express & Suites 9589 Milliken Avenue Business/Leisure 93 Residence Inn by Marriott 9299 Haven Avenue Extended Stay 126 Fairfield Inn & Suites by Marriott 9550 Pittsburgh Avenue Business/Leisure 108 TownePlace Suites by Marriott 9625 Milliken Avenue Extended Stay 112 Homewood Suites by Hilton 11433 Mission Vista Drive Extended Stay 103 Hilton Garden Inn 11481 Mission Vista Drive Business/Leisure 122 Courtyard by Marriott 11525 Mission Vista Drive Business/Leisure 117 Aloft 10480 Fourth Street Business/Leisure 136 Best Western Plus Heritage Inn 8179 Spruce Avenue Business/Leisure 116 Four Points by Sheraton 11960 E Foothill Blvd Busines slLeisure 118 New Kansan Motel 9300 E Foothill Blvd Budget 12 Hotels are permitted or conditionally permitted in six zoning districts within Rancho Cucamonga, as well as the Haven Avenue Overlay District and the Industrial Commercial Overlay District_ Hotels are also permitted within the following special planning areas: Empire Lakes, Etiwanda, Town Square, Victoria Arbors, and Victoria- Although a hotel development will typically be subject to design review, the Development Code currently lacks the provisions that would ensure the E1—Pg2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605, DRC2019-00230, DRC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 3 excellence in architectural design for hotels commensurate with City's vision for a high quality, world class community. Historically, hotels were a very modest business sector for the City, and there were other, more pressing needs, which necessitated updated Development Code attention. It has become clear, however, as the hotel sector has grown and staff has seen an increasing proliferation of standardized design (aka cookie -cutter) hotels with only minor variations from community to community and site to site, that without increased regulation this area of the local economy will become a significant anomaly to the traditional high quality, unique and world -class standards associated with other Rancho Cucamonga development. Therefore, an amendment to the hotel development standards would help to facilitate better site design, better architecture, a greater range and quantity of amenities, and the use of higher quality building materials. Furthermore, hotel construction is often formulaic with essentially long rectangular boxes mimicked from location to location. Instead, creative design should be encouraged with (1) proper consideration given to a site's natural landforms and native vegetation, (2) climate, through proper building orientation, appropriate glazing, use of overhangs, shading devices, etc., (3) the highest standards in architectural design and style, proportions, colors, and materials, and (4) compatibility with the design and form of adjacent buildings and the neighborhood. In addition to improved design standards, there are two additional trends in the hospitality and lodging industry that a change in hotel regulation would address: 1) a boom in development of extended stay hotels; and 2) dual -branding of properties, whereby two hotel brands typically under the same parent company are developed on the same site. The Development Code currently does not differentiate between standard hotels and extended stay hotels nor does it contain provisions for dual -brand hotel concepts. The concern with the extended stay hotel concepts is that without improved design and amenities, these hotels encourage formulaic design, increased traffic, congestion, vehicle miles traveled and other negative impacts. Extended stay and limited service hotels frequently do not provide the type of on -site amenities, including full -service restaurants, in -hotel coffee and food locations such as Starbucks or Coffee Bean, or the other on - site amenities of a full -service hotel. As a result, guests will more frequently drive to other locations to access these services, thereby increasing traffic, congestion and vehicle miles traveled. Extended stay hotels also have limited employment compared to a full -service hotel, thereby further limiting their positive impact on the local economy. Additionally, because of the extended stay nature, hotel design, and limited staffing, these hotels can become an attractive location for certain types of criminal activity, including prostitution, sex trafficking, and even the manufacture of illicit drugs. These problems are frequently associated with extended stay hotels in the Inland Empire region and Rancho Cucamonga is not immune from these trends. Ironically, there are currently no regulations in effect regarding the operational standards required for hotels to mitigate these impacts (i.e. security, lightinq, staffing, and cooperation with law enforcement) and help support the efforts of the Police Department. As a result, depending on the cooperation of ownership and the local hotel manager, PD often has to expend greater resources on enforcement, which could be mitigated with better design. Finally, with respect to the dual -brand trend, there are also separate supporting reasons for improved design standards. Dual brand hotels on one site tend to encourage two smaller hotels, with surface parking and modest design amenities. This under -utilizes sites, compared to a single larger hotel design which would better support employment, amenities and more intense site use. El—Pg3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605, DRC2019-00230, DRC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 4 As Rancho Cucamonga's remaining open sites are limited, each opportunity that is missed to maximize the use and intensity of a site represents a loss for our local economy as those sites are not likely to redevelop again for 25-30 years or more. Staff would like to encourage larger hotels, with greater height, and utilize the rest of a site for supporting uses such as housing, office, retail or a combination of uses. This will ensure greater economic resiliency and more vibrant mixed -use sites. ANALYSIS: In 2015, the City adopted an Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP). This plan was developed to identify advantages and disadvantages for economic development within the City and "guide the City's economic development actions to strengthen the City's existing advantages and take action to address disadvantages or gaps." The EDSP recognizes the diverse business mix available in the City as an asset that provides the City resiliency to navigate the peaks and valleys of regular economic cycles. To continue thriving in the next decade, the plan identifies four key challenges the City must address: I . Diversifying the types of jobs available — increasing the number of highly skilled office - based jobs_ 2. Creating an environment that is attractive to Millennials by facilitating the development of walkable and bike -friendly mixed -use places in order to attract office -based businesses that cater to the Millennial workforce_ 3. Shifting towards infill development to encourage new types of development and investment on infill sites to accommodate business growth. 4. Implementation of the plan without redevelopment tools previously available. The plan further identified specific strategies and actions to support these challenges. One of the priority areas identified within the plan was the hospitality industry. One of the hospitality related strategies of the plan is to "attract full -service and boutique hotels to Rancho Cucamonga." Currently, hotels in the City are classified as limited service, offering modest nightly rates and few amenities. Having more full -service and boutique hotels that offer higher nightly rates would raise the level of lodging offerings in the City and help support efforts to attract additional office -based industries in Rancho Cucamonga_ There is strong near -term potential for smaller, boutique hotel development in key locations like Victoria Gardens and the surrounding areas_ In fact, one of the entitled hotels is a smaller, boutique hotel, associated with the Hilton flag, which is going through plan check now_ Attracting full -service hotels may be a longer -term proposition, however, If new boutique hotels are successful, this could help lay the groundwork to eventually attract full -service hotels to the City. Currently, limited service and extended stay hotels comprise almost three quarters of our hotel offerings. With limited vacant land available for future hotel development, it is imperative that we develop zoning regulations to encourage increased diversification of the City's hotel market by encouraging boutique hotels, full! -service hotel, and amenity -rich hotel development and restrain the future development of limited service hotels. In essence, this strategy is similar to the practices followed by the City for both Victoria Gardens and the Haven Office corridor. For over 30 years, the City was told Victoria Gardens was not possible, the local economy would not support it, the demographics were incorrect, and it would never come to be_ Despite numerous E1—Pg4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605, DRC2019-00230, DRC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 5 enticements throughout the decades for immediate development of different products that were, at the time, good uses, the City held to the vision and eventually developed one of the premier retail locations in the United States. Similarly, the City has held to a vision for the Haven Office corridor as a location for corporate headquarters. Through the years the City has resisted enticements to develop vacant land with other uses, and today more and more corporate headquarter locations are moving to the Haven Office corridor. One of the 2018 City Council Goals reads, "ENHANCING PREMIER COMMUNITY STATUS — As the community matures, undertake programs and projects to enhance Rancho Cucamonga's position as the premier community in our region." In the absence, however of design guidelines and operational standards for hotels, there is concern that new hotel development or expansion could run counter to this goal. But a code amendment could provide for more discretionary review of hotels, ensure higher quality design, and impose minimum amenity requirements to ensure the City's premier community status is reflected in the local hotel industry. Staff is recommending a patient long-term approach, supported by strong design standards, for the hotel industry, so that the vision of boutique luxury and full -service hotels eventually becomes a reality, whether it is now or several decades from now. New regulations could also be crafted to protect the financial health and vibrancy of the local hotel industry and to protect the fiscal health of the City. From a regional perspective, the extended stay hotel market appears to be reaching a saturation point. In Rancho Cucamonga, three of the eleven existing hotels — TownePlace Suites by Marriott, Residence Inn by Marriott, and Homewood Suites by Hilton — operate as extended stay hotels. Staff is concerned that a proliferation of new extended stay hotels in the City could lead to a rise in vacancy rates and a depressed hotel market. High vacancy rates and reduced hotel quality could cause a blighting effect on the City, encouraging illicit uses which strain our police resources. If the market becomes depressed, properties may sell to new owners who are not cooperative with the City and Police Department, and/or we could see requests to convert hotels to apartment type uses. Regardless of the type of hotel, there is an upper limit to the number of hotel rooms that are economically viable in our City. With 11 hotels operating in the City and 2 more entitled and expected to begin