Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHPC/PC Minutes 2016HPC/PC Minutes 2016 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF ;HO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION January 13, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7.00 PM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER 11 Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher A Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director; Maricela Marroquin, Assistant City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS 11 This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain. from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO January 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of Regular Meeting Minutes dated December 9, 2015 B. Consideration of Workshop Minutes dated December 9, 2015 Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Macias to adopt the Consent Calendar. Carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher absent) 11 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00555 (MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA) - SRM DEVELOPMENT - A request to amend the Development Code to conditionally permit Residential Care Facilities in the Low (L) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts for the proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00174, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item as well as the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00165 MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA (MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA) - SRM DEVELOPMENT - The proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2015- 00166, Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00174, Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00555, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-00166 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO January 13, 2016 CUGAMONGA Page 3 (MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA) - SRM DEVELOPMENT - The proposed development of a 112-Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00174, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19619 (MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA) - SRM DEVELOPMENT -A request to subdivide a 9.55 acre parcel into two lots in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00174, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. G. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2015-00174 (MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA) - SRM DEVELOPMENT - A request to remove 35 trees for the proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He noted that a letter had been received from the County of San Bernardino Department of Public Works regarding the proposed MND with respect to water resources. Mr. Grahn reported that their concern has already been addressed in the standard conditions. He also noted that a Planning Condition has been added to three of the resolutions and correction sheets have been placed before the Commissioners (copies on file). Commissioner Oaxaca asked how staff evaluated the criteria to make sure these facilities are compatible with the Low Residential District. Mr. Grahn said staff addressed all the development standards. He said this facility is not a residential use per se but it is consistent with the residential character of the neighborhood. Those living there are more controlled by living inside, and therefore noise is not an issue. He added that the parking is sufficient and the buildings are similar in mass and scale to residential development. He said the Development Code will still allow these facilities in 13 areas in the City and the Code Amendment will not prevent single-family homes from being HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO January 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 built. He said they looked at all the standards and all have been met, it is compatible. Vice Chairman Oaxaca observed that compatibility is measured more on a case by case basis. Mr. Grahn concurred in that the Conditional Use Permit ensures we consider all those factors for every application for this type of development. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Andy Loos of SRM Development said they have partnered with Merrill Gardens for the last 12 years. He reported that they have 7 assisted living communities. He said with respect to compatibility, their facilities are very well accepted by the community and provide synergy in that often the families of residents live in the community, their units are in high demand. Chairman Wimberly asked about how the payment structure works. Mr. Loos said they do take Medicare; the units rent from about $3,000 per month for a studio up to around $5,000 per month. Meals, laundry and transportation is included and then all other services are on the cafeteria plan. Brad Buller, stated he has worked with the applicant since the inception of the project. He thanked staff and the team. He said the industry of adult care has changed in recent years and these uses make good neighbors. Pat Biehl, 9778 Caldaro Street asked if this is senior housing and if there is medical assistance. Ashley Montgomery 9934 Highland asked about the elevation of the buildings. Mr. Grahn explained there are 3 levels and the building follows the topography of the site. He said the height is 34 feet for the upper story. Chairman Wimberly confirmed the 3rd level is below grade. Mr. Loos said no medical care is provided, they assist with daily activities and hygene; there is a memory care unit for dementia and alzheimers. He said residents do not have to need additional services to live there; the memory care unit will have trained personnel there. He said most residents are elderly that need minimal help and there is no age restriction; the typical age is in the low 80s. In response to Chairman Wimberly he said they do medicine management but no nursing, no shots. Rusty Monzo, said he is a representative of Highland Avenue Community Church. He said Mr. Loos has taken much time to explain everything to their members and they are in total HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA cRANCH GA January 13, 2016 Page 5 In support. Paul Schroeder said he is a visitation pastor and member of church since 1981. He noted Transportation is provided for residents to go to their doctor if needed. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz expressed support and noted the applicant worked hard. He said he liked how they built into the hill and it looks compatible with the area. Commissioner Macias expressed his support. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he reviewed the project at the DRC. He said the applicant wasl very responsive, and he believes the facility is compatible. Chairman Wimberly agreed and thanked the applicant for being considerate of the surrounding uses. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher absent) to recommend approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, to forward the Development Code Amendment and Mitigated Negative Declaration to the City Council for final action and to approve Design Review DRC2015-00165 as presented, and Tentative Parcel Map 19619 and Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00174 as amended. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Munoz provided a copy of the strategic goals for 2016 for the California League of Cities. They were received and filed by the secretary and will be distributed to the remainder of the Commission and staff. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None VI. ADJOURNMENT 7.40 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 7, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,584 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA j THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 10, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7:OOPM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER =:=I Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca A Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, Dominick Perez, Assistant Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Mike Smith, Senior Planner, Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, Dat Tran, Assistant Planner II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO February 10, 2016, CUCAMONGA Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of regular meeting minutes dated January 13, 2016 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Macias, carried 3-0-1-1 (Oaxaca absent, Fletcher abstain) IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. B. LANDMARK DESIGNATION DRC2015-01091 - MARCELLA ALCALA - A request for a historic landmark designation for a single-family residence within the General Commercial (GC) District, located at 7112 Amethyst Avenue; APN: 0202-081-43. This action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15331, historical resource restoration/reconstruction. This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, stated the applicant withdrew their application, therefore no action was taken. C. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2015-00989 - HEATHER PERRY - A request to add an additional porch on the south side of the Thomas Winery Building in the Specialty Commercial (SC) District, at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue, located at 8916 Foothill Boulevard; APN: 0208-101-23. This action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15331, historical resource restoration/reconstruction. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and gave a brief PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing none, he closed the public hearing. Heather Perry for the Coffee Klatch stated the space looks empty and said it might add to HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO February 10, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 3 the overall look of the building. She said they would add seating there. Commissioner Munoz noted that it is consistent with what is there and adds to the resource. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) 11 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. D. TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01168 - JAIME CAMPOS - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 3-lot Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM18626) located at the southeast corner of Lemon Avenue and Daylily Court at 9923 Lemon Avenue - APN: 0201-902-16. Planning Department staff has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as a Class 15 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15315) exemption, which covers minor land divisions of four or fewer parcels. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Jaime Campos said nothing new occurred since the original approval and he could not complete the map prior to expiration. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and hearing and seeing no comment, closed the public hearing. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-01034 - KNEADZ WORK - A request to operate a massage establishment in a 2,440 square foot tenant space within the General Industrial (GI) Zoning District located at 9637 Arrow Route, Suite A.; APN: 0209-021-35. The project is categorically exempt under Section 15303 as a Class 3 exemption (existing facilities) of the guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act. Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO February 10, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 Chairman Wimberly asked if this business has any history from other cities. Ms. Nakamura said this is a new business for the owner who has worked at other sites independently. Larry Wade, the applicant, said he graduated in 2012 in his field of sports therapy and worked in several other facilities and provided outcall services. He said he does sports therapy massage and rehabilitation not spa type massage. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no comment, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fletcher noted the request is routine, he has no concerns and he wished the applicant good luck. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00650 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING FOR RICHARD DICK & ASSOCIATES -A request for site plan and architectural review of a 44,336 square foot warehouse building on a 2.2 acre lot located on the west side of Pittsburgh Avenue and approximately 275 feet south of 6th Street in the Industrial Park (IP) District -APN: 0229-341-03. 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2015- 00659. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, gave the staff report and a PowerPoint presentation. (Copy on file). Charlie Buquet, Consolidated Consulting said he concurs with the conditions. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing none, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz said the use fits, it's a good design and suggested they move forward on the application. Commissioner Fletcher noted it is compatible and consistent with the area. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CR RANCHO �A February 10, 2016 Page 5 VI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION G. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Munoz said he attended the Policy Committee meeting for the League of California Cities and he will bring a report at next regular meeting of the Commission. H. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Fletcher asked if a cost analysis/study is going to be done with respect to the Empire Lakes Project Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said the City has entered into a contract for that study to be done. She said it will come back to both the Planning Commission and the City Council Chairman Wimberly said he would like the opportunity for the Planning Commission to review and respond to that information prior to a public hearing on the project. Ms. Burnett responded that there would be an opportunity to do so. VII. ADJOURNMENT 11 7:35PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 4, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the PHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RmCHO February 10, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 6 views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,584 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 24, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California E- I. CALL To ORDER ==I Pledge of Allegiance 7:02 P.M. Roll Call Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias A Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Mike Smith, Senior Planner, Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, Jason Welday, Traffic Engineer II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing anyissue not previouslyincluded on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES C�%RANCHO FEBRUARY 24, 2016 IONGA Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated February 10, 2016 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 3-0-1-1 (Macias absent, Oaxaca abstain) 11 IV. 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 for each project. Please sign in after speaking. B. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19666 - I&D CONSULTING FOR COSTANZO INVESTMENTS, LLC: A request to subdivide a parcel of 2.25 acres, into two (2) parcels, in the Industrial Park (IP) District located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue; APN: 0208-353-14. 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 as a Class 15 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15315) exemption, which covers minor land divisions into four or fewer parcels. Related files: Design Review DRC2015-00756, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00760, Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00757 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00759. C. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00756 — I&D CONSULTING FOR COSTANZO INVESTMENTS, LLC: A request for site plan and architectural review of two (2) multi - tenant buildings, with a combined floor area of approximately 15,979 square feet, on a parcel of 2.25 acres in the Industrial Park (IP) District located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue; APN: 0208-353-14. 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially .surrounded by urban uses. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19666, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00760, Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00757, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00759. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-00760 — I&D CONSULTING FOR COSTANZO INVESTMENTS, LLC: A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow retail sales within one of two (2) proposed multi -tenant buildings, with a combined floor area of approximately 15,979 square feet, on a parcel of 2.25 acres in the Industrial Park (IP) District located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue; APN: 0208-353-14. Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R�,,,cao FEBRUARY 24, 2016 �Ccrc IONGn Page 3 requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19666, Design Review DRC2015-00756, Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00757, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00759. E. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2015-00757 — I&D CONSULTING FOR COSTANZO INVESTMENTS, LLC: A review of a uniform sign program for two (2) proposed multi -tenant buildings, with a combined floor area of approximately 15,979 square feet, on a parcel of 2.25 acres in the Industrial Park (IP) District located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue; APN: 0208-353-14. 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19666, Design Review DRC2015-00756, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00760, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00759. F. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2015-00759 — I&D CONSULTING FOR COSTANZO INVESTMENTS, LLC: A request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove fifty (50) trees to allow the construction of two (2) multi -tenant buildings (and associated parking lot improvements) on a parcel of 2.25 acres in the Industrial Park (IP) District located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue; APN: 0208-353-14 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Related files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19666, Design Review DRC2015-00756, Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00757, and Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00760. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). She noted a change with respect to the Conditions of Approval that textured pavement shall be provided across the circulation aisle, pedestrian walkway and plaza, and be of brick/tile pavers, exposed aggregate and/or integral color concrete. She said this condition was left off some of the resolutions in error. Chairman Wimberly asked if the Commission will be able to view the final renderings, color boards and material boards. Ms. Cavazos produced the material boards that were presented at DRC and noted there were some revisions asked for but the Committee forwarded the project to the Planning Commission as it was presented to the Design Review Committee with the understanding revisions are needed. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO FEBRUARY 24, 2016 Cu AMONGA Page 4 Chairman Wimberly asked for the design of the actual murals. Ms. Cavazos said the murals are up to the applicant. It was noted that the art work in the murals cannot be an advertisement. Chris Costanzo, the applicant, thanked staff and asked if there were any questions from the Commissioners. Chairman Wimberly said the murals are going to be the applicant's design and should fit into the architecture of that area. He asked if any designs have been brought to staff. Mr. Costanzo said only a discussion of what can be done and some ideas have occurred. He said they looked at examples from Orange County and Los Angeles areas of trendy shopping centers that have put up artwork and murals on sides of the buildings. Ideas vary from black and white to colorful typical/graphic artwork. He said the architects are working on sketches to be consistent with the building theme. Commissioner Fletcher asked if it will be presented to Staff for review. Ms. Cavazos said renderings will come back at plan check. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said there can be a Condition placed requiring staffs review. Commissioner Fletcher asked about the anticipated restaurants. Mr. Costanzo said The Habit wants more space and are excited to be part of the area. Cafe Rio will be placed in the building as well as Jersey Mike Subs and Tokyo Joe's Asian Fusion. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing none, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz stated he is happy to see new product on that corner. Commissioner Fletcher stated it is a good addition to the City, it is attractive and a good mix of tenants. Vice Chairman Oaxaca stated it is an optimal use for the property, the color and materials used are an improvement and he is pleased. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO FEBRUARY 24, 2016 'CucnMarrc - Page 5 Chairman Wimberly stated this is a great mix for the location. He said it will enhance the area and draw attention to the location. He said he is pleased and wants to see the building murals for a final look. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney provided language for a condition requiring the applicant to submit a mural design for review prior to the installation. Mr. Costanzo agreed to both the Conditions of Approval re: decorative paving and to submitting a design for review prior to installation. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to adopt the resolutions approving Items B, C, D, E and F (Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19666, Design Review DRC2015-00756, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00760, Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00757 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2015-00759) with the added condition to submit the mural designs for review prior to installation. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00887 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - An amendment to change the land use designations of multiple parcels at various locations within the City from their existing designations (which varies but includes, for example, General Commercial and Office Professional) to Mixed Use, and to correct, as necessary, existing tables/text in the General Plan that specify the uses and range of development required on various parcels in the City that are currently designated for Mixed Use development. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to continue Item G to a future date. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION H. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Munoz gave the highlights of the League of California Cities Transportation, Communication & Public Works Policy Committee activities (documentation on file). COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Fletcher reported he attended the State of the City event along with HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES &RANCHO FEBRUARY 24, 2016 AMONCA Page 6 Chairman Wimberly and Planning Director Candyce Burnett. Commissioner Fletcher stated the event was nice and complimented City staff, the City Manager, Chamber of Commerce and the sponsors who helped support the event. VI. ADJOURNMENT 7:42 P.M. 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 18, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO FEBRUARY 24, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 7 Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,584 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF ANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 9, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7.00 P.M. Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Dominick Perez, Assistant Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Mike Smith, Associate Planner, Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, Kimberly Rhoads, Assistant Planner II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Rnxcrao MARCH 9, 2016 dCAMONGA Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated February 24, 2016 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Macias abstain) B. VACATION OF A PORTION OF 10115 24TH STREET, LOCATED EAST OF HERMOSA AVENUE (V-229) — HCH INVESTMENTS, LLC — APN: 0209-111-20. Related File: Minor Design Review DRC2014-00388. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 5-0 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19917 - SHAREEF AWAD - A request to subdivide 7.17 acres into 10 lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located north of the 210 Freeway and east of East Avenue at the easterly extension of Wilshire Drive and Copley Drive; APN: 0226- 102-30. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented a brief staff report and gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file), for continuance of Environmental Assessment and Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19917in order to address new concerns re: The Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment closed the public hearing. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to continue the item to an unspecified date. D. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00402 — FULLMER CONSTRUCTION FOR FREWING DEVELOPMENT - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 45,797 square foot warehouse building on a 2.32 acre lot located on the west side of Pittsburgh Avenue and HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 9, 2016 CuoxcA Page 3 approximately 570 feet south of 6th Street in the Industrial Park (IP) District - APN: 0229- 341-15. 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Chairman Wimberly asked what was done to resolve the issue with the outside eating area. Ms. Cavazos said the outside eating area square footage meets all development standards. Casey Jones, the applicant, thanked Ms. Cavazos and said she was very helpful and did a wonderful job. Dan Coleman, representative of Cucamonga Christian Fellowship, said they are the adjoining property to the south and the developer worked with the church regarding their site plan to see what works best for them as well as the developer. He said the church is very happy with the application. Commissioner Munoz complimented staff and the applicant and said the design makes sense and the building fits like a glove. Commissioner Fletcher said the design is consistent within the area and the building looks good. Chairman Wimberly said the building is a perfect fit for the location. He applauded the applicant and the church for being able to work together. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review DRC2015-00402. E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-00848 — ROYAL SPA — A request to operate a massage establishment within a 1,395 square foot tenant space located within Planning Area 10 of the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan at the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and 7th Street at 9090 Milliken Avenue, Suite 130 — APN: 0209-272-28. 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 as a Class 1 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15301) exemption, which covers existing facilities. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). PAWNCHO HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 9, 2016 C. UQkMarrcA Page 4. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, advised the Commissioners that there were three applicants associated with the business and because staff had not heard from them since the new facts came forth, he and staff felt it best to proceed and drop the application than to move it to a later date as it was scheduled to be heard this evening. He said he believed the applicants are still interested in the application although they do not appear to be present today and may not be present if we proceed to a later date. Commissioner Fletcher asked which applicant contacted staff. Mr. Perez said the applicant that originally submitted this application was Yuee He and had been communicating with staff by his translator Jean Jang. Charlie Buquet with Consolidated Consulting said he works on behalf of Richard Dick and was present this evening to observe the proceedings. He said it sounds like staff had the proper communication. He said his understanding is the tenant has not been paying rent and the owner is suing for the legal possession of the property. Commissioner Munoz said he had a lot of concern with the Facts and Findings with respect to them not being met as required by the code. He said he approves of the denial. Moved by Macias, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution denying the application. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION F. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None VI. ADJOURNMENT 7.30 P.M. The Planning Commission immediately adjourned to the Rains Room to discuss Pre - Application Review DRC2015-00444 — Civic Design Group for Roger Wong. 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 3, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 9, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 5 If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall., located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,584 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WORKSHOP MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 9, 2016 - 7:00 PM* Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center ***RAINS ROOM*** 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 17- I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call 7:40 PM Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist H, Mike Smith, Associate Planner, Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. ►IL= III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2015-00444 — CIVIC DESIGN GROUP FOR ROGER WONG - A request for a Planning Commission Workshop review of the conceptual site plan and architecture for a proposed commercial/office building on a parcel of 0.37 acres within the Commercial/Office (CO) District, Foothill Boulevard Overlay District (FBOD), located at 9533 Foothill Boulevard; APN: 0208-261-14. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 9, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 Nikki Cavasos, Assistant Planner, gave a brief PowerPoint presentation summarizing the project application (copy on file). Roger Wong, Applicant, indicated real grapevines would be planted along the sides of the building where they are shown on the plans. Commissioner Munoz noted the level of traffic at the project location and confirmed the access points. He suggested they punch up the design as recommended by staff. Commissioner Fletcher asked for specifics regarding staffs request for the applicant to enhance the wall plane, materials etc. Ms. Cavasos said staff would like to warm and soften up the design for an office and to fit in with the area. She said it currently feels more industrial. Commissioner Fletcher said it is difficult to see how the color samples fit everything looks washed together, it may need more color. He said he likes it and it looks nice and did not think it would be out of place. He said he likes the awnings, cables and supports. Mr. Wong said he hopes to set an example for other buildings to follow with respect to the modern design. Commissioner Macias said he mostly agrees with Commissioner Fletcher and he generally likes it. He suggested the applicant work with staff for the details. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he concurs as he likes the modern, clean look. He said it would be helpful to have material samples when it comes to the Planning Commission hearing. He said the color prints don't do it justice; he needs to see the differences in texture. Chairman Wimberly concurred and said the development will be a significant improvement over what is currently on that corner. He noted that there are stairs only and no elevators. He asked if that presents an ADA problem. Mr. Wong said they considered a separate room downstairs to accommodate handicapped visitors and that the upper floor would be offices exclusive to his own business. Commissioner Fletcher said that staff will not support that arrangement but to work it out with staff. He suggested more articulation on the side that reflects a single wall plane. PLANNING -COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 9, 2016 CUc"oNca Page 3 Commissioner Munoz asked staff to comment with respect to ADA and the lack of an elevator. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said this is a building code issue/it depends on how the building is occupied. She said the applicant will have to meet ADA requirements and accommodate or have an elevator. She said the applicant should verify what is needed early in the review process. Mr. Wong said the second floor will be his own offices and there is not a big demand for "face to face" meetings with clients. Commissioner Munoz said the Code may not support you because the building could be used for another business at a later time (if he sold the building, for example). Ms. Burnett noted that it may also be an employment issue (hiring disabled). Chairman Wimberly recommended the application be sent back to staff and directed staff to work with the applicant on the application. IV. ADJOURNMENT 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 3, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES CU AMOO MARCH 9, 2016 - Page 4 INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,486 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA T THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION We THE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 23, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7:03 PM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present. Steven Flower, Assistant CityAttorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Senior Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Mike Smith, Senior Planner, Donald Granger, Senior Planner II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS 11 This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. Stewart Schwartz spoke in opposition of the Empire Lakes project proposal. He said it should be a "no AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R�NcHo MARCH 23, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 project" and open space use alternatives should be explored because there is not much open space left. He said the project is not consistent with what has made Rancho Cucamonga a desirable city such as recreation, open space. He said our development patterns have been smaller and not mega urban developments; he expressed doubt about the City needing them. He said he believes few residents will be new users on the Metrolink. He said the project will have a negative impact on public transportation with many more cars and congestion. He doubted the appeal to professional millennials because there are no jobs here for them; we should build business infrastructure first. He said we don Y need 4, 000 housing units. He said the Planning department is not objective. He said all the studies involved Randy Lewis and are biased. III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of Regular Meeting minutes dated March 9, 2016 B. Consideration of Pre -Application Workshop minutes dated March 9, 2016 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried (4-0-1 Oaxaca absent -late arrival) to adopt the Consent Calendar. IF IV. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS/PLANNING COMMISSION C. RANCHO CUCAMONGA METROLINK FEASIBILITY AND TRANSIT -ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT STUDY — SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS (SCAG) AND CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA: A study, prepared by AECOM, to determine a recommended transit -oriented development concept for the existing Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink San Bernardino Line station and the feasibility of introducing a potential future station with associated development at Haven Avenue. Dominick Perez introduced and summarized how the study came about and the award of the grant that funded the study. Veronica Siranosian with Aecom presented the study (copy on file). She thanked staff for their assistance, leadership and guidance. Vice Chairman Oaxaca arrived at 7:20 PM Commissioner Fletcher asked if the study supported Haven Avenue as a good location for r HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R CHO MARCH 23, 2016 Cucn ONCA Page 3 the Metrolink station. Ms. Siranosian said it could fit but is not an ideal location. She said Metrolink would not support a 2"d stop there because it is so close to the other station on Milliken and they have made recent improvements and investment at the Milliken station. She also mentioned a track realignment, platform conflicts with an active rail spur, existing land uses and grading and the future vision for Haven Avenue as an office corridor. Commissioner Fletcher indicated the report seems to be transportation oriented and little is mentioned about the loss of open space or alternative uses and the loss of the golf course is not mentioned either. He expressed concern that it seems to have one goal, to develop Empire Lakes. He said there is little information on the 10-acre TOD site and how that can be developed and help ridership. Ms. Siranosian said evaluating for the Empire Lakes development was not in the scope but they wanted to see how the 10 acres could be incorporated. She said the scenarios section contains more explanation. She said they looked at how Metrolink is used now and not how to improve ridership. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney noted that although there is a proposal to develop Empire Lakes, this study is a separate document. Commissioner Fletcher noted that this affects that site. He said there are many apartments along Milliken Avenue and he would like to know how many units are there now and also along 4rh Street near Milliken Avenue. He said there maybe perhaps 5,000 units near the current station and he would have liked to know that information with respect to ridership. Ms. Siranosian said they did not look at the existing apartments and the focus of the study was the immediate 112 mile area around the station. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said it is a detailed report and he understood the focus was to look at different scenarios with an innovative eye and integrate those ideas. He asked if the team looked at the commuting distance to the station. He noted he is a daily commuter on Metrolink. He said there are many apartments near and/or adjacent to the station but he observes very few walking to and from those apartments to the station. He asked what the catchment area is and if that would that help convince anyone. He asked if they looked at Fullerton and the Orange station in retrospect to see how many folks made buying/leasing decisions based on the proximity of the rail station. He said his involvement with it at the time indicated it was not as high as they had hoped for. Ms. Siranosian said the catchment area/distance for light rail and BRT is about 112 mile;, biking 3 miles and driving about 10 minutes. She said the case studies included market analysis and favored a mix of uses incorporated near the station to create a mix for people to walk through. She said there is good potential for BRT that would supplement the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 23, 2016 UCAMGNGA Page 4 Metrolink line. Commissioner Fletcher asked if they surveyed actual riders. Ms. Siranosian responded that the survey included 2 days at Chaffey College and on the Metrolink platform; and there was an on-line survey of City employees. She said they received a total of 239 responses - a small percentage of those ride the Metrolink. Commissioner Munoz asked if the same presentation will go to the City Council. Ms. Siranosian said the blue areas are the 10-acre and 14-acre parcels. She said they would clarify the drawings for the City Council. Mike Smith, Senior planner clarified that the scope of the study was just to evaluate the feasibility of a Metrolink station at the Haven Avenue site and for TOD at the Milliken Avenue Station. It was noted that AECOM was directed by City staff to show how the TOD site could be integrated with Empire Lakes in the conceptual drawings but that Empire Lakes is a separate project. Chairman Wimberly added that this is only conceptual and it was not just focused on the blue areas shown in Figure 5. He suggested they tailor the presentation for the Council so they get the real feel of what the study focus was. Commissioner Macias said the consultant's scope was in response to staffs request and it is incumbent on staff to explain the scope and what we asked them to also conceptualize. The Secretary received and filed the report. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION 7D The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. —A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue — APN: 1087-081-25. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 23, 2016 {XCAMONGA Page 5 Dominick Perez, Associate Planner reported that correspondence was received from Fish and Wildlife noting concerns about the biological section of the environmental documents. Staff requested a continuance of the item to an unspecified date to adequately respond to the letter. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and hearing and seeing no comment, closed the public hearing. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to continue the item to an unspecified date to allow time to adequately address the concerns noted in the letter. E. TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-01110 - PACIFIC SUMMIT -FOOTHILL, LLC - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 8-lot Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16605) residential subdivision for condominium purposes on 21 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and the Pacific Electric Trail; APN: 0207-101-13. On April 12, 2006, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract 16605. Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of the previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Chad Studnicki stated he is the applicant. He thanked staff for the project review and consideration of the time extension request. He said he looks forward to submitting a detailed proposal next year. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Renee Massey, a Red Hill resident, expressed concern about water usage and suggested we have a pause in building to conserve water. Mr. Grahn said water is part of the review of the project. He said staff received a certification from CVWD the available supply of water for the project. He said staff has only received letters of support from CVWD and no requests from them for a moratorium. He confirmed that this request on the agenda tonight is for the map time extension and not for a future project on the site. Richard Davidson said he is a resident of Red Hill and lives in the condos north of project F MHO HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 23, 2016 CUGAMONGA Page 6 area. He said 315 units were originally planned. He asked how many are proposed now. Mr. Grahn recalled the original count was 206 units but that application expired — it was also on only 21 acres. He said the new proposal includes a new area and is now 24 acres with about 175 units. He confirmed it is a bigger area with a reduction in units. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution approving Time Extension DRC2015-01110, VI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Fletcher commented on current mandated water restrictions/reductions and how that relates to the approval of new development, time extensions with respect to future CEQA review, and certified water supply letters provided by CVWD. Mike Smith, Senior Planner said staff would look into it. Commissioner Macias asked if additional CEQA review would be required once the applicant moves forward with his tract (referring to Item E on the agenda). Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, commented that additional CEQA review may not be required if no significant changes to the project have occurred, however, in some cases it may be needed. He indicated there is a difficult nexus with respect to water usage, the current restrictions in place and the approval of new development. Vice Chairman Oaxaca suggested staff be more specific in their reports about how the determination of available water supplies for new development rests in the jurisdiction of the water districts and not with the City. Mr. Smith noted that staff is aware of this and staff report preparation will be more thorough in the analysis with respect to water. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO' MARCH 23, 2016 ucAMorrcA Page 7 Commissioner Fletcher asked if a presentation by the water district could be scheduled to explain how they are handling these requests. He said there is a perceived disconnect with the public in this area. Mr. Smith said staff will look into that. Commissioner Macias reported two Code Enforcement issues of possible unpermitted sales of items during the weekends. Mr. Smith noted the locations and issues and assured the Commissioners that they would be referred to Code Enforcement. Mr. Flower said they could be illegal but could also be a temporary use or a special sale. He said the Commissioners in general can bring these types of reports to staff but there is no role for staff to direct Code Enforcement. He suggested staff check it out the report and forward it on to Code Enforcement as appropriate. Mr. Smith said staff is comfortable with that approach. Commissioner Fletcher noted that when he has informed staff of his concerns, Code Enforcement is prompt in responding. VII. ADJOURNMENT AT 8:30 PM THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO THE RAINS ROOM TO DISCUSS PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00142 — DR HORTON. 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 17, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 23, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 8 from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,584 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. 1� THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ;CHO WORKSHOP MINUTES OF UCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 23, 2016 - 7:00 PM* Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center ***RAINS ROOM*** 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER 11 Roll Call 8:35 PM Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Mike Smith, Senior Planner II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP DRC2016-00142 — DR HORTON - A request for a Planning Commission Workshop review of a conceptual site plan and architectural elevations for a proposed 28.4 acre mixed -use project consisting of 398 residential units, a 52-room hotel and two restaurant pads totaling 12,000 square feet including a change in land use from Regionally Related Office/Commercial (RROC) to Mixed Use (MU) for a site located within the Victoria Community Plan (VCP) at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. Related File: Preliminary PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO' MARCH 23, 2016 CUCAMGNGA Page 2 Review DRC2015-01102. Donald Granger, Senior Planner gave a brief introduction and overview of the Pre - application process. He gave a brief summary of the proposed project and proposed uses and their locations on the site. He noted the applicants have taken staff comments thus far seriously and this is third or fourth iteration of the conceptual plans. He reviewed the items for discussion noted on Page 5 of the staff report (Page A-5 of the agenda packet). He introduced Dan Boyd of DR Horton and Jaime Stark (Architect). Mr. Boyd noted their excitement for the project and said it is a great opportunity for a spectacular development and Mr. Horton is reviewing this himself. He said they plan on bringing in upscale restaurant eateries and a boutique hotel although they would greatly prefer a larger hotel as this smaller hotel will be difficult to market and to pencil out. He said the project has 5 areas, A-F and each has a theme; there are 4 distinct products. Mr. Stark noted that although some of the 3-story row homes have tandem parking, the tandem space is not included in their parking count. Some units have roof deck and all walkways are organized so pedestrians can easily move from one village to the next. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked for more information regarding the mix of residential and commercial uses. Mr. Boyd said there is a 3 acre balance for commercial uses per a staff request. He said the layout is market driven and they are looking for multiple levels of buyers- fire/police/teachers and the millennials that want pizazz and families as well. He said the development is not heavily geared towards kids -there is more here for adults. He said their plan is to achieve build out in 3-4 years. With respect to phasing, they will have models for all the products -they plan to do the infrastructure, grading etc. all at once. He said they meet the parking requirements and they know guest parking is critical. He said they may re -visit that after the recreation amenities are finalized. He said it will not be an issue. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said they are not "real" streets that they can use for parking. Commissioner Munoz noted recreational amenities are lacking. He said the architecture looks pretty good, eclectic. He said the massing of the multi -family buildings could be overpowering; they need to be careful with that. He said the wall proposed by staff is probably a good idea —they should make it look special. He asked about the timing of the construction for the commercial portion in relation to the residential. Mr Boyd said there is no timing yet — they will get the infrastructure in place first. He said the challenge will be a boutique hotel at 52 rooms. He said they need to find a boutique operator for this; they will have to compete in the market. He said he knows PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANcr4o MARCH 23, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 3 this is very important to the mixed use component and staff wanted it in this range. He said he proposed 100 rooms but that impacted parking and another chain hotel was not desirable either. He said they would like to push this part of the development out to the end. He said Ayres hotels could be considered. Mike Smith, Senior Planner asked the applicant if they are taking advantage of the mixed use standards for setbacks. He asked if fronting the buildings to Day Creek was considered. Mr. Stark indicated they do front Day Creek. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked if they considered a smaller commercial use along Day Creek to reflect the Sprouts center across the street. Mr. Boyd stressed that they want the focal point for the residents to feel like they are arriving in a residential project. He said the layout meets the mutual goals of mixed use. Commissioner Fletcher said the work so far is good. He said he supports the land use change, it has good walkability, the architecture looks good and is a little different than the norm. He said he agrees with staff with respect to it lacking active amenities. He expressed concern about the tot lot located adjacent to the rear yards of other residents - he suggested it be moved. He said he likes the mixed uses that are proposed and the layout. He supported staffs recommendations in the staff report with respect for adequate parking. He said with respect to phasing, there are new mixed use development standards and he wants to see the commercial portion built by the time rest is completed. Mr. Boyd agreed that the tot lot should be relocated. He said with respect to active and passive uses, Irvine created forums that are hugely popular, he said they want to see gardens. He did not want a basketball court. He said active amenities all add to the HOA dues. He expressed concern about breaking up the residential community with additional commercial uses on Day Creek. He said they do not want to lose the entry or sense of arrival and he did not want residents to drive through a retail component to get to their homes. Chairman Wimberly agreed with Vice Chairman Oaxaca that they could maximize their opportunity along Day Creek with more mixed uses. He said overall he is pleased with the development. He said he feels strongly about the phasing and that the commercial piece should not be added at the end. He said the commercial must be there to justify the mixed use ordinance. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES PCHOR MARCH 23, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 IV. ADJOURNMENT 9:35 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on March 17, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." . Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO MARCH 23, 2016 CucAMONCA Page 5 Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91.730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,486 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CitvofRC.us THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION _►W THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 13, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7:00 PM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist Il; Mike Smith, Senior Planner, Dat Tran, Assistant Planner, Rob Ball, Fire Marshall, Rebecca Fuller, Administrative Secretary, Jason Welday, Traffic Engineer, Craig Cruz, Associate Engineer, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Trang Huynh, Building and Safety Services Director, Mike Frasure, Building Inspection Supervisor, Matthew Addington, Associate Engineer, Linda Daniels, Assistant City Manager, Linda Troyan, City Clerk Services Director, Michelle Perera, Library Director II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. Gary Gileno commented on various concerns regarding Mr. Lewis' participation in SCAG, and implied his receipt of paybacks in the form of government contracts to his company. He warned about aggressive government controls, non -representative voting and low voter turnouts, secret meetings of government ,officials and his desire to not have a hipster utopia. Katie Tomkiewicz, Field Representative, introduced herself and stated she assists Assemblyman Marc Steinorth. She stated his interest in and assistance to the Planning Commission. Chairman Wimberly gave opening remarks regarding decorum and the process of the business meeting. It was noted for the record that Commissioner Oaxaca arrived at 7:03 PM. III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of regular meeting minutes dated March 23, 2016 B. Consideration of Workshop meeting minutes dated March 23, 2016 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to adopt the Consent Calendar. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00114 —SC Rancho Development Corp. (Lewis Operating Corp.): A request to amend the 2010 General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga by revising text, graphics, and exhibits within the General Plan, and change the land use designations of parcels that are currently developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course, an existing, private golf course of 160 acres that is located north of 4th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, from Open Space to Mixed Use, in conjunction with a proposed mixed use, high density residential/commercial development that is proposed to replace the golf course; APNs: 0209-272-11, -15, -17, -20, -22 through -28, 0210-082-41, -49 through -52, 0210-082-61, -64, -65, -67 through —69, -71 through -74, -78, -79, -84 through -88, -89, -90, 0210-581-01 through -06, 0210-591-02 through -14, and 0210-623-66. Related files: Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115 and Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 20150410083), Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP), and Facts and Findings HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 3 to support the Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared for consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00040 - SC Rancho Development Corp. (Lewis Operating Corp.): A request to amend the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Subarea 18 Specific Plan, a Specific Plan that applies to properties located north of 4th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, to delete text, graphics, and exhibits relating to the Empire Lakes Golf Course, an existing private golf course of 160 acres that is located within the subject Specific Plan area, and insert text, graphics, and exhibits that will describe the design and technical standards/guidelines for a proposed mixed use, high density residential/commercial development that is proposed to replace the golf course; APNs: 0209-272-11, -15, -17, -20, -22 through -28, 0210-082-41, -49 through -52, 0210-082-61, -64, -65, -67 through -69, -71 through -74, -78, -79, -84 through -88, -89, -90, 0210-581-01 through -06, 0210-591-02 through -14, and 0210-623-66. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114 and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. An Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 20150410083), Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP), and Facts and Findings to support the Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared for consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. E. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015-00115 - SC Rancho Development Corp. (Lewis Operating Corp.): A request to amend the Development Code of the City Rancho Cucamonga by revising text, graphics, and exhibits within the Development Code that applies to properties, including the Empire Lakes Golf Course, an existing, private golf course of 160 acres, within the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Subarea 18 Specific Plan, a Specific Plan that applies to properties located north of 4th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, and insert text and graphics in conjunction with a proposed mixed use, high density residential/commercial development that is proposed to replace the golf course; APNs: 0209-272-11, -15, -17, -20, -22 through - 28, 0210-082-41, -49 through -52, 0210-082-61, -64, -65, -67 through -69, -71 through -74, - 78, -79, -84 through -88, -89, -90, 0210-581-01 through -06, 0210-591-02 through -14, and 0210-623-66. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114 and Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040. An Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 20150410083), Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP), and Facts and Findings to support the Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Mike Smith, Senior Planner, gave a PowerPoint presentation and the staff report (copy on file). Ended at 8.30. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RINCHO APRIL 13, 2016 CUCAMONCA Page 4 Randall Lewis of Lewis Companies thanked staff and noted the community -benefits of the project and concerns raised. He reported that he does serve on SCAG Executive Committee and he does not seek contracts from that association that he only is there to bring a business and housing perspective. He remarked that the proposed project is a benefit because of the Mixed Use development, retail, recreational opportunities, various public spaces, needed additional homes for sale as well as apartments. He said it would be a special place for Rancho Cucamonga that we can be proud of. He said his company was here before the community and they understand the housing market now and what is coming. He said they want to respond to the market that will be here in the future. He said they would not do if they did not think it would be successful. He listed the following benefits 1) the region is short of for -sale and rentals -there is a housing crisis, 2) project proposal is market driven (nothing to do with politics) it is being done by the private sector, and is not dictated, 3) distinct housing choices -they want to offer different alternatives; 4) target market is for — sale/$300k-400K range, rentals/around $1, 500-2, 500 month. He said this is mid- range for singles, young professionals, change in life status individuals, and offers single - level living for retirees, 5) Provides new retail, restaurants, shops and services; 6) Will bring short term jobs (construction) and permanent jobs/retail, offices, property management, 7) Will house workers that employers want -they want a housing supply for their workers if they are thinking of relocating their businesses here. He said Lewis Companies was part of the Victoria Gardens development and that has been positive and transformational for Rancho Cucamonga; 8) The right location -near jobs within 1-2 miles puts housing where jobs are, close to transit, rail, and freeways. This development would be difficult to do in other parts of the city and is consistent with the General Plan -we studied it and it is good for the long term, and, 9) Healthy RC- he said this project is a real demonstration of the City principals. He said with respect to the concerns about the project 1) Golf course was facing challenges of rising costs. He said nationally courses are closing -they are all struggling. We respect the owner's property rights/they chose to sell the golf course; 2) The course area is open space -but private and not paid for by the City and it represents a small percentage of the open space found in the City. He said there is additional property in northern part of the City that could be used, 3) Re: the term 'millennials' — he said they can't make a generalization about their desires as this may not appeal to all millennials-he said what they want is all over the map according to studies. He said his company finds out what they like and don't like here in Rancho Cucamonga because they give us feedback from the various existing communities in town. He said we think we know what they want. Older folks and professionals also will be here; 4) We are not trying to create an anti -car community -many say they are looking for alternatives and walk or take transit to work. This offers a choice in transportation and we want it to age over time; 5) The concern about overwhelming the schools is not true. These residents don't have many kids, 6) Re: water.- CVWD (the water district) knows and has the capability to provide the water. He said using less water per household -will drive down those averages; 6) Re: concern about bankrupting the city -this project will provide funds, not bankrupt it, 7) Re: traffic and growth -growth is coming — we need to deal with it sensibly. We know there will be more traffic and we will try to minimize HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 5 that. We should try to keep jobs and housing in close proximity for less travel overall, 8) Re: the type of housing -diverse housing stock in Rancho Cucamonga - nearly 213 have 1, 2, maybe 3 in a household. He said they are offering vision for future and this project is better for the City in the long run. Bryan Goodman gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file),, Jason Pack of Fehr & Peers (Traffic Consultant), Todd Larner, Senior Principal of William Hezmalhalch Architects, and Michael Schrock of Urban Arena who showed a video (copy on file). Also in attendance from William Hezmalhalch Architects was Cathy Baranger, CGBP, LEED AP Principal. Chairman Wimberly announced a 10 minute break at 9:32 p.m. The Commission reconvened at 9:43 p.m. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing at 9:44 p.m. Danny Pierce, a golfer, opposed changing the General Plan. He said the course is widely used and the open space in northwestern sector of the city is not widely used. He said two courses are needed and said they should keep the course and bring in a good manager. Richard Dick left the Chambers before speaking. Ed Lyon offered his support and said the proposal is exciting - it would make a new 'sense of place' and offer a great opportunity to keep professional talent here by providing housing they would like. He said he owns an engineering firm near the project site. Tressy Capps said she wants to keep toll lanes out and that staff and the developer played dirty trick by staging a filibuster. She said Mr. Lewis is creating a region of renters and there is more than golf to be lost -she predicted the development will end up a slum. She said we like our cars and transit oriented development (TOD) does not work here. Vincent Navarro said he is the General Manager of the Aquarmar facility north of the site; they manufacture seafood. His concerns included traffic, nuisance of emissions, possible release of ammonia from his facility, noise from his facility, and it would have the potential to impede current and work in progress projects by Aquamar. Mira Kirscitt said she wants to keep the golf course open space. She said there are 1-300 apartments available each month. She suggested the City/county purchase the land and maintain it and there are other places in town for this. She said many retail and offices are struggling and there is not a need for this development. Jason Mak offered support stating it benefits everyone civically and economically. He said it is better to live and work here rather than in LA. He said he enjoyed the golf course but we will get beneficial amenities in return. AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES HOR APRIL 13, 2016 C,UCAMONGA Page 6 Kim Earl opposed because of traffic/streets are already crowded, and water use she said she wants open space/City officials should listen to residents for what they want -we don't want 'pack-n-stack'. She