The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About21-22 ResolutionRESOLUTION NO. 21-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2020-00397, A REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED BUILDING SETBACK AND MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE REPLACEMENT OF THREE EXISTING BUILDINGS TOTALING 10,135 SQUARE FEET WITH THREE NEW BUILDINGS AND A DRIVE-THRU LANE TOTALING 9,497 SQUARE FEET ON 4.21 ACRES OF LAND (183,534 SQUARE FEET) LOCATED IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) DISTRICT, FOOTHILL BOULEVARD OVERLAY DISTRICT, AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND VINEYARD AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0207-211-42. A. Recitals. 1. McKently Malak Architects filed an application for the approval of Variance DRC2020-00397, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On April 14, 2021, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and continued the meeting to April 28, 2021. 3. On April 28, 2021, 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. 4. 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 Lhearings of April 28, 2021, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The 4.21-acre project site is located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue; and b. The existing Land Use, General Plan and Zoning Designations for the project site and adjacent properties are as follows: Land Use General Plan Zoning Site Commercial Center Mixed -Use Community Commercial (CC) District' North Commercial Center (Albertsons, Community Community Commercial (CC) etc.) Commercial District' South Vacant Land Mixed -Use Community Commercial (CC) District' PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-22 VARIANCE DRC2020-00397 — MCKENTLY MALAK ARCHITECTS April 28, 2021 Page 2 Service Station (Mobil) Mixed -Use Community Commercial (CC) District2 East Multi -Family Residential Medium Medium -High (MH) Residential Development Residential District West Service Station (Chevron) Medium Community Commercial (CC) Residential District 'Foothill Boulevard Overlay District (Subarea 1) ZFoothill Boulevard Overlay District (Subarea 2) C. The project scope is for the demolition of three buildings (Buildings B, C, and D) and the construction of three new buildings in their place with a combined floor area of 9,497 square feet, including the establishment of a new drive-thru lane (Building B); and d. The project includes a request for a Variance (DRC2020-00397) to reduce the required street setback of Building D as measured from the curb face on Vineyard Avenue, and for an increase in the maximum permittedbuilding height related to the screening of rooftop equipment; and e. The project's compliance with the related development standards are shown in the following tables: Required Provided Compliant? Building Setback Foothill Blvd. 25 Feet 25 Feet Yes Building Setback (Vineyard Avenue 25 Feet 14 Feet-8 Inches Noe Building Setback Interior PL 25 Feet 450 Feet Yes Drive-Thru Lane Setback 45 Feet 25 feet No' Landscape Coverage 10 Percent 20 Percent Yes Floor Area Ratio up to 100 Percent 11 Percent Yes Building Height 20 Feet Maximum 24 Feet' No ' Deviation from this requirement is permitted through the design review process 2A Variance application for building setback and building height has been submitted for consideration to permit this Parking Ratio Required Parking Provided Parkin Building A 3,348 SF Retail 1:250 SF 14 Spaces Building B 4,508 SF Restaurant 1:100 SF 45 Spaces Building B (400 SF) Restaurant Outdoor Eating Area 1:100 4 Spaces Building C 1,729 SF Retail 1:250 SF 7 Spaces Building D 3,260 SF Restaurant 1:100 SF 33 Spaces Building E 3,217 SF Restaurant 1:100 SF 32 Spaces Total Parking Spaces 135 Spaces 140 Spaces 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. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in a difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this Code. The strict PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-22 VARIANCE DRC2020-00397 — MCKENTLY MALAK ARCHITECTS April 28, 2021 Page 3 interpretation of the required 25-foot streetscape setback for Building D would create unnecessary hardship and would be contrary to the intent of the Foothill Boulevard Overlay Zoning District to place buildings closer to the public right-of-way in designated activity centers. Building D is located adjacent to a bus turnouttright turn lane which reduces the width of the public right-of-way by approximately 13 feet. The strict interpretation of the 20-foot building height limit would also create an unnecessary hardship as it would make it difficult to screen the rooftop equipment in a manner that is architecturally compatible with the proposed buildings. . b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that does not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. Regarding the request to reduce setbacks, the project site is located adjacent to a bus turnout/right turn lane which reduces the width of the public right-of-way by approximately 13 feet. This condition generally does not apply to other commercial centers in the City. Further, regarding the request for increased building height, the grades on the project site also make it necessary to raise the parapet heights on the building to screen the rooftop equipment. C. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. Without a reduction in the required building setback from the curb face on Vineyard Avenue, Building D would be required to increase the street setback by 10 feet, contrary to the intent of the Foothill Boulevard Overlay District, which encourages building to be located closer to the public right-of-way in activity centers. Without an increase in the permitted building height, the rooftop equipment could not be screened by the roof parapets, a normal requirement in the City. d. The granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. It is common practice to grant a Variance for reduced setbacks when a building is located adjacent to a bus turnout/right turn lane. It is also not a grant of special privilege to allow the parapets to be of adequate height to screen the rooftop equipment. e. The granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The reduction in the building setback and a minor increase in the building parapet heights will not negatively impact the surrounding property owners as the proposed building will replace an existing building on the project ,site with a similar building setback. The additional building parapet height will also not impact the surrounding property and will permit the necessary rooftop equipment to be screened from public view.. 4. Planning Staff 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 2 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines 15302 (replacement or reconstruction) as the scope of work is to replace three existing buildings totaling 10,135 square feet with three new buildings and a drive-thru lane totaling 9,497 square feet in close proximity to the existing buildings. Staff finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will 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 subject to each and every condition set forth in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 21-22 VARIANCE DRC2020-00397 - MCKENTLY MALAK ARCHITECTS April 28, 2021 Page 4 The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF APRIL 2021. PLANNING CZOM OF TH ITY NCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Tong Guglielmo, Chairman ATTEST: Q' MI -IfiqC' dx v� Anne McIntosh, AICP, SecretZn9, I, Anne McIntosh, 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 28th day of April 2021, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: GUGLIELMO, OAXACA, DOPP, MORALES, WILLIAMS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: