Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20-16 ResolutionRESOLUTION NO.20-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00529, A REQUEST TO DEVELOP 13.6 ACRE SITE WITH FOUR (4) INDUSTRIALIWAREHOUSE BUILDINGS TOTALING 240,710 SQUARE FEET WITHIN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL (GI) DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND 7TH STREET; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0209-211-24 A. Recitals. 1. The applicant, Redrock Development, Inc. on behalf of Scheu Management Company, filed an application for a Design Review DRC2018-00529, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Design Review is referred to as "the application." 2. On November 13, 2019, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application. At the request of Staff, the Planning Commission Continued the public hearing to December 11, 2019 to allow time for the Initial Study and Mitigated to be recirculated (to address a technical error that occurred during the initial circulation of those documents) and be available for review and comment. 3. On December 11, 2019, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application. At the request of Staff, the Planning Commission Continued the public hearing to an unspecified date to allow time for Staff and the applicant to review and respond to comments received regarding the Initial Study and Mitigated that was recirculated. 4. On February 12, 2020, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date: 5. 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 the Planning Commission during the above -referenced public hearing on December 11, 2019, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located within the City; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 20-16 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00529 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT COMPANY February 12, 2020 Page 2 b. The application applies to approximately 13.6-acre irregularly shaped piece of land within the General Industrial (GI) District, located at the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and 71h Street; and C. Properties to the north, south, east and west contain industrial/warehouse buildings and are located within the General Industrial (GI) District; and d. The proposed project consists of the construction of four (4) industria llwarehouse buildings totaling 240,710 square feet and ancillary on -site improvements; and e. The project complies with all pertinent development standards related to building height, site coverage, and front/rear setbacks; and f. The project complies with the landscaping requirements as prescribed in the General Industrial (GI) District; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan. The site is located within the General Industrial (G1) District, which permits a range of industrial activities. The project consists of four (4) industria[/warehouse buildings totaling 240,710 square feet. All site improvements, including parking and landscaped areas, are designed to be consistent with the General Industrial (G[) District. Furthermore, the potential uses within the proposed buildings are would be consisted with this land use designation. b. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The Development Code designates the project site as General Industrial (GI) District. The proposed industrial/warehouse buildings are consistent with the land use intent of the General Industrial (GI) District. The zoning of the adjacent sites to the property are also within the General Industrial (GI) District and are (or will be) developed with compatible buildings and uses. c. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The buildings are designed for industrial/warehouse operations. The buildings meet all setbacks, floor area, height, and landscaping requirements. The buildings have been designed to meet the City's architectural standards. The project meets the minimum parking, loading, and access requirements. d. 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 site is surrounded by industrial developments of a similar scale and intensity. Potential uses/operations within the proposed buildings and on the project site are anticipated to comply with the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 20-16 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00529 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT COMPANY February 12, 2020 Page 3 performance standards described in the Development Code relating to, for example, noise, lighting, and odors. 4. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local. CEQA Guidelines, an Initial Study (IS) of the potential environmental effects of the project was prepared. Based on the findings contained in that IS, it was determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to, for example, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, and noise, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. -Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration ,(MND) was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided' public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program was also prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. During the 30-day review public comment period, Staff received a comment letter from Lozeau Drury, LLP on October 23, 2019. The letter expressed issues with the ISIMND and cited.concerns with the mitigation measures identified in the ISIMND. Emails were also received from the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the. California Air Resources Board (GARB) on October 23 and 24,, 2019, respectively. Both of these emails (followed later by written correspondence) contained requests for certain appendices associated with the technical studies used in the environmental analysis of the project. The information was provided to these agencies as requested. The comment letters were forwarded to the applicant and the applicant's environmental consultant for their review/reference and response. The consultant subsequently provided responses to these comments. The ISIMND was recirculated on November 6, 2019, to address technical errors that occurred during the first circulation of the environmental document. During the second 30-day review public comment period that was provided, the City received a second comment.letter from Lozeau Drury, LLP on December 10, 2019..This comments letter identified several deficiencies in the analyses and methodologies.applied in -the discussion of two environmental topics (air quality and biological resources) during construction of the project and the operations of it when it is completed. This. letter was also reviewed by staff and forwarded to the applicant and their environmental consultant for their review and response. The applicant contacted Lozeau Drury, LLP to discuss their second set of comments. They ultimately reached a mutually acceptable solution to address the comments. On December 19, 2019 the City received correspondence from Lozeau Drury, LLP stating that they accept the applicant's approach. This was followed on December 23, 201,9 by a letter from the applicant that outlined it. The solution does not includelpropose additional mitigation measures nor conditions of approval. Staff reviewed the comments from the above -noted entities, and. the applicant's consultant's responses to,them, and lias concluded that no revisions to, and/or recirculation_ of, the ISIMND is required. 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 in the Conditions of Approval, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 20-16 DESIGN REVIEW DRC2018-00529 — SCHEU MANAGEMENT COMPANY February 12, 2020 Page 4 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: C&:: Tony Guglielmo, Chairman ATTEST: l Anne McIntosh, ICP, Secretary I, Anne McIntosh, AICP, Secretary of the Planning Commission for 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 12' day of February 2020, by the following vote - to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: GUGLIELMO, OAXACA, DOPP, MORALES NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: WILLIAMS ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: