HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-04-28 - Minutes - PC-HPCPreservation Commission
Planning Commission Agenda
April 28, 2021
MINUTES
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
7:00 p.m.
The regular meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on
April 28, 2021. The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Planning Commission present: Chairman Tony Guglielmo, Vice Chair Oaxaca, Commissioner Bryan
Dopp, Commissioner Tony Morales and Commissioner Diane Williams — (Williams joined meeting @ 7:15
P.M.)
Staff Present: Nicholas Ghirelli, City Attorney; Anne McIntosh, Planning Director; Dat Tran, Assistant
Planner; David Eoff, Senior Planner; Mike Smith, Principal Planner; Jason Welday, Engineering Director;
Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Sean McPherson, Senior Planner; Jennifer Nakamura,
Management Analysis II.
B. Public Communications
Chairman Guglielmo opened for public communications and hearing no comment, closed communications.
C. Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of April 14, 2021.
Motion by Commissioner Dopp, second by Vice Chair Oaxaca. Motion carried 4-0. (Absent — Williams)
D. Public Hearings
D1. PROJECT LOCATED AT 8865 — 8875 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD & 8130 VINEYARD
AVENUE — MCKENTLY MALAK ARCHITECTS — A request for site plan and architectural
review to replace three existing buildings totaling 10,135 square feet with three new
buildings and a drive-thru lane totaling 9,497 square feet, a related Conditional Use Permit
to establish the drive-thru lane and a Variance to reduce the required building setback and
maximum building height for a 4.21 acre (183,534 square feet) project site located in the
Community Commercial (CC) District, Foothill Boulevard Overlay District, at the southwest
corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue, APN: 0207-211-42. DESIGN REVIEW
DRC2020-00318, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (MODIFICATION) DRC2020-00319 &
VARIANCE DRC2020-00397. (Continued from April 14, 2021 Planning Commission
Meeting.)
Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and presentation
(copy on file).
Chairman Guglielmo asked the Commission if there were any comments for staff on the Public Hearing
item.
Commissioner Dopp asked what kind of discussions did Staff have with developer on the property that
maybe more could be done with this parcel. He said possibly finding different ways to bring in business
to that corner.
Anne McIntosh, Planning Director, explained that this project has the existing center on Foothill frontage
and behind it is a large vacant land area and two buildings. She said if you could conceive of something
that could be placed on the entire site, if lots where all consolidated and redeveloped as one big project,
we probably would not recommend approval of one-story buildings along Foothill. Your point is well taken
in terms of our larger land use policies and what we are hoping for when we get a brand-new
comprehensive project. She said this Applicant is looking to re -tenant their building and remodel this
strip center. Their goal for this project is to remodel and bring in active tenants. She stated we evaluated
what they are applying for, not what might be possible in the future.
Nick Ghirelli, City Attorney, mentioned there are a number of vacant buildings being remodeled, and new
uses are being put in there. There will be an increase of financial performance at this site. Tabe
mentioned the vacant building will be split off from the rest of parcel as a condition of the project. He said
in addition to the lot split, there is also a condition that will require the building within 30 days be abated
so the nuisance conditions on the side are removed or the applicant has the opportunity to demolish the
building. There will probably be some fiscal performance out of having that nuisance building removed
from site.
Commissioner Dopp asked if there is something more that could be done somewhere down the line doing
something different with this project. He was wondering if possible, room for discussion to maybe create
some sort of synergy in that project with the Historic Home. He is worried it will underutilize property over
a couple of decades. He feels we might have a missed opportunity to use that home and create a more
unifying development.
Tabe van der Zwaag mentioned the Historic House is being used as a commercial building now. He said
the owner of building has done some improvements for access to that building. Hopefully, we will get
good tenants in that building and help create a more synergy between it and the rest of the center.
With no further discussion from Commissioners, Chairman Guglielmo re -opened public hearing.
Haney McLak, Applicant, provided background and history of project and expressed excitement to begin.
Commissioner Dopp asked for Mr. McLak to talk about his unique challenges and aspects of this project
he is excited to bring to the table.