construction, our opportunities for additional hotel types are also limited and, if we are to be successful at implementing our EDSP, it is important that we work to ensure that future hotels are amenity- and service -rich hotels. Additionally, when looking at the available sites for new hotels, it is clear most locations are along the Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard Corridors, or in close proximity, which are locations that already have multiple existing business class and extended stay hotels. Not only does this model appear to be proliferating in the region, it also works against the City's economic development strategy in that the City does not collect transient occupancy tax (TOT) for stays exceeding 30 days. Limited service hotels have limited employment opportunities which runs counter to our strategy to encourage greater job development. Furthermore, it behooves the City to have a lodging industry that can meet the needs of a broad spectrum of travelers and budgets. The City's focus should now be set on attracting higher end luxury and boutique hotels to capture that part of the region's lodging market and to reinforce Rancho Cucamonga's status as a "World Class City." E1—Pg5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605, DRC2019-00230, DRC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 6 Therefore, after studying the issue in depth, staff is recommending a new chapter (17.93) be added to the Development Code to implement operational standards and application requirements for the development of new hotels. A summary of the proposed recommendations is as follows: Extended Stay Hotels: New extended stay hotels will not be permitted as it has been determined that this category of hotels is satisfactorily represented in the City and the focus will be on attracting higher end and boutique hotels to capture that segment of the hotel market. 2. Conditional Use Permit: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) will be required for all new hotels or expansions to existing hotels, which will provide the City with discretionary review ability and allow staff and the Planning Commission to consider each hotel development on a case -by - case basis and apply specific conditions to each project to ensure Band use compatibility with the surrounding area. 3. Market Feasibility Study: A market feasibility study will need to be prepared as part of the application review process. The study will determine the condition of the hotel/lodging market and its ability to support a new hotel and will assist staff in determining if the development will be financially feasible. 4. Findings: Findings specific to hotel uses will be required to support the CUP, including a finding that the total hotel occupancy rate for the City will not drop below 75%. 5. Occupancy: Defined minimum (one day) and maximum (30 days) stay requirements. 6. Public Safety Standards: To help ensure public safety and mitigate against criminal activity the following will be required for hotels: a. Submission of a management plan for addressing potential criminal activities at the site, b. Installation of security cameras and storage for a minimum of 30 days of recordings. c. Training for hotel staff on how to spot criminal activity. d. Single point of contact for Fire and Police to address issues at the hotel. 7. Hotel Amenities: As part of the effort to broaden the types of hotels within the City, defined amenities will be required for new hotels. Options include full -service restaurants, outdoor barstlounges and dining areas; fitness centers with a wide range of equipment/exercise stations, spas, large poois, fire pits, other recreation areas, and valet parking. 8. Design Standards: Like many other developments occurring within the City, hotels will be held to a higher standard of architectural design review than they had been previously. Development standards and design guidelines specific to hotet development, including requiring designs that are unique and tailored to a specific site rather than a cookie -cutter hotel without any distinguishing characteristics and requiring building architecture that incorporates multiple design elements and variation in materials and colors. El—Pg5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605, DRC2019-00230, DRC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 7 Based on feedback provided by the Commission and the public at the last hearing, staff is offering the following options the Commission may want to consider to modify the ordinance: Modifying the minimum occupancy rate from 75% to 72%. Permit Extended Stay Hotels in all zones where Hotels are permitted and broaden the minimum required amenities to include services associated with a full -service hotel such as sit-down restaurants, expanded fitness center, 24-hour bellhop staff, full concierge service and other similar services. This could include amenities like a full -service restaurant not built within the hotel, but as a part of the overall development that would be entitled and constructed concurrent with the hotel. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Department staff has determined that this Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(B)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The Amendment does not propose any physical change to the environment itself. The Amendment's requirement for hotel development applications to prepare a market feasibility study is a purely economic requirement. In addition, the occupancy standards and public safety standards are limited to the operation of hotels and do not affect the environment. The remaining development standards do not have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment because they pertain to improving the quality of the architectural design of hotels and not to the intensity of development. In sum, the Amendment would impose more restrictive regulations on hotel development within the City as hotel projects are currently permitted by right in most zoning districts. Furthermore, the Amendment only revises the land use regulations to apply development and operational standards for hotels and to require discretionary review through the Conditional Use Permit process for the development of hotels. Applications for development subject to these provisions will be reviewed for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements. During the entitlement process, the applicant will be required to comply with CEQA. In reviewing each project for compliance with CEQA, an applicant may be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise levels, and transportation/traffic caused by the site - specific project. On a case -by -case review of each project, the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project -specific impacts. Based on this evidence and all the evidence in the record, the City Council concurs with the Planning Department staff's determination that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA. FACTS FOR FINDING: Per Section 17.22.040 of the Development Code, amendments to the Code may be approved only when the City Council finds that the Development Code Amendment is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs: • Land Use Policy LU-1.1: Protect neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible activities or land uses that may have a negative impact on the residential living E1—Pg7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605. DRC2019-00230, DRC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 24, 2019 Page 8 environment. Regulating the operational standards for hotels that may be near residential neighborhoods will reduce potential impacts created by hotels. • Land Use Goal LU-1I. Ensure that community aesthetics are maintained through appropriate regulations. Establishing design guidelines for hotels will encourage better site design, improved architecture, and the use of higher quality building materials. • Through partnerships designed to report and prevent criminal activity at hotels between hotel owners and operators, and City Police and Fire services. General Plan Public Safety Goal PS-4. Provide a High level of public safety services throughout Rancho Cucamonga, can continue to be achieved. FISCAL IMPACT: The development of new hotels can provide additional revenue to the City in the form of transient occupancy tax and sales taxes. Hotels can also negatively impact costs to public safety services when not operated properly. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The proposed amendment does not specifically address a council goal; however, the development of operational standards and requirements for new hotels promotes the City's premier community status within the region CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing on March 29, 2019 with a large 1/8«' page legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. After the Planning Commission meeting on April 10. 2019, staff attempted to reach out to all those who spoke at the hearing, We successfully contacted four of the individuals. Two provided general comments on the hotel industry in the City. Two provided written comments and are included as exhibits in the staff report. EXHIBITS: Exhibit A — Vacant Land Available for Future Hotel Development Exhibit B — Comments Received on Ordinance from Don Cape, Theraldson Hospitality Exhibit C — Comments Received by Brandon Feigner, CBRE Hotels Draft Resolution No. 19-34 Recommending Approval of Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018-00605, Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230, Town Square Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231, Victoria Arbors Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231 and Victoria Community Plan DRC2019-00232. El—Pg8 .r.sP Cr F!• L. kI Sr K `JY Cq E LL •% 0 E .% Y L a ' 11G Rri V•� rlrr.seEl aSlCl j�f •�•, C.�la3 tsii Ave cr 2 in QD w hSutherry AVE! C=; .'x c• � Fa U C o == Q c .AV epuer,iil3 It Aanda Ave —•— — =•%1rz I I M. q-.-, -067 all Q iI PAI;i fr CI 1: U1 x L c i C) r{ s" thl cj Htlf#ahr Ave Z A� ' G cn 6 ! V1 O 7 i aAb u�; F:1rliiken Ave 4� p o q c Milliken Ave 1 m Q CL 1 Li v r3 4 J # r TW 0 C tyuc1 Ave i_ 1 HavQrl Ave flaven Ave r� If�sven AVZ=� Pd Havr�Z. fu u O I i• n rx :3 `o E a •r� C C 1-l�rra Ave r-r! .- r cc E V l3J asa Q Ln — .7Al,F elSDlrlCa � Z I ¢ I E Archibald Ave zu m ArTze.lryst Av+ 1 D W ❑ Zr � r w U 1 J l _Li I �� �•� a c i •ti 4 '�_ u c a a Li ¢IM n a w 1' Vineyard Ave N Vineyard Aviv°, z 1 1 or o Carnelian 5t 1 x -A!,Pe( t ir. jasper 51. • 4 O 1 �'} (3 r� �• I. ,!!,PeS 1 1.•1 • •` ! c m . `1;ro7e . _ I O 4r' m E Op v AVe'—....6r4-e rivc • �i4 N +n too re" Alta Ave 'n r••F w LLU +� i' DL) yr } CA � ° 15 4n 0.— ._• pus Ave o u' > i i EXHIBIT A 9 N 2nd Ave El 5th Ave C - N Sultana Ave —P 9 k TPA :. F,r e—ira ato. N Euclid Ave Nakamura, Jennifer From: Don Cape <dcape@diversifiedgrp.com> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 11.35 AM To: Nakamura, Jennifer Cc: Feighner, Brandon @ Los Ange°es Subject: RE: Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance Attachments: DRC2018-00605 Hotel StfRpt 4-1 O.docx; DRC2018-00605 Hotel Draft Ordinance 4-10.docx Jennifer plea}e also find the attached comments and suggestions to improve the draft ordinance. We appreciate the opportunity to support the efforts of the city and hope the efforts are considered and evaluated. Don Cape Vice President Tharaldson Hospitality 4255 Dean Martin Drive, Suite J Las Vegas, NV 89103 Office: 702-385-4988 x207 Cell: 702-339-9115 dcape@diversifiedgrp.com www.tharldsonhm.com From: Feighner, Brandon @ Los Angelus <Brandon.Feighner@cbre.com> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 11:25 AM To: Nakamura, Jennifer <Jennifer.Nakamura@cityofrc.us> Subject: RE: Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance Good morning Jennifer and I hope this note finds you well. Based on our understanding of the matter at hand and the opportunities and challenges that your department is tasked with navigating, we have drafted our professional opinions in the attached letter. As noted there+n, we welcome the opportunity to clarify any questions city staff and elected officials may have. We are also happy to make introductions to industry professionals that would likely be able to shed additional light on the intricacies of hotel development and be able to further assist you and your department in guiding the development of hotels that are consistent with the city's desire for high quality hotel products. 7rai1(1of1 J I CEii.E Flot�'s AclLlro:y T+121:35133s(.' From: Nakamura, Jennifer <Jennifer.Naka mura@cityofrc.us> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2019 3-06 PM To: Don Cape <dcape@diversifiederp.com> Cc: Feighner, Brandon @ Los Angeles <Brandon.Feishner@cbre.com> Subject: RE- Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance Hi Don, EXHIBIT B E1—Pg10 Is there a time frame that we can expect your comments? ! would like to be able to review and address your comments and concerns in the report and ordinance. However, we have just 2 days left before the report has to be ready for the Planning Commission on Thursday. Thanks! Jennifer Jennifer Nakamura Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga (909) 774-4324 From: Don Cape <dca a diversified r .com> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 5:20 PM To: Nakamura, Jennifer <Jennifer.NakamuraCacityofrr _u5> Cc: Feighner, Brandon @ Los Angeles <Brandon.Feighner@cbre.com> Subject: RE: Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance CAUTION: This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless youj cognize the sender and know the content is s Jennifer thank you for working with us on the draft. We want to be supportive while being constructive on sensitive items. We are going to focus on a collaborative draft of comments rather than work independently as we are all busy and time is precious so we want to respect yours as well. Would it be possible for you to send a word version of the staff report and the ordinance for us to clip out sections and add questions or comments embedded in the document for ease of working together remotely? Thanks again Don Cape 702-339-9115 From: Nakamura, Jennifer <Jennifer.Nakamura@cityofrc.us> Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 6:23 PM To: Don Cape <dcape@diversifiedgr.g.com> Subject: Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance Good Evening Don, Attached is the staff report and draft ordinance for hotel development that will be heard by the Planning Commission on Wednesday April 10, 2019 The entire agenda for the meeting can be found here: https://www.citvofrc.us/citvhall/meetings/pc/default.asp Look forward to speaking with you on Monday. Jennifer E1—Pg11 Jennifer Nakamura Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga (909) 774-4324 El-Pg12 DATE: April 10, 2019 TO: Chairman and Members of the P7arning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner INITIATED BY: Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner Perry Banner, Contract Planner SUBJECT: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018-00605 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request to amend Title 17 of the Munickpai Code (Development Code) pertaining to requirements and standards for the development of hotels, and associated amendments to relevant special planning areas as it relates to hotels — EMPIRE LAKES SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019-00230, ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019.00230, TOWN SQUARE MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019- 00231, VICTORIA ARBORS MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019-00231, AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2019-00232. This item is exempt from the requ rements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEOA) and the City's CEOA guidelines under CEQA Section 15061(b)(3). This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending the City Council approve Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018-00605 Empire lakes Specific Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230, Etiwanda Spec is Plan Amendment DRC2019-00230, Town Square Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231, Victoria Arbors Master Plan Amendment DRC2019-00231, and Victoria Community Plan Amendment DRC2019-00232, amend-ng the requirements and standards for the development of new hotels or expansions to existing hotels within the City and plan areas BACKGROUND: A Timeline. On October 4, 2017. the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No. 919, an interim ordinance requiring a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel w thin the City to allow staff time to study appropriate development standards and regulations for hotels and draft any necessary changes to the Municipal Code. Per State law an interim ordinance is effective for a period of 45 days from the date of adoption, unless extended at a pub'ic hearing prior to the end of the 45-day period. On November 15, 2017, the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No 923, which extended the interim ordinance's requirement for a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel w.thin the City for an additional 10 months, 15 days, to provide staff additiona+ time to study the issue and draft a Municipal Code Amendment to address the impacts created by hotel deve`opment within the City. E1--Pg13 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605, ARC2019-00230, ORC2019-00231, & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 10, 2019 Page 2 On Septembe- 19. 2018. the City Council approved U!gency Ordinance No 940. which further extended the interim ordinance's requirement for a Cond tional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel within the City for an additional 10 months, 15 days, Hove Hotels are Currently Reaul ed There are 10 hote's operating in the C-ty of Rancho Cucamonga with one more under construct -on and 2 with current entitlements Most of these hotels have been bu It withm the last five to ten years In the last three years the City has not.ced increased •nterest for hotels iii all categories, including business extended stay, and general categories Hotels in the City provide business travelers a convenient location near local businesses and the Ontario International Airport as well as provide weekend travelers a great locat'on to use as their base for explor ng the local sites Hotels employ hundreds of people and provide a valuable contribution to our economy However. staff belieyeg that a proliferation of new hotels in the City could lead to a r'se in vacancy rates and a depressed hotel market High vacancy rates and reduced hotel quality could caLlSe a bkghting effect on the City- con5ldr Ipokin at.suncly and demand relative to uaoe;', Gin end 1;uisness diversi!yLand.transy4latrpn hi ib Rancho hotel marker has a pat Ian, ; Ieadcr in rate an occ�,nancl rathgr focus i fit. ndar that keo roduct u I, hi h n industrk termsAik.%Imidscale and ur,r±ur midsca'e as minimums I sell 9ike the hard zo-nond use tables ynlh„vertv:5lheg w +gel' n-Qrilri Cludt hca th.y txoduct evolution If�ou look at this hst nothino has heen bud? rn_the?ast 70yea�s lxcYot tl�c Res�drecis Inner id Fairfield im_.F=oLfim,hal with the New Kinaan llln'el but All of rf.- WS extremely atr2nn brands and—wi1L t E . t f_Id to t rand-standarr s_f4r many-"ars.to come A 1� aical RanchiA2 aw ment will-t?c 2$.Year wi h r tuireL ren^yations eve b 8 ors and�a ma or.branu ur;da:e eve4y 10.12 rears B. The table below identifies Rancho Cucamonga's existing hotels. HOTEL NAME ADDRESS Holiday Inn Express & Suites 9589 Milliken Avenue Residence Inn by Marriott 9299 Haven Avenue Fairfield Inn 8, Suites by Marriott 9550 Pittsburgh Avenue TownePlace Suites by Marriott 9625 Milliken Avenue Homewood Suites by Hilton 11433 Mission Vista Drive Hilton Garden Inn 11481 Mission Vista Drive Courtyard by Marriott 11525 Mission Vista Drive Aloft 10480 Fourth Street Best Western Plus Heritage Inn 8179 Spruce Avenue Four Points by Sheraton 11960 E Foothill Blvd New Kansan Motel 9300 E Foothill Blvd Hotels are permitted or cond;t;onally permitted in six zon'ng districts within Rancho Cucamonga, as well as the Haven Avenue Overlay District and the Industr�ai Commercal Overlay District Hotels are also permitted within the following special planning areas. Empire Lakes, Etiwanda Town Square. Victoria Arbors, and Victoria Although a hotel development w!ll typically be subject to design review, the Development Code currently lacks the provisions that would ensure the excellence in architectural design quality for hotels that the City is comm';lted to Therefore an amendment to the hotel development standards would help to encourage better site design, better architecture, and the use of higher quality El-Pg14 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605 DRC2019-00230 DRC2019-00231. & DRC2019-00232 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 10, 2019 Page 2 building matemas Furthermore. hotel construct.on is often formu aic mth essent!a:ly Icng rectangular boxes mimicked from location to location Insiead ;;realve design should be en_❑uraged with (1) proper consideration given to a sites natural landforms and native vegetation (2) climate through proper building orientation appropriate glazing use of overhangs, shading devices, etc (3) the h ghest standards in architectural design and style. proportions, colors. and materra s, and (4) compatibility with the design and form of adlacent buildings and the neighborhood- Hctgl shares yr ? f ,yet n, of tk a s ue This i5 There are two trends occurring in the lodg'ng industry: 1) a boom in development of extended stay hotels and 2) dual -branding of properties, whereby two hotel brands typically under the same parent company are developed on the same site The Development Code currently does not d fferentiate between standard hotels and extended stay hotels nor does it contain provisions for dual -brand hotel concepts gp m Also hotels can become an attractive locat.on for certa n types of criminal activity, includ ng prostitution, sex trafficking, and even the manufacture of it icit drugs. However, there are currently no regulations in effect regarding the operational standards required for hotels to mitigate these impacts (i e. security, lighting, stalling and cooperation with law enforcement) 4NP Winririrt rFiSRnatle ooaratian standards and should be the t:as s for the CUP reouiremem fines and lir ANALYSIS: General One of the 2018 City Council Goals reads. -ENHANCING PREMIER COMMUNITY STATUS —As the community matures, undertake programs and projects to enhance Rancho Cucamonga's position as the premier community in our region' However, in the absence of design guidelines and operational standards for hotels there is concern that new hotel development or expansion could run counter to this goal. But a code amendment could allow for more discretionary review of hotels. ensure higher quality design, and impose minimum amenity requirements to ensure the City's premier community status is reflected in the local hotel industry. Th _k.t _4f erlay ft� rarreview commi,.tes. and.staff_ar,�nt Jihe_ab'lrty to enaura ualily designg. Thi'a_t it w cis,. 0 in almg2t everw higher end.Cahfcmia.cgde.frnm El-Pg15 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-00605 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 10. 2019 Page a Walnut Creek to Mann County Land Use cannot be written to be autonomous and self- govern=ng it takes leadership andyeoole _ New regulations could asso be crafted to protect the f.nani:0 health and vibrancy of the local hotel industry and to protect the fiscal health of the City. T#}is nerds to be done by usino 10yearsFrom a regional perspective, the extended stay hotel market appears to be reaching a saturation point There is no research to suriAort t)+is .statement ralnez (here is an will take 3years to ramg_up to stable performance In Rancho Cucamonga, three of the eleven existing hotels --Towne Place Suites by Mari lott Residence Inn by Marrrott and Homewood Suites by Hilton - operate as extended stay hotels. Not only does this model appear to be proliferating in the region. it aaso works aga-nst the Cdy's economic development strategy m that the City does not collect transient occupancy tax (TOT) for slays exceeding 30 days Again, th=s statement is not factualThe average length of stay as evidenced by leading market reports is 3-5 days and in actuality, the all -suites run 15% h gher occupancy resulting n as the market. leaders for REVPAR producin.q.More_T9T.than Leisure Branded Hotels. Furthermore, h't behooves the City to have a lodging industry that can meet the needs of a broad spectrum of travelers and budgets. T_Ns.statement is in conflict wltr the cbtecWe of hrviEg high genoaEgk and hi h L hatels_..Ail complete coriflrct with the nex; sentence The City's focus shou'd now be set on attracting higher end luxury and bo.At.que hotels io capture that part of the region's lodging market and to reinforce Rancho Cucamonga's status as a higher class city Therefore. after stS dying the issue in depth (what studies have been donel. staff. is___�Formatted=rrghl�rp recommending a new chapter (17.93) be added to the Development Code to implement operational slandards and application requirements for the development of new hotels A summary of the proposed recommendations is as follows- t- Ext ruled to H©le�w extended-stay-frote"ill not be-permitted-as4t-has been determined -that -in the—Qty-and-the fees -will be onat4rast+rig higher-er+d aacl bauhque #rotels to-caplure�hat seg+rrent o€ tl►e hotel ma#ef This should be removed it is contraiv to the industry and exhrbils un lateral bps_ with_2ut. ba si5�u r�Ction. 2-1.... Conditional Use Permit A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) will be required for all new hotels or expansions to existing hotels, which will provide the City with discretionary review ability and allow staff and the Planning Commission to consider each hotel development on a case -by -case basis and apply specific conditions to each project to ensure land use compat:bility with the surrounding area. 3:2 Market Feasibility Study, A market feasibility study will need to be prepared as parl of the application rev ew process The study will determine the condition of the hotelliodging market and its ab,lity to support a new hotel and will ass=st staff in deterflairimg recommending to council if the development will be financially feasible E1-Pg16 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018.00605 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 10. 2019 Page 5 4.3. Fin in - Findings specific to hotel uses will be required to support the CUP, including a find-ng that the total -hotel occupancy rate for the c2mipariable market segment in City w:Il not drop below 7465% Don't prevent ttreat c grtuni!. g j JQcause acme old bad appies Weigh down khe avers -an houtdfi'I tad iincluded in the comparat,ve market sel._Lhat is exoC.ly why Smith Travel Research uses the STR reports on comparative pTQajj,w'a,. &.4 Occuaancv Defined minimum (one day) and maximum (30 days) stay requirements. 65 Publi f t Standards: To help ensure public safety and mitigate against cr;minal activity the following will be required for hotels: a. Submission of a management plan for addressing potential criminal activities at the site. b. Installation of security cameras and storage for a minimum of 30 days of recordings. c. Training for hotel staff on how to spot criminal activity d Single point of contact for Fire and Police to address issues at the hotel e. Impose fines for repeat violations d fTccnsider coed lional optional review T -rood9 of sae-2 or 5y ors far comofeance � 6 Hotsl AiveniCy g: As part of the effort to broaden the types of hotels within the City defined amenties will be required for new hotels. Options include Wv restaurants, outdoor barsilounges and dining areas, fitness centers w-th a wide range of equipment/exercise stations, spas, large pools, fire pits, other recreation areas and valet parking if sufficient ons to parking is not availab'e. a-7.. _Oesian Stan arrr,. Like many other developments occurring within the City. hotels will be he'd to a higher standard of architectural design review, than they had been previously. Development standards and design guidelines specific to hotel development, includ:ng requiring designs that are unique and tailored to a specific site rather than a cookie -cutter hotel without any distinguishing characteristics and requiring bui'ding architecture that incorporates mu'tiple design elements and variation in materials and colors Frivironmentat Assessment. The Planning Department staff has determined that this Amendment is exempt from the requ,rements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines The project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects. which have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sect -.on 15061(B)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA The Amendment does not propose any physical change to the environment itself The Amendment's requirement for hotel development applications to prepare a market feasibility study is a purely economic requirement In addition, the occupancy standards and public safety standards are limited to the operation of hote_s and do not affect the environment. The remaining development standards do not have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment because they pertain to improving the quality of the architectural design of hotels and not to the intensity of development In sum, the Amendment would impose more restr'ctive regulations on hotel development within the City as hotel projects are currently permitted by right in most zoning districts. Furthermore, the Amendment only revises the land use regulations to apply development and operational standards for hotels and to require discretionary review through El-Pg17 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2018-0cr:05 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Apr;l 10. 2019 Page 6 the Conditional Use Permit process for the development of hotels. Applications for development subject to these provisions will be rev,ewed for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements During the entitlement process, the applicant wall be required to comply with CEQA In reviewing each project for compliance with CEQA, an applicant may be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, b ological resources, cultural resources noise level's, and transportationilraffic caused by the site -specific project On a case -by -case review of each project the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project -specific impacts Based on this evidence and alF of the evidimce in the record, the City Council concurs with the Planning Department staff s determination that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the env;ronment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA Are you sure this doesn't rub-MO.against acts of discrimination orADA creclud n rodby_a_pIgtected class FACTS FOR FINDING: Per Section 17.22 040 of the Development Code, amendments to the Code may be approved only when the City Council finds that the Development Code Amendment is consistent with the General Plan goals, policies. and implementation programs Land Use Policy LU-1 1 Protect neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible activities or land uses that may have a negative impact on the residential living environment Regulating the operational standards for hotels that may be near residential neighborhoods w;U reduce potential impacts created by hotels • Land Use Goal LU-11: Ensure that community aesthetics are maintained through appropriate regulations Establishing design guidel ones for hotels wih encourage better site design: improved architecture, and the use of higher quality building materials • Through partnerships designed to report and prevent criminal activity at hotels between hotel owners and operators, and City Police and Fire services, General Plan Public Safety Goal P5-4- Provide a high level of public safety services throughout Rancho Cucamonga. can conl:nue to be achieved FISCAL IMPACT. The development of new hotels can provide additional revenue to the City in the form of transient occupancy tax and sales taxes Hotels can also negatively impact costs to public safety services when not operated properly. COUNCIL GOAL(S) ADDRESSED: The proposed amendment does not specifical;y address a council goal, however, the development of operational standards and requirements for new hote's promotes the City's prep er community status within the region. CORRESPONDENCE: El--Pg18 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ❑RC2018-00605— CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 10, 2019 Page 7 This item was advertised as a public hearing on March 29. 2019 with a large 1181' page legal advertisement in the Wand Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. To date, no comments have been received by staff regarding th-s amendment._:tp ach;eve the 6est knosstblem for the cit just simQly pe-fish ngan ald fir a m rke! s grmenl I r W italst and Lod in seems to fail the ab'ectivi� $trQnqlv encaur oe lakina lime to enciaae the industry. Wet brands. mgrket research r f s 4 nats to r ach an objective h ij not unilateral and Will serve the 6t aoorooriately. EXHIBITS: Draft Resolution No 19.34 Recommending Approval of Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018- 00605. Empire Lakes Specifx Plan Amendment DRC2019.00230, Et-wanda Specific Plan Amendment ORC2019-00230, Town Square Master Plan Amendment DRC2019.002311, Victoria Arbors Master Plan Amendment DRC2019.00231 and Victoria Commun ty Plan DRC2019-00232 E1-Pg19 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL. CODE PERTAINING TO REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOTELS WITHIN THE CITY, MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF, AND MAKING A DETERMINATION THAT THE ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Recitals, A. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018-00605, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Municipal Code Amendment is referred to as "the Amendment". B. On October 4, 2017, the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No. 919, an interim ordinance requiring a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel within the City to allow staff time to study appropriate development standards and regulations for hotels and draft any necessary changes to the Municipal Code_ Per State law, an interim ordinance is effective for a period of 45 days from the date of adoption, unless extended at a public hearing prior to the end of the 45-day period. C. On November 15, 2017, the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No. 923, which extended the interim ordinance's requirement for a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel within the City for an additional 10 months, 15 days, to provide staff additional time to study the issue and draft a Municipal Code Amendment to address the impacts created by hotet development within the City. D. On September 19, 2018, the City Council approved Urgency Ordinance No. 940, which further extended the interim ordinance's requirement for a Conditional Use Permit for the establishment of any new hotel or the expansion of any existing hotel within the City for an additional 10 months, 15 days. E. On April 10, 2019, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing with respect to the Amendment and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted Resolution No. 19-XX, recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt this Amendment. F. On , 2019, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the Amendment and concluded said hearing on that date. G. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. II. Findings. A. Based upon all of the evidence presented to the City Council during the above - referenced public hearing, this City Council hereby finds and concludes that the changes proposed to Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code by this Amendment are consistent with the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs. Ordinance No. — Page 1 of 11 E1—Pg20 General Plan Land Use Policy LU-1.1 encourages the protection of neighborhoods from the encroachment of incompatible activities or land uses that may have a negative impact on the residential living environment. Regulating the operational standards for hotels that may be near residential neighborhoods will reduce potential impacts created by hotels. Land Use Goal LU-11 requires that community aesthetics are maintained through appropriate regulations. Establishing design guidelines for hotels will encourage better site design, improved architecture, and the use of higher quality building materials. Lastly, through partnerships designed to report and prevent criminal activity at hotels between hotel owners and operators, and City Police and Fire services, Public Safety Goal PS-4, which requires a high level of public safety services throughout Rancho Cucamonga, can continue to be achieved. B. The Planning Department staff has determined that this Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(B)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The Amendment does not propose any physical change to the environment itself. The Amendment's requirement for hotel development applications to prepare a market feasibility study is a purely economic requirement. In addition, the occupancy standards and public safety standards are limited to the operation of hotels and do not affect the environment_ The remaining development standards do not have the potential for causing significant effects on the environment because they pertain to improving the quality of the architectural design of hotels and not to the intensity of development. In sum, the Amendment would impose more restrictive regulations on hotel development within the City as hotel projects are currently permitted by right in most zoning districts. Furthermore, the Amendment only revises the land use regulations to apply development and operational standards for hotels and to require discretionary review through the Conditional Use Permit process for the development of hotels. Applications for development subject to these provisions will be reviewed for CEQA compliance under separate entitlements. During the entitlement process, the applicant will be required to comply with CEQA. In reviewing each project for compliance with CEQA, an applicant may be required to submit environmental studies that analyze potential impacts such as air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise levels, and transportation/traffic caused by the site -specific project. On a case -by -case review of each project, the appropriate environmental document will be prepared to address project -specific impacts. Based on this evidence and all of the evidence in the record, the City Council concurs with the Planning Department staff's determination that the Amendment will not have a significant effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from further environmental review under CEQA. 111. Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The land use labeled "Hotels and Motels" in Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements) of Chapter 17.30 (Allowed Land Use by Base Zoning District) shall be modified as follows: Ordinance No. — Page 2 of 11 E1—Pg21 Land Use/Zoning VL L LM M MH H MU OP NC GC CC SC RRC CO IP GI MI11-1I HI OS HR FC UC District Hotel N NJ N N N N C C N C N N C C C N N N N N N N Hotel, N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Extended Stay(15) (151 Notwithstanding any other previsien of this code existing Extended Slay Hotels that Gonform to all other applicable d#ev -lopment standards ail of the effective da'e- of OfdinaQGe No MW shall not ba oo►asidered a RG;1G�9F1f9r+`1fng Ilse under Ghapter k 7 62 and niay ci7nhnue in operation provided they Gentmue to coi}iply with other applicable development staitdaids. SECTION 2. The land use definition of "Hotel and Motel' in Section 17.32.020.E.31 of Chapter 17.32 (Allowed Use Descriptions) shall be amended to read as follows; this Isil t bad but consider feyievmig otllei municipal codes_for descii t�1nr -- "Hotel. A facility with guest rooms or suites rented to the general public for transient lodging (less than 30 days). Hotels provide access to most guest rooms from an interior walkway and typically include a variety of services in addition to lodging, for example, restaurants, meeting facilities, personal services, etc. A hotel also includes accessory guest facilities such as swimming pools, tennis courts, indoor athletic facilities, accessory retail use, etc." SECTION 3 A n?w- lai)d lase deffifiti+ n €sr -Hotel- E--)4en4ed-;stay- shall be added to Se;vtfari 17 32-020 E of Ghapter 17-32 (Allowed Use De5Gnptiens) at an appFWiate alphat=et+sal i-a,ation to read as fellows I I L)tel -Stay A betel which {; adv&rt{s-d designed intended or rolJtfRely UWiZed f-a; .4feekly occupan-2jy or longer and in-whic-h quest- rooms have faaities-f©f the fefrige-ration-and preparat+en of feod by guests stwh-as-a refrigerator arid a cooktoplsteve -(4F-a re€rfgrrater a MisrGwave- and a dishwasher er*it6henette sink) -and a self -serve laundry faGflity.is available far guests iise For the {purposes- ef-thi* cede hst-ls and extended stay hetels are separate and dfstfnst kE6?5 SECTION SECTION 3. A new Chapter 17.93 (Hotels) of Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby added to read as follows: "CHAPTER 17.93 HOTELS Section 17.93.010 Purpose. Section 17.93.020 Market Feasibility Report Required. Section 17.93.030 Additional CUP Findings. Section 17.93.040 Occupancy Standards. Section 17.93.050 Public Safety Standards. Section 17.93.060 Hotel Amenities. Section 17.93.070 Design Guidelines. Ordinance No- _ - Page 3 of 11 E1-Pg22 17.93.010 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to regulate hotels with development standards and operational requirements that will ensure high quality hotel development and mitigate impacts that could be associated with hotels, including crime, urban blight, and the exceptional use of public resources. 17.93.020 Market Feasibility Study Required. An application for a conditional use permit to operate a hotel shall include a market feasibility study. The a34�TTiay prepare -toe sk+dy-er- request4he-applicant shall to prepare the study, subject to an independent peer review if require' y staff. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of the study and/or peer review. The market study, at a minimum, shall address the following: A. A complete listing of proposed facilities, amenities, and services (e.g., number and type of rooms, meeting space square footage, recreational amenities, business services such as data ports, workstations, etc., in -room amenities such as refrigerators and microwaves, laundry service, food service such as restaurants or coffee shops, etc.). B. Provide information on the business model, ownership, and franchise of hotel. C. A business and financial history of the proposed developer and potential operators, if different than the developer, including at a minimum the following: principals, experience, years in business, capitalization, listing of projects, number of units owned, average rates charged, and occupancy rates. D. Whether the proposed hotel will be financially feasible by meeting an unfilled need for hotel rooms in the city. Provide an analysis of the economic environment, projecting likely future economic conditions as they relate to the operation of the proposed hotel and its accessory uses. E. Analysis of the proposed hotel's projected market base. F. Three and five-year projected occupancy rates, projected average daily rate for the proposed hotel, and revenue per available room trends for hotels within the city. G. The estimated share of the hotel market the hotel will capture during the first five years of operation, and whether the hotel will primarily focus on drawing guests from existing hotels in the city. H. An analysis of economic impacts on existing hotels within Rancho Cucamonga, including at a minimum, an estimate of the dilution of the city's hotel market due to the proposed hotel and if the proposed project has potential adverse impacts on the financial viability of existing hotels in the city. 17.93.030 Additional Conditional Use Permit Findings. Prior to approval of a conditional use permit when required by Table 17.30.030-1 (Allowed Land Uses and Permit Requirements by Base Zoning District) the approving authority shall make the following findings, in addition to those findings required by Section 17.16.120.D: Ordinance No. — Page 4 of 11 El—Pg23 A. The proposed hotel will not create urban decay due to the significant loss of business at existing hotels in the city, hotels currently under construction in the city, or hotels that have been granted entitlements by the city that have not expired but are not yet under construction. B. The proposed hotel is located in an area of the city with substantial unmet demand for a hotel. C. The proposed hotel is not expected to reduce the taut hotel occupancy rate in the city below % in the first five years of operations )r the comparative warket segment. 17.93.040 Occupancy Standards. No hotel guestroom shall be rented for a period exceeding thirty (30) consecutive calendar days, counting portions of calendar days as full days, ner 4)alt ar)y gUia-6t ane room to another w4hout a three (3) day vaeanJy in between &A. No hotel guestroom shall be rented for less than a one day period, 17.93,050 Public Safety Standards. A. No hotel small create an unreasonable or excessive demand for police services. To demonstrate compliance with this standard, an application for a hotel conditional use permit shall include the following information, A management plan that describes how the hotel will address potential criminal activities at the site, 2. A lighting plan that demonstrates how the hotel's proposed lighting will illuminate the site to the extent necessary for a peace officer to adequately observe the property from a patrol car. 3. A site plan designed to allow for visibility from the public right-of-way for peace officers in patrol vehicles. B_ At all times, hotel operators shall maintain on file with the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department and Fire Protection District a single, current point of contact for addressing law enforcement, public health, and safety problems at the hotel site. In connection with the issuance of a business license, a police and fire inspection shall be required when a hotel undergoes a change in ownership or operator. C. Hotel owners and all hotel employees shall be trained to spot criminal activity. D. A security camera system is required to be installed with the capability of providing access to the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department and Fire Protection District. Recordings shall be held for a minimum of 30 days. E_ Hotels that provide entertainment as defined in 17.20.020 shall obtain an entertainment permit. Ordinance No. — Page 5 of 1 I El—Pg24 17.93.060 Hotel Amenities. No Development Review and/or Conditional Use Permit shall be approved for a hotel unless the following amenities are provided: A. Each guestroom shall include voicemail, wired and/or wireless internet access, desk, hairdryer, iron and ironing board, color television, mini -fridge, and alarm clock or wake up service; B. Minimum of 15 square feet of meeting space on site per guestroom; outdoor meets space may be considered -. 2L1UH J be deeim=u appiuprlate by staff C. A minimum of three of the following active and passive leisure amenities shall be provided on site: 1. A full -service restaurant. 2. An indoor a, outdoor bar/lounge with dmmq seatim area or rooftop bar/lounge. 3. A fitness center with a wide range of equipment/exercise stations. 4, A spa. 5. A pool. 6_ Fire pits, 7. Valet parking, 8. A business center with computers and printers for guest use. 9. Indoor or outdoor recreation court (basketball, volleyball, etc.). 10. Other amenities may be considered in lieu of one of the required amenities subject to Planning Director approval. D. If the hotel is more than mile from the nearest existing I-sefvf restaurant, one of the following convenience retail uses shall be provided on site: 1. Fult-sefuise restaurant, which maybe provided within the hotel or on the same site as part of a master plan or site plan. 2. Guest courtesy lounge for light meals and snacks within the hotel. 17.93.070 Design Standards. In addition to the design provisions outlined in Article VII (Design Standards and Guidelines) of this code, the following design standards shall apply to all new hotel development: A. Site Design and Layout_ Ordinance No. —Page 6 of 11 El—Pg25 uses such as restaurants, entertainment, recreation, and travel and tourism by integrating into a larger pattern of development and avoiding being isolated from such uses or being stand-alone. 2- Site and building designs shall be unique and tailored to the specific site rather than formulaic and without any distinguishing characteristics. 3. D{ial band hotel sonsepis shall t�daLa14pad wr Na a single building er Gamplex and not as two -separate btHIdings,_1 he se are rare and oni/ possible with the same flactor example you can t do Marriott and Hilton 4- Multi -story vertical development is preferred over single or two-story horizontal development. Furthermore, within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, all ' iotel buildings shall have four (4) floors or more, 5. Hotel projects shall be -designed with the hotel building(s) plotted at the street/front building setback line, vuith_the primary (long) axis of the hotel building(s) aligned paralle€ to the street and with the overnight parking area located at the rear or side of the building(s) niay be directed by staff ii found necessary to be con,istent with existing or fdtlire development in the vicinity (encouraping this is fine but site constraints may require alternative designs for example a narrower deeper parcel that is a great hotel opoort,inity won t be alto,red 5 Hote; projcGts shall be designed w4th the primary {leng) axis of the hotel bu;lding(s) aligned parallel to the street -7-6- When the main entrance into the hotel building is on the "street side', short- term parking for guests' checking -in, drive aisles for passenger unlloading. and any overhead structures such as porte cocheres are permitted within the parking and landscape setback along the street by up to 50 percent of the setback dimension. 8 Pa{k411g-l0is Or faesltties shall have a mtnirtiu;o ratio of-2- peroer}t-ef the teal parking _raceme -_Iqu pped--as-elThis is already co'lered Under tale 24 Cal Green avo,d-niessincl v1rt—h this its well covered on the bri{Iding code atreadv - -— B. Architectural Design and Details- 1. The architecture of all buildings shall incorporate multiple design elements/features and diversity/variation in colors to minimize monotony and repetition along all wall planes. 2. The ii amount of plaster/stucco finish applied to any building wall plane (or any exterior panel systems that have the appearance of plasterlstucco) shall not exceed 25 percent of the vertical area of the wall plane.shall not be permitted Ordinance No. _ __.__ - Page 7 of 11 E1-Pg26 3. Articulation of the building wall planes is required on all elevations. 4. High -quality building materials shall be used both on the exterior and interior of the hotel. - Withn-the-Haven.-Aver}r+e Qver#a� D+stf}st -#k-+e fe#la vinq apply te-all-hGtel.-bui ld4igs a. -The-applF(-,atfan ef-plaster>rstt4eeo f ntsh-ior exterior-panel-systerr+s4hat have tf+e--appearance af--plasterfstUGG0) e+i any--building—wall- plane is not Permitted b.- -A nim of extano�qlass-cladding. rnetal ele-+ients/feakKes-and 4ec4rat+ve wail #+r++sl�es s!#+ as stene: san�pps+te of Rat►ral t+les are regE+;reet Haven Overlay already has specific Design Be uirements C. Pedestrian and Vehicular Access. All hotel buildings shall have d+reetincorp orate pedestrian access between the hotel lobby and the street on the "street side" of the building if the main entry into the building is on the opposite side of the building. . -mil b++il�4ira s-v�+tl�+r3 motel �re}aet—v+�hz+ separated try a pafk4Fr g let —shall -be +r�tersennecled lay-pzdestr+ar+ pathways--w4h-a-rr3+n4num w+dth efi9-feet -Stish pathways -shall +nte+vals. This makes no sense all buildings within a hotel proiect the hotel is the tail not the doer in a master plan so'-iFa project is master planned with multiple uses buildings design qUidelines should be applied to the site_pjanning not s ecifi ;all to the hotel component 3-- ,�-dr+ve-threti�-severed-entry shalt�e-pre+�+ded--++�oerpareit+n� a�rer�►nerrt-e�}tr�} feat+af2 4e water-#eats;re -Pk+tk ark - landssaped elements-) th.s concept is very rigid and some conce is don t utilize a drive through covered entry the water Feature is a problem during drouahUears and is an eyesore if forced to shut down 'Public Art" on a private propertv front door is hard toeven.understand how this avotild work Landscaping standards already anpl, . Brand standards are specific to each hotel flag and vAl have the elements re!ative to the product Exam.pie the Element brand doesn't have a drive under porto_it's more of can tale verd build:nu element of the entryway and signatoa try„the brand D. Lighting. 1. Light fixtures, features, and/or similar elements shall be incorporated into the exterior of all hotel buildings to accentuate the architecture. Ordinance No. — Page S of 11 E1—Pg27 2_ All pedestrian pathways on -site and along the public sidewalks adjacent to all street frontage(s) of the project site shall have pedestrian -scale lighting. All such light fixtures (including any base) shall not exceed 10 feet in height. E. landscaping, A high degree of landscaping shall be installed throughout the property, including entry, courtyards, gardens, pool areas, walkways, and parking areas. _ - lush clee ree ._ what does that mean Also this needs to be cflnsist--t,t With water conset vation efforts and goals with the use of drought tolerant plant materials and irriaabon systems such as using In -line drtp lane or similar compatible ems to conserve water F. Building Systems Placement. All mechanical equipment and utility connection points, including HVAC units, electrical meters, and gas meters shall be screened from public view (see Figure 17.93). Rooftop equipment shall not exceed the height of the roof parapet concealing the equipment._ Agree cam Ip etely wtth_this only comment is the roof equipment as written this could tee tiirepata et to exceeds on a 25k SF budding tivould not be feasible what works best is to reQUie screening elements that rncor op rate the buildings architecture and do a line of ssght drawing to demonstrate as part of the st_ibmittal There are a lot of codes out there with Good language on this Figure 17.93.070-1 Screened Mechanical Equipment SF=r.T1QN &SECTION 4. The City Council declares that, should any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance for any reason be held invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Ordinance No. —Page 9 of 11 E1—pg28 ,9EC.T1QW 6.SECTION 5. Neither the adoption of this Ordinance nor the repeal of any other Ordinance of this City shall in any manner affect the prosecution for violations of ordinances, which violations were committed prior to the effective date hereof, nor be construed as a waiver of any penalty or the penal provisions applicable to any violation thereof. GEGWG SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause it to be published in the manner required by law. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of 2019. Dennis Michael Mayor I, JANICE REYNOLDS, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the day of , 2019, and was finally passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the day of , 2019, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS.- ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBERS: ATTEST: Ordinance No. —Page 10 of 11 E1—Pg29 City Clerk Ordinance No. -Page 11 of 11 E1-Pg30 Nakamura, Jennifer From: Feighner, Brandon @ Los Angeles <Brandon.Feighner@cbre.com> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 11:25 AM To: Nakamura, Jennifer Subject: RE; Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance Attachments: 519054 - Letter to RC Planning (4.18.19)_pdf Good morning Jennifer and I hope this note finds you well. Based on our understanding of the matter at hand and the opportunities and challenges that your department is tasked with navigating, we have drafted our professional opinions in the attached letter. As noted therein, we welcome the opportunity to clarify any questions city staff and elected officials may have. We are also happy to make introductions to industry professionals that would likely be able to shed additional light on the intricacies of hotel development and be able to further assist you and your department in guiding the development of hotels that are consistent with the city's desire for high quality hotel products. From: Nakamura, Jennifer <Jennifer.Nakamura@cityofrc.us> Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2019 3:06 PM To: Don Cape <dcape@diversifiedgrp.com> Cc: Feighner, Brandon @ Los Angeles <Brandon.Feighner@cbre.com> Subject: RE: Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance Hi Don, Is there a time frame that we can expect your comments? I would like to be able to review and address your comments and concerns in the report and ordinance. However, we have just 2 days left before the report has to be ready for the Planning Commission on Thursday. Thanks! Jennifer Jennifer Nakamura Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga (909) 774-4324 From: Don Cape <dcape(@d!versifiedern.com> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 5:20 PM To: Nakamura, Jennifer <Jennifer.Nakamura@cityofrc.us> Cc: Feighner, Brandon @ Los Angeles <Brandon.Feighner@cbre.com> Subject: RE: Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance EXHIBIT C 1 El-Pg31 CAUTION: This email is from outside our Corporate network. Do not click links or open attachments unless recognize the sender and know the content is safe Jennifer thank you for working with us on the draft. We want to be supportive while being constructive on sensitive items. We are going to focus on a collaborative draft of comments rather than work Independently as we are all busy and time is precious so we want to respect yours as well. Would it be possible for you to send a word version of the staff report and the ordinance for us to clip out sections and add questions or comments embedded in the document for ease of working together remotely? Thanks again Don Cape 702-339-9115 From: Nakamura, Jennifer<Jennifer.Nakamura@-pityofrc,us> Sent: Thursday, April 4, 2019 6:23 PM To: Don Cape <dcaoe@diversifiederp.com> Subject: Hotel Staff Report and Draft Ordinance Good Evening Don, Attached is the staff report and draft ordinance for hotel development that will be heard by the planning Commission on Wednesday April 10, 2019 The entire agenda for the meeting can be found here: httRs:/Iwww.citvofrc.uslcityhalVmeetingsll2cldefault.as2 Look forward to speaking with you on Monday. Jennifer Jennifer Nakamura Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga (909) 774-4324 El—Pg32 COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES Brandon J. Feighner Senior Director CBRE Hotels Advisory NO HARD COPY TO FOLLOW April 18, 2019 Ms. Jennifer Nakamura Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 CBRE CBRE, Inc. 400 South Hope Street, 25" Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 + 1 213 613 3373 Office Brandon feighnergcbre.com www.cbrehotels,com Re: Rancho Cucamonga Proposed Hotel Ordinances Nos. 919, 923 and 940 Based on our recent meeting, discussion with City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department staff, review of the April 10, 2019 Staff Report ("Report") to the Members of the Planning Commission, and meeting on the some date of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission, we have prepared this letter outlining our thoughts as hotel professionals and advisors to public and private clients alike. We reserve the right to revise or supplement this letter as new information becomes available. As a point of background, we were originally retained by Tharoldson Hospitality ("Tharaldson") in July 2017 to provide an analysis of the anticipated economic and fiscal impact of their hotel developments to be located at the northeast corner of Have Avenue and East Fourth Street. This study, as required by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, was subsequently updated in November 2017 and March 2018. Thus, while Tharoldson remains a client of our firm, the views and opinions expressed herein would not be materially different, regardless of what entity retained us for our hotel advisory services. Our conclusions herein are based not only on our familiarity with the proposed Tharoldson project specifically, but also numerous market studies and appraisals conducted in the Inland Empire, both for public and private sector clients. In addition, we prepare an annual lodging forecast for the greater Ontario/Rancho Cucamonga area and also present to industry groups regarding trends in the Inland Empire hotel market. According to the aforementioned Report, city staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve eight specific Code Amendments relating to the requirements and standards for the development of new hotels or expansions to existing hotels within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Staff's proposed recommendations are summarized in the following key points. 1) Extended Stay Hotels: New extended stay hotels will not be permitted as it has been determined that this category of hotels is satisfactorily represented in the City and the E1--Pg33 Pane ; 2 focus wick be on attracting higher end and boutique hotels to capture that segment of the hotel market. 2) Conditional Use Permit: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) will be required for all new hotels or expansions to existing hotels, which will provide the City with discretionary review ability and allow staff and the Planning Commission to consider each hotel development on a case -by -case basis and apply specific conditions to each project to ensure land use compatibility with the surrounding area_ 3) Market Feasibility Study: A market feasibility study will need to be prepared as part of the application review process. The study will determine the condition of the hotel/lodging market and its ability to support a new hotel and will assist staff in determining if the development will be financially feasible. 4) Findings: Findings specific to hotel uses will be required to support the CUP, including a finding that the hotel occupancy rate for the City will nol drop below 75%. 5) Occupancx: Defined minimum (one day) and maximum (30 days) stay requirement. 6) Public Safety Standards: To help ensure public safety and mitigate against criminal activity the following will be required for hotels; a. Submission of a management plan for addressing potenlial criminal activities at the site. b. Installation of security cameras and storage for a minimum of 30 days of recordings. c. Training for hotel staff on Prow to spot criminal activity. d. Single point of contact for Fire and Police to address issues at the hotel. 7) Hotel Amenities: As part of the effort to broaden the types of hotels within the City, defined amenities will be required for new hotels. Options include full -service restaurants, outdoor bars/lounges and dining areas, fitness centers with a wide range of equipment/exercise stations, spas, large pools, fire pits, other recreation areas, and valet parking. 8) Design Standards: Like many other developments occurring within the City, hotels will be held to a higher standard of architectural design review than they had previously. Development standards and design guidelines specific to hotel development, including requiring designs that are unique and tailored to a specific site rather than a cookie -cutter hotel without any distinguishing characteristics and requiring building architecture that incorporates multiple design elements and variation in materials and colors. It is our strong professional opinion that the majority of staff's recommendations are reasonable and prudent in light of the City Council's goal "...to enhance Rancho Cucamonga's position as the premier community in our region." For example, it would be reasonable for the City to be able to evaluate each planned hotel and its design on a case -by -case basis (#2 and #8). Similarly, all business class hotels in the City should conform to public safety standards (#6) and we would be surprised if a majority of the hotels operating in the City do nol already adhere to the standards E1—Pg34 Page 13 (or some facsimile thereof) outlined in the staff recommendation. Additionally, it is not uncommon for municipalities to require prospective developers to demonstrate that their hotel developments are financially feasible (#3). Lastly and not surprisingly given the trend towards experiential hotel stays it would be reasonable to anticipate that future hotel developers would include one or more types of amenities (#7) outlined in the Report. Adopting these recommendations would not only be consistent with the City's stated goals, but also comments made by members of the Planning Commission at the April 10"' meeting. Further, the development and adoption of operational standards and requirements for new hotels promotes the City's premier community status within the region. However, in our capacity as hospitality and real estate professionals, recommendations #1, #4, and #5 of the draft Ordinance are not only overly restrictive, but they run counter to the actual demand for accommodations in the local area. We are sympathetic to the fact that there is a belief among City staff and officials that the "extended -stay" segment of the hotel industry is adequately represented, giving the existing and proposed supply of hotels in Rancho Cucamonga. We also understand that on a related note, the City seeks to further the development of luxury hotels such as a Four Seasons or Montage branded hotel and is concerned that the development of "lesser" hotels on parcels within the City would preclude the development of more luxurious hotels. It is important to note that it is not a zero -sum game and that absent financial subsidies at the municipal level, the market will ultimately dictate the highest and best use of any site. Based our experience in the local market, full -service hotels and especially luxury hotels have generally not been financially feasible. While at some level the demand for these very high - quality facilities is likely present in the Rancho Cucamonga area, the costs to construct such a product is not supported by the average daily rates that the project can generate. Generally, luxury hotels are found in exclusive urban areas such as Beverly Hills, or coastal destinations such as Dana Point and Santa Monica. In fact, there are only 16 AAA five -diamond award winning hotels in the entirety of California and the Mission Inn Hotel & Spa in Riverside is the only four - diamond hotel in the larger metropolitan statistical area. Additionally, based on recent work for the City of Ontario, as well as Anaheim and Los Angeles, we have found that there are few instances in which the development of a full -service hotel is the highest and best use. The factors are many, but primarily due to rising construction and labor costs (not to mention land values) developing full -service hotels in many markets today does not generate the required return on investment for the majority of firms active in the hotel space today. Thus while the City's desire for full -service and/or luxury hotels should be applauded and reasonable steps should be taken to attract these types of hotels, they are unlikely to be supported by market factors in the short to mid-term. It is important to note that the term "extended -stay" is somewhat of a misnomer and such properties should more appropriately be referred to as "all -suite" hotels, thereby denoting the physical attributes of a hotel and its guestrooms rather than hypothetical guest profile, especially since hotels of these types are attractive to a wide spectrum of guests that prefer the extra living space afforded by all -suite hotels and full kitchen facilities that allow for the preparation of meals according to strict dietary needs. These facts are supported by Marriott's own data. Following its acquisition of Starwood Hotels in September 2016, Marriott International became the world's largest hotel company and one of the largest operators of all -suite hotels, including the nation's most well-known brands: Residence Inn. According to Marriott's Franchise Disclosure Document, E1—Pg35 Page 1 4 only approximately 40 percent of all Residence Inn guests across more than 500 hotels in North America, stay for more than five consecutive nights. Therefore, the majority of all -suite guests at "all -suite" or "extended -stay" hotels were actually guests that likely stayed for only a few days at a time. In recent years and for the likely foreseeable future, the demand for "extended -stay" hotels continues to grow. One of the primary drivers of this Trend is the fact that this class of hotels is attractive not only to prospective hotel guests, but also to hotel developers. Guests are appreciative of the larger than average room sizes, full kitchen facilities and residential -style amenities, whereas developers are attracted to the higher than average occupancy levels and streamlined level of day-to-day operations of the property. As noted The Highland Group's 2019 US Extended -Stay Lodging Market report, dated March 8, 2019. "Despite record levels of new room construction adding more than 83,000 new rooms over the last three years, some of the strongest demand growth ever reported has kept extended -stay occupancy above its long-term average for eight consecutive years. Rising construction costs and a tight construction labor market has lengthened the development process and for the first time in seven years extended -stay rooms under construction at year end declined from the prior year. Despite the decline, the firming of the 47,000 extended -stay rooms under construction will be a major factor in the segmeni's performance in 2019. Extended -slay hotel RevPAR deceleration and closer alignment with the overall hotel industry's RevPAR growth is usual at this stage of the hotel business cycle, Extended -slay room supply growth should be in the 6% to 7% range in 2019. Assuming strong economic fundamentals result in demand growth similar to the 6% average over the Iasi five years, there should be little change in occupancy in 2019. Even if demand fails to keep up with supply, occupancy was at an 18 year high in 2018 so it should remain above its long- ADR and RevPAR growth are likely to be slower in 2019 compared to 2018 but the near - term outlook remains good for extended-sioy hotels." The national trends are also prevalent at the local level. Similar to STR, Inc., CBRE Hotels collects data from hundreds of individual hotels throughout Southern California. Based on this data we selected a representative sample of extended -stay and all -suite hotels located in either the City of Rancho Cucamonga of the City of Ontario. Given the proximity of the hotels and the joint marketing of the cities by the Greater Ontario Convention and Visitors Bureau (GOCVBj, we find this to be a reasonable comparison. The four hotels surveyed during the course of our analysis are outlined in the table at the beginning of the following page. All-Suile/Extended-Stay Hotels Rancho Cucamonga & Ontario Hotel Name City Class Open Date Rooms Homewood Suiles Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga Upscale November 2005 103 TownePlace SJ'tes Roncho Cucamonga Rancho Cucomongo Upper Midscale January 2006 112 Embassy Suites Ontario Airport Ontario Upper Upscale June 2011 175 Res -deuce Inn Ontario Airport Ontario Upscale February 1986 200 Source STR, Inc., CBRE Hotels _ ,. . The aggregate average anneal available and occupied rooms, resulting occupancy levels, average daily rate, and revenue per available room (RevPAR) for this sample set between 2008 and 2018, are presented betow. For confidentiality reasons we are unable to provide individual El--Pg36 Page 15 hotel data, but at the conclusion of 2018 the occupancy levels of the four hotels ranged from the low 80's to the low 90's and average daily rates ranged from approximately $130 to $180. All-Suite/Extended-Slay Hotels Ontario/Rancho Cucamonga Historical Market Performance Year Annual supply Percent Change Occupied Rooms Percent Change Mar,et Occ.jpancy ADR Percent Change RevPAR Percent Change 2008 151,475 - 115,064 - 76.0% $104.04 $79.03 2009 151,475 0.0% 102,678 10 8% 67.8 94.57 -9.1% 64.10 -18.9% 2010 151,475 0.0 113,230 10.3 74,8 89.79 -5.1 67.12 4.7 2011 188,735 24.6 126,535 11.8 67.0 100.97 12.5 67.70 0.9 2012 215,350 14.1 159,397 26.0 74.0 107.03 6.0 79.22 17.0 2013 215,350 0.0 167,400 5.0 77.7 113.52 6.1 88.25 11.4 2014 215,350 0.0 180,616 7.9 83.9 118,71 4.6 99.56 12.8 2015 215,350 0.0 184,174 2.0 85.5 128.80 8.5 110.15 10.6 2016 215,350 0.0 185,040 0.5 85.9 139.64 8.4 119.98 8.9 2017 215,350 0.0 182,700 .1.3 84.8 146.81 5.1 124.55 3.8 2018 215,350 0.0 185,809 1.7 86.3 150.18 2.3 129.58 4.0 CAGR 1 3.6% - 4.9% - - 3.7% - 5.1 % - Source CBRE Hotels Prior to the Great Recession, occupancies in the local market were in the mid to high 70's, although as with nearly all markets across the U.S., occupancy levels dropped precipitously in 2009 and unique to the local market experienced second decrease in 2011 with the mid -year opening of the Embassy Suites Ontario. As economic conditions improved, and the newly opened hotel ramped up in the local market, occupancy levels increased significantly through 2014 or 2015. In fact, for the last five years the local market of all -suite and extended-siay hotels has averaged approximately 85 percent occupancy. For the record, this is an indication of an extremely healthy hotel market and is nearly 20 percentage points of the national average of 66.2 percent for U.S. Hotels, which in itself was an all-time record for the hotel industry as a whole. Not surprisingly and further speaking to the demand for "extended -stay" hotels in the local market, one of the properties listed in the table on the preceding page was recently honored for having the highest occupancy in the entire Hilton reservation system. Therefore as it relates to the proposed Ordinance, recommendation #1 (prohibition of extended - stay hotels) should be removed entirely based an compelling business reasons and supporting market data. Beyond the supply and demand imbalance that likely exists in the local market given the preceding statistics, staff recommendation #5 is unduly punitive to hotel operators and the guests that they intend to serve. As noted previously, the majority of "extended -stay" guests stay are accommodated for less than five consecutive days, and when they do stay longer, it is usually for reasons beyond their control. From a purely business perspective it is unlikely that the City receives less transient occupancy tax (TOT) from its "extended -stay" hotels, as these types of hotels have a RevPAR roughly 15 percent higher than a traditional business class hotel'. While hotels are often thought of tourist or visitor serving they also play an important role in the local community. The reasons are too numerous to list, but both in theory and practice local residents could and have patronized extended -stay hotels for temporary accommodation if their t Compartson of Marriott International's Residence Inn and Courtyard brands 'fire revenue per acat] able room (Re%PAR) uas S 116 15 for all Residence Inn branded hotels and S 102.22 for Courtyard branded hotels El-Pg37 Page 16 homes are uninhabitable for any reason, they are relocating to the area, or have experienced a major life event for which access to a larger guest room and full kitchen facilities would be highly desired (if not required) facilities and amenities from a guest perspective. Additionally, such a restriction would not allow any hotels, regardless of their classification by the city, to serve first responders and other important personnel associated with a major disaster and the remediation that follows. Given that in practice few "extended -stay" hotel guests stay more than 30 days nights, coupled with the likelihood that these hotels likely generate a similar amount of TOT as comparable traditional hotels, we do not find a business case from which to support this arbitrary recommendation. Legifimate health and safety concerns are cause enough to remove hotel guests or visitors engaging in dangerous or criminal activity. If problems occur at the property and/or ownership level, imposing fines and liens, including the right to begin the foreclosure process would likely serve as compelling legal methods to curb criminal activity. Finally, we are of the opinion that recommendation #4 should be rewritten following the completion of a detailed data -driven analysis that considers the historical and future projected performance of not only hotels located within the city limits of Rancho Cucamonga but also should likely include hotels in the adjacent community of Ontario. There is not necessarily a discernible difference in a prospective guest's eye between staying at a hotel north of the Ontario Mills Mall across Fourth Street (in Rancho Cucamonga) or staying at a hotel property south of the mall in the City of Ontario. According to the December 2018 Lodging Report prepared by the GOCVB, the nine City of Rancho Cucamonga hotels posted an 81.6 percent annual occupancy, which was similar to the year prior. However, the 48 City of Ontario hotels posted a much lower occupancy for the same period (72.0 percent) and therefore it is important to not consider supply and demand metrics in a vacuum. It should also be noted that the national hotel industry, including the City of Rancho Cucamonga specifically, has been operating at occupancy levels that are amongst the highest ever recorded. While we are not projecting a major decline in hotel performance during the reasonably foreseeable future, it is inevitable that there will be peaks and troughs in the market's future performance based on more than 80 years of historical data_ Based on discussions with staff of the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, the City of Ontario has a similar provision in their development code, although according to 5.03.C.2.5 of Ontario's Zoning and Land Use code, the minimum occupancy threshold is 65 percent is ten percentage points lower than that is being proposed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Inclusive of the reasons mentioned above, this would be reasonably consistent with the longer term average of the local hotel market, as shown below and partially excerpted from CBRE Hotels' 2019 Southern California lodging Forecast. El—Pg38 Page 1 7 Ontario/Rancho Cucamonga Historical Market Performance of the Competitive Supply Year Annual Supply Percent Change Occupied Rooms Pfrcert Change Market Occupancy Average Do ly Rate Percent Change REVPAR Percent Chan e 2008 1,470,220 983,387 66.9% $98 64 $65 98 - 2009 1,640,675 1 1.6% 973,367 -1 M' 59.3 85 10 -13 7% 5049 -23 50, 2010 1,658,560 1.1 1,046,733 7.5 63.1 80.99 -4.8 51 11 1.2 2011 1,693,235 2.1 1,052,658 0.6 62.2 83.04 2.5 51.62 1.0 2012 1,722,435 1.7 1,096,267 4.1 636 85.59 3.1 54.48 5.5 2013 1,800,910 4.6 1,181,145 7.7 65.6 8660 1.2 56.80 4.3 2014 1,800,910 0.0 1,283,534 8 7 71.3 89 72 3.6 63.95 12.6 2015 1,800,910 0.0 1,328.791 3 5 73.8 9647 7.5 71.18 11.3 2016 1,800,910 0.0 1,334,335 0.4 74.1 103.71 7.5 76.84 8.0 2017 1,800,910 0.0 1,336,726 0.2 74.2 109.45 5.5 81.24 5.7 2018E 1,815,875 0.8 1,369,871 2.5 75.4 115.05 5.1 86.79 6.8 CRAG 2.1 % - 3.4% - 1.6% - 2.8% - Source: CBRE Hotels Instead if the City is seeking to guide future development by amending the Zoning Code to require a more upscale design and increased amenities package, these stipulations should be based on definable and generally accepted hotel industry terminology. To achieve this desired effect, municipalities establish minimum quality standards governed by organizations such as AAA (Diamonds) and Forbes (Stars) that set forth the quality and service levels of a hotel. A second source would be the aforementioned STIR, Inc., which also rates hotels but by different criteria and classifications. Through the use of definable and industry recognized terms and definitions in the drafting of any hotel related ordinance, the City will not only be able to better shape the future needs of the premier community by requiring stricter standards, but these standards should also set forth clear and deliverable objectives for prospective developers, which would likely be desirable from their prospective in term of time and materials saved. We appreciate the opportunity to offer our professional opinions on this important matter and look forward to answering any questions you may have regarding our conclusions presented herei n. Sincerely, Brandon Feighner Senior Director CBRE Hotels Advisory El-Pg39 Addendum Terms and Conditions El-Pg40