Mr. McLak answered trying to squeeze in a historic building on one side and existing lease with KFC on
another in this particular corner was challenging. He said grading issues and getting the circulation to
work well. He mentioned the biggest thing he loves is the opportunity for patio spaces. It brings more
life to the space.
Frank Wang, Property Manager for Vineyard Hill, LLC located in the City of Walnut, representing owners
at 8800 Foothill Blvd., Rancho Cucamonga. Parcel Numbers: 0207-21143 and 0207-21144. He is
representing owners to discuss the onsite project easements. Concerned that the proposed construction
and renovations will affect the condition and status of these easements. He said owners of Vineyard Hill
LLC are undergoing planning for future development on Foothill Blvd./Vineyard Ave. where its completion
will foresee a significant increase in pedestrian traffic in neighboring commercial lots and want to discuss
further on the implementation on the drive thru and impact of pedestrian traffic and safety.
HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES — April 28, 2021
Page 2 of 7
FINAL
Tabe van der Zwaag stated their property is the vacant parcel that is part of the project site. They own
two parcels within the greater project area. Explaining that parcel was originally designated as the anchor
tenants to the shopping center when it was originally conceived by the City. He said we have been in
discussion with the owner and they have provided a preliminary site plan for a mixed -use project in that
location.
Mr. McLak's rebuttal — Once we have the opportunity to sell Building F and subdivide the property, they
will have direct access up on Vineyard and if there is a mixed -use project within that pedestrian, activity
would take hold directly into Vineyard. Looking at the site development layout, there is access
opportunities for sidewalks that can be developed within their property that would directly access our
portion of the land and have access into KFC and other buildings as well. He is willing to look at their
plans and how they can join cross access.
With no more comments from the Public, Chairman Guglielmo closed public hearing.
Vice Chair Oaxaca expressed he liked the look and design of the project. He said redesigning the
corner with the two buildings gives it more a pedestrian friendly and welcoming feel. Drive thru lane will
not become a problem with circulation within parking lot. Project is nicely done.
Commissioner Morales stated the requested setback reduction for Building D is reasonable because of
13 ft. bus stop and right turn lane. He said it will be in close proximity to the existing building there now.
The minor increase of building height of 4 ft. higher is reasonable so buildings look nice. The Condition
of Approval for Building F is absolutely necessary to bring project and area up to our high standards. The
architectural and design to the new buildings is definitely an improvement to what is there now and fulfills
the City Council Goals of continuous improvement. He is in favor of the project.
Commissioner Dopp stated his main reservation will continue to be the use of revenue and the best use
of land. He said what he heard made him sway him in another direction. The house can be better utilized
in the future. If this project at the end of the day does it, then that could be a motivation of hope. By
approving this project, the hope would be we end up doing something great with the property that is left.
He approves the property going forward.
Commissioner Williams stated this project is long overdue. She said we can really set some high
standards for this particular project. She would like to see restaurants with strung up lights, a little activity
going on and once in a while with live music. She said the people in the area will welcome it and she is
in favor of the project.
Chairman Guglielmo agrees with Commissioner Williams. He is also excited about the project.
Expressed he enjoyed the fly through video because it helps to visualize, and he hopes to encourage
future applicants to do similar.
Nick Ghirelli, City Attorney, reiterated the Commissioners will be acting on a Design Review approval that
gives Commission to look at walkability and encourage harmonious appearance and structure within the
city. Also heard about the traffic queuing with the drive-thru and a traffic study was prepared and provided
to you. He said it sounds like all Commissioners have reached their conclusion but wanted to let you
know for your consideration.
Motion by Commissioner Morales, second by Commissioner Williams. Motion carried 5-0
HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES — April 28, 2021
Page 3 of 7
FINAL
E. General Business
El. Discussion of Draft Development Standards for Industrial Uses and Related Amendments
to the Development Code.
Jennifer Nakamura, Management Analyst II, presented the Commissioners with a PowerPoint presentation
to get their input, feedback, questions, and concerns. She said we will make final refinements to the Draft
Development Code and on May 26'", we will come back for your recommendation and that recommendation
will go to City Council on June 161" will then review the final draft development code and review your
recommendation and make a final determination.
Anne McIntosh mentioned as a reminder, the moratorium will end late June. We are timing this to meet that
deadline. The ordinance will not be in effect until July. Getting it to the Council before the moratorium ends
is adequate.
Commissioner Morales' concern is truck traffic. He asked with truck traffic and parking, is it the best we can
do to control queuing of trucks on the streets, so they are not parked in the middle of the road.
Jennifer Nakamura replied the on -site queuing plan, which is one of the components of the parking
management plan, is a piece. However, because we are looking at conditioning each of these projects there
maybe, as we go through these projects, additional levers or controls we need to consider through conditions
of approval. She said we will continue to engage the development community to ask their feedback. We are
somewhat ahead of the curve in some of these issues. If we don't feel that its working, we can come back
and present additional standards as we need them.
Commissioner Morales mentioned ebikes are becoming more popular use of transportation. Employees for
these industrial sites, should we add bike racks and charging station for those.
Jennifer Nakamura responded it's a great idea and adding a charging station is reasonable and makes sense.
Something to take a closer look at.
Vice Chair Oaxaca stated when we look at the traffic implications of these large-scale truck intensive uses,
are we looking at the standards from a perspective of making sure we don't fall into the cumulative trap.
Where we didn't give ourselves the tools to be able to react to make sure we do not end up exactly what we
did not want with those ugly looking levels of service on our streets through there.
Jennifer Nakamura replied that is why we spent the time doing the type of analysis that we did. She said
that is a concern but having those standards as part of the General Plan is important because it sets a
foundation for future development in that area.
Nick Ghirelli, City Attorney, mentioned for our larger warehouses the City has required that EIR's be prepared
and you do have to look at cumulative impacts associated, not just the project but how it interacts with other
projects in the area and other foreseeable projects. He said there is a mechanism for CEQA to evaluate that
type of impact. He said that is separate from the planning process you are going through right now.
Jason Welday, Engineering Director, replied one of the aspects in our traffic impact analysis standards is the
level of service analysis, due to the problem is the capacity issues on our roadways. He said we look at both
the project level at the opening year, as well as the horizon year, the future year scenario in order to try and
capture the cumulative project by project basis but that cannot capture everything. He said we are working
on a bigger picture analysis right now, so we don't find ourselves in that problem.
HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES — April 28, 2021
Page 4 of 7
FINAL
Anne McIntosh reminded the Commission we will review the Draft General Plan on May 12'" and a few days
it will be released. You will have an opportunity to see that focus area defined better.
Commissioner Williams commended staff for reaching out to stakeholders. She said not just take what they
have to say but incorporate it, use it.
Jennifer Nakamura stated they really focus on balancing what they say will work right now vs. what our long-
term vision is for a world class community and meeting our vision.
Anne McIntosh mentioned another thing we realized with an industrial development is it cycles. It may begin
with an existing property owner and then maybe sold to a developer and the developer will find the tenants
later. She said the responsibility we have is to think about the entire cycle and that is why we came up with
the ideas with the different parking strategies. We have to think about that upfront.
Chairman Guglielmo stated it looked like you were going from 50 to 60% in all zones. He asked if that applied
just in SEIQ or all over the city.
Jennifer Nakamura answered that it will apply to all industrial zones within the city. Not specific to SEIQ or
Foothill corridor. These standards will apply everywhere. In the areas previously zoned heavily industrial
those have a maximum of 50% and that is increasing. She said others are currently already at 60%.
Commissioner Dopp asked is it fair to say we are trying to transition industrial areas in the city towards more
of that new industrial conversation that maybe is more vibrant and brings more to the community at large.
Jennifer Nakamura replied one of the things we talked about previously is the smaller buildings generally
tend to have a better fiscal performance and one of things we want to do is encourage smaller businesses
to come to the city as well. It's not to say, we are not interested in having larger industrial buildings or that
we do not see a need for logistics or distribution. She said those are incredibly high demand and are really
important. We want to have a variety and want that diversity of industrial base. We want to see auto repair
shops, small printing business and other types of businesses that can help create this more vibrant
community and then mix up with some of these commercial oriented uses.
Commissioner Dopp asked what kind of demand is there for these kinds of uses in the Inland Empire or for
Rancho Cucamonga at large.
Jennifer Nakamura answered we don't know until we put it out there. She said if we don't, we could potentially
be missing opportunities.
Commissioner Dopp stated there is an opportunity moving forward as we transition over to the General Plan
discussions within the next few months, he is looking at incubator spaces and a great opportunity we have
to take partnership with some of the research universities in the area. Young adults who are doing something
exciting in the Engineering program or Science field. He asked regarding manufacturing, is it fair to say
moving forward, we are really looking to try and get rid of heavy polluting industries in our city.
Jennifer Nakamura replied those businesses are transitioning out of California probably for reasons that have
nothing to do with Rancho Cucamonga. We believe long term that is not going to be unsurprising with other
type of heavier manufacture and other type of business. She said this is a time to start focusing on more
cleaner, less noxious type of industrial uses.
HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES — April 28, 2021
Page 5 of 7
FINAL
Commissioner Dopp stated in terms of warehousing, one thing he noticed in the land use destination is you
look at warehouses that are over 100,000 square feet, you change the code to City Council approval. He
asked if there is value in allowing the Planning Commission to have a recommendation to the City Council
on warehouses that are large. The argument for it would probably be you are creating double backstop
against projects that might be bad for the city by opening public communications twice.
Jennifer Nakamura answered if that was not clear in the amendments, they will make it. She said that was
always their intent to have the Planning Commission as a recommending body when the City Council makes
a final decision.
Commissioner Dopp appreciates the attempt of staff to use the code to drive a further discussion about what
industrial areas can look like in the 21 SI Century. He said it's really good that Rancho Cucamonga is maybe
starting that forge conversation in our area about the fact that industrial areas are not just a bunch of
warehouses. He hopes by changing the code this starts to happen by some level. He commented that he
appreciates the fact that staff focused on Foothill. Commission has a visionary idea for what we want the
major thoroughfare to be by limiting the types of development on Foothill is a good thing.
He said also, the focus on solar that requirement is critical moving forward. Commission talked about
southwest corridor, by putting that requirement in, it moves to equity and better opportunities for better health
for that side of the city. In terms of staff and how they approached this, he mentioned to Anne, this way of
approaching development code is the best way. This approach works.
Chairman Guglielmo opened up to the Public for any comments on this item.
Bill Blankenship, Representative NAIOP Chapter, stated his concerns to the city and industry regarding this
important matter and reporting some inconsistencies that need to be addressed. He said they look forward
to working with staff and removing the moratorium.
F. Director Announcements
Anne McIntosh mentioned if Commissioners have any questions on the code to please contact us on your
own within the next few weeks. We want to get ahead of any issues raised before that hearing date. Also,
as City Manager Gillison mentioned, the City Council adopted a moratorium last week, an urgency ordinance,
that if it's extended, it would occur on June 2nd and it is for service station moratorium. A City-wide issuance
on any kind of planning entitlements and building permits. She also reminded Commissioners of the May
1211 Study Session starting at 4:00 p.m. via Zoom.
G. Commission Announcements
Commissioner Morales commented on the Draft Development Industrial Code. He congratulated staff and
acknowledged them as a good example of executing the goal of being exclusive with the stakeholders and
where able to come up with good products and thanked them for being professional.
Commissioner Dopp requested a Staff or Director Report regarding Haven Avenue on what Council is looking
for on the planning end of things. What is going to be the approach on the strategy for Haven. He said it's
not urgent but if something comes up on the agendas in future meetings, it would be a good idea to have the
background.
HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES — April 28, 2021
Page 6 of 7
FINAL
H. Workshop —None
I. Adjournment
Motion by Vice Chair Oaxaca, second by Commissioner Williams to adjourn the meeting, motion carried 5-
0. Meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
qY5�'J�x 11,9�x
Elizab& Thornhill
Executive Assistant, Planning Department
Approved: May 261h, 2021 — HPC/PC Meeting.
HPC/PC Regular Meeting MINUTES —April 28, 2021
Page 7 of 7
FINAL