stated she wished for more opportunity for public input -people are saying no. Bill Rue, from Citrus Valley of Association of Realtors said there is a shortage of housing here -people and jobs are locating here. He said the 1. E. is the fastest growing region for jobs -people want to be close to work, school and activities. Tammy Tapia said the City officials have forgotten us — kids dreams are disappearing -they will not be able to afford a home and will suffer from higher crime & pollution. Kathy Ponce said citizens have a right to say what they want in development and there are coalitions forming to take towns away from developers. Developers buy and pay for council members so how could they say no or oppose it. Linnie Drolet said she is opposed for all the reasons previously stated. Dominick Spezialy said the project is in conflict with the General Plan - open space is needed for a Healthy RC. He said we should protect open spaces and keep land uses in balance. Erick Gavin said he is an Upland resident and he supports the plan. He said Upland is 95% built and the region has an affordable housing crisis. While these units are not necessarily affordable, it may be for move up folks freeing up less expensive units for others. He offered up an acronym 'BANANA' to sum up the attitude about this proposal -build absolutely nothing anywhere near anyone. He suggested this could benefit many more than current golfers. Gary Guileano was called to speak because he submitted a speaker's car, but did not appear when called by the Chair. Holly Bombard said she supports the project and stated she has lived here many years, it is a wonderful community. Brittany Whiteman said she has lived here 30 years and always lived in Lewis Communities. She said renters are not 'slummers' and offered her support. Brandon Groves said he is in support and is a renter and has lived here many years -he loves the sense of community and amenities. He said the project represents future residents of this community and also meets the needs of families. He said he has golfed many times and said the course is poorly managed — this is their own fault. AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RmCHO APRIL 13, 2016 C,UCAMONGA Page 7 Ken Bowas said he is a real estate broker. He said this is an incredible product and harmonizes with community, this City is the best planned city along with Mission Viejo and Irvine. He said there is an economic advantage for city -taxes and jobs/employers will want to be here. He offered his support. Gary Price said Metrolink-ridership has fallen and costs are up; the rails systems raised fares 25% to stay solvent. He said all the platitudes are based on a false premise. He said the demographics of LA have changed and it is no longer the destination. He said the traffic information is not correct and all the consultants are smooth and slick -he opposed the project. Jack Adams indicated a filibuster occurred and said he is opposed. He said these utopian ideas fail and no one will ride train to LA and kids can't afford this housing. Stewart Schwartz was called to speak because he submitted a speaker's car, but did not appear when called by the Chair. Jeff Rupp said he is in favor of the project and his children would like to live and stay here - they are excited about it. He said he takes the train to LA every day and his fare uses pretax dollars and the ridership is growing. He said we need more TOD communities. Chris Johnson said he is in support — he is a young professional and the project has everything he wants. He said "the City needs more housing for young professionals like me." Loree Masonis said she lives in Ontario at Vineyard and 4th Street and the area is getting very urbanized. She said this type of development is coming aggressively with a Utopian mindset and is part of a greater plan to change this country. She said LA needs this, not us. Jeffrey Anderson said he is opposed. Angie Churchwell said she is in support- as it will create diverse housing opportunities — it is exciting and beautiful. Chairman Wimberly stated that those persons who had submitted speaker cards had been given an opportunity to speak, and asked if anyone else wished to speak on the matter. The Chair then asked again if there were any more comments and seeing and hearing none, closed the public hearing at 10:45 p.m. He then asked for Commissioner comments. Vice Chairman Oaxaca thanked the public and the applicant. He said there are success factors for a transit oriented mixed use development he and he said he needs to hear more about how this project incorporates those. He said with respect to TOD, Metrolink ridership suffered during the economic crash, employment centers have changed or moved and bus HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 8 service is very limited and not coordinated with the Metrolink scheduling. He said Metrolink is currently maxed out on the route he rides daily. 1) He said he would like to hear more about how the train will potentially affect its success, 2) Re: mixed use development and what experience this developer has had with this type of development, 3) phasing plan and what that looks like, 4) he said he wants to hear more about jobs and the housing balance - for example: the types of jobs/income within 3 miles, rental housing vs for sale homes etc.; 5) He has concern about the environmental clearance he said the un-mitigatable impacts fly in the face of the goals of what the project says it is -the undesirable outcomes need to be better addressed. Commissioner Fletcher said he shares the concerns voiced by Commission Oaxaca. 1) Re: the mixed use tour —of those cities toured, he favored Santa Clarita — He said he thinks much of the presentation has merit but he has questions; 2) Re: meeting goals and protecting the community identity -he said he has a concern about what our identity is and we need to discuss that; 3) Re: workshops - he said there was a lack of communication with respect to the workshops with the Commission; 4) he asked if the 220.000 square feet of non-residential uses (Pages C,D,E of the agenda packet) includes flex units. He said this gives opportunities to the developer to fudge; 5) Re: joint use facility -he said it does not compensate for the loss of recreation, 6) Re: mitigation - it does not compensate for the loss of the golf course; 7) Re: the City and Commission has a right to determine what is developed there. He said it was in poor taste to publish comments prior to discussion of the merits; 8) Re: maintaining features -he asked if inflation for maintenance costs are built in; 9) Re: economic/fiscal impact study -he said the EIR did not really answer his question; he wanted them to look at alternate uses because other uses could have been proposed, 10) Re: appropriate land use -this is part of the City's Open Space 11) Re: Statement of Overriding Considerations — he said we can't mitigate significant impacts using the statement of overriding considerations; 12) Re: CFD's-will the City end up with uncovered expenses; and, 13) He said we already ha ve TOD type development and he believes the TOD discussion is really about getting high density development and mixed use. He said the Commission only had 2 meetings and we were told not to make comments at the workshop. He said the agenda is over 1,245 pages long and this is not fair to commissioners to drop this on the Commission; there was very little opportunity to ask questions and he is upset and concerned about this process. Commissioner Macias quoted the book of Ecclesiastes indicating fewer words would be more meaningful. He defended staff and noted that the Commission had 6 weeks to review the EIR and this project has not been "dropped on us. " He said from reading the EIR, he knew there would be un-mitigatable impacts — there will be with this big of a project, it should be expected. He said he read the whole thing over the weekend and believed he had adequate time to review the materials. He said the golf course/privately held land is not doing well and it is beyond our jurisdiction to consider other management of the course. He said the EIR did its job and looked at viable and feasible alternatives. To propose other alternatives is not feasible. He said if we impose restrictions on housing, then we have no project and the EIR did assess that. He said he has a problem with the comments HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 9 regarding the loss of open space. He said the total scheme of open space is based upon its availability for all people to use, not just golfers -He noted that the general public can't walk dogs, picnic or jog there, only the golfers can use it. He said its value as an Open Space resource is low. He said with respect to housing - we need all types of housing stock for all types of people and it is unrealistic to assume we or neighboring communities will remain unchanged. He said he came to the Inland Empire for affordable housing many years ago and it still exists today. With respect to density - no better place to accommodate this type of development in our city as it is not in the middle, it is on the perimeter. He said the market will adjust itself overtime. With respect to the jobs/housing balance —we have a market based economy — the market is volatile, things change over time. With respect to the overriding considerations — a project this big will have them and CEQA provides for that. He said City officials have to weigh the benefits against the impacts... He said CEQA is supposed to be flexible; those impacts need to be looked at seriously but we have to be realistic. He said he has no problem with water supply, schools or traffic. He said the development will provide more benefits than the golf course. Commissioner Munoz said these applications are doable and things change over time. He said the golf course is no longer viable and the owner wants out, Lewis Companies has a vision and they have seen it come to fruition. With respect to housing - we are lacking housing and if there was more housing/greater supply, young people could afford to live here. He said he read the EIR and concurred with Commissioner Macias with respect to the Statement of Overriding Considerations. He said it looks consistent, and need to deal with growth as a city. He said he has no problem with staffs recommendation and he would support the project. Commissioner Fletcher added that he is not saying he would not support, he just felt he did not have enough opportunity to discuss it. He said these recommendations green light this —and he did not like how this came to us as he wanted to provide more input. He said he had comments about mitigating the loss of the golf course as it was used over the years to attract businesses to the city. He said a mitigation could be to develop the rest of central park. He said he did like much of what he saw in this project. Chairman Wimberly moved to continue the item until the April 27th meeting. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney noted that the motion is appropriate if the majority wants to continue the item. He said the Public Hearing is closed but Commission discussion would continue to the next meeting. In response to Commissioner Macias, he stated that if anything new resulted from those discussions, the CEQA process is not jeopardized; that the environmental process is ongoing until the City Council certifies the EIR. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 3-2 (Macias and Munoz voted no) to continue discussion of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040 and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115 to the . 91HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 13, 2016 CUGAMONGA Page 10 regular meeting on April 27, 2016. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION F. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Munoz reported that because of the late hour he would present his updates at a later time. G. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None VI. ADJOURNMENT 11:44 p.m. 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 7, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 13, 2016 C,UCAMONGA Page 11 generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 27, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7:00 PM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER ::=I Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Jason Welday, Traffic Engineer, Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Mike Smith, Senior Planner Chairman Wimberly offered some guidelines regarding the conduct during the meeting. He noted the public hearing portion of the Empire Lakes project was closed at the last meeting of April 13, however, comments will be received during the Public Communications section to follow. He said there would be another opportunity for public comment on the Empire Lakes project during the public hearing before the City Council on a future date. He limited comments to 5 minutes per speaker. II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 CONGA Page 2 Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. Richard Dick spoke in support and said it is a good use for the property. Erik Westedt filled out a speaker card but did not come forward when he was called by the Chairman. Paul Runkle spoke in support noting his prior experience with mixed use projects and the re -development of golf courses for other uses. He said the TOD concept is very popular and will support other businesses. He said there is a direct link of affordability of housing with density -the more we build, more options available, hence more affordable. He said it is key to deliver a quality project -Lewis Co are leaders and they are in business with a long term perspective. Anna Millsap said she is a Lewis homeowner and is excited about this project; she believes their quality is great. Danny Pierce spoke in opposition citing loss of valuable open space noting 52,000 tee times at Empire Lakes last year, a significant use for open space. He said changing the 2010 General Plan/ means we will lose; 2 course to zero and the loss is unmitigated. He also expressed concern about exposure of hazardous materials, costs of future fire station and fiscal impacts. Brandon Brooke spoke in opposition noting concerns about property owners/residents not receiving the notifications. He said there is misinformation regarding traffic, crime, city resources, and school impacts. He said the wildlife found on the course is amazing and people really enjoy it. He questioned the water usage calculations and that the EIR does not adequately address traffic stemming from other large projects in the area in combination with Empire Lakes. Cherie Knudson opposed noting more open land is lost with each development, high rents and credit requirements of Lewis developments and tall buildings blocking views. She said the general public thinks all City officials and the Commission are in Lewis' pocket. She said the golf course should be preserved. Gary Price opposed and said the concept of TOD development is based on a false premise; there is falling ridership, increased fares, and a change of demographics of riders. He asked if the City of Ontario reports of 8,000 new units to be built has been considered as traffic is already a problem. He implied a backroom deal because Lewis knew it was Open space and the seller knew it was open space and now there is the request to change it. Stuart Schwartz opposed but commended Oaxaca and Fletcher for their diligence with questions. His concerns were about the prices of housing is above what workers in the area can afford; the consultants are not independent and there is no evidence to support the use of Metrolink by this development, He said private property rights do not assume buyers can automatically rezone. He said his sources say the course is net cash positive and still could be viable as open space; the project pictured is a myth -it will change. He claimed a lack of transparency. Cynthia Gomez said she is sickened by those who imply something bad is going on. She supports the project, she stated this is nothing like LA and she hopes this will bring millennials as many are looking for this lifestyle -we prefer to walk or bike to work and we live with traffic it is a part of life. She said it meets HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES I CHo APRIL 27, 2016 iTCAMONM Page 3 multigenerational needs that she sees every day. Kim Earl opposed the project and said many millennials do not want stack n pack, dorm room environment; young families do not want their children to play in a public area -they would prefer aback yard. Schools will be impacted and are already impacted. She questioned water supply vs conservation requirements, traffic, people will not walk or bike to work, affordability for Millennials. She said she understands their right to sell golf course but this is not a good replacement. Frank Frenloff opposed and said the golf course is a pristine area. He said golf is cheap therapy -he is in his 80s and said he can swing the club and forget it all. He said it is great to see kids taking lessons -they learn good values. Patricia Wallen spoke regarding the GFR project (Items E, F & G) she noted she lives adjacent to the site. She supports the removal of the eucalyptus trees as they cause much work and mess in her yard although she will miss the privacy they provide. The Public Communications Section ended at 7:49 PM III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated April 13, 2016 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to adopt the minutes of April 13, 2016. IV. SCHEDULED MATTERS/PLANNING COMMISSION Chairman Wimberly reminded the public of the expected conduct for the meeting and explained the order of Items B, C and D. He noted the public hearing portion is closed and no further testimony would be taken and that the focus of the meeting tonight is for the Commission to continue their discussion and deliberation of these items. He noted that staff would be the report and any updates from the last meeting, field questions as appropriate and then following their discussion the Commission may choose to take action. He said if the Commission recommends approval, the item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action and that meeting will be a noticed public hearing. -\ B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00114—SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. (LEWIS OPERATING CORP.): A request to amend the 2010 General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga by revising text, graphics, and exhibits within the General Plan, and change the land use designations of parcels that are currently developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course, an existing, private golf course of 160 acres that is located north of 4th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, from Open Space to Mixed Use, in conjunction with a proposed mixed use, high density residential/commercial HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 CUGAMGNGA Page 4 development that is proposed to replace the golf course; APNs: 0209-272-11, -15, -17, - 20, -22 through -28, 0210-082-41, -49 through -52, 0210-082-61, -64, -65, -67 through -69, -71 through -74, -78, -79, -84 through -88, -89, -90, 0210-581-01 through -06, 0210-591-02 through -14, and 0210-623-66. Related files: Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00115 and Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH No. 20150410083), Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP), and Facts and Findings to support the Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared for consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00040 - SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. (LEWIS OPERATING CORP.): A request to amend the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Subarea 18 Specific Plan, a Specific Plan that applies to properties located north of 4th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, to delete text, graphics, and exhibits relating to the Empire Lakes Golf Course, an existing private golf course of 160 acres that is located within the subject Specific Plan area, and insert text, graphics, and exhibits that will describe the design and technical standards/guidelines for a proposed mixed use, high density residential/commercial development that is proposed to replace the golf course; APNs: 0209-272-11, -15, -17, -20, -22 through -28, 0210-082-41, -49 through -52, 0210-082-61, -64, -65, -67 through -69, -71 through -74, -78, -79, -84 through -88, -89, -90, 0210-581-01 through -06, 0210-591-02 through -14, and 0210-623-66. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114 and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. An Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 20150410083), Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP), and Facts and Findings to support the Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared for consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015-00115-SC RANCHO DEVELOPMENT CORP. (LEWIS OPERATING CORP.): A request to amend the Development Code of the City Rancho Cucamonga by revising text, graphics, and exhibits within the Development Code that applies to properties, including the Empire Lakes Golf Course, an existing, private golf course of 160 acres, within the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan ([ASP) Subarea 18 Specific Plan, a Specific Plan that applies to properties located north of 4th Street, south of the BNSF/Metrolink rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues, and insert text and graphics in conjunction with a proposed mixed use, high density residential/commercial development that is proposed to replace the golf course; APNs: 0209-272-11, -15, -17, -20, -22 through - 28, 0210-082-41, -49 through -52, 0210-082-61, -64, -65, -67 through -69,-71 through -74, - 78, -79, -84 through -88, -89, -90, 0210-581-01 through -06, 0210-591-02 through -14, and 0210-623-66. Related files: General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114 and Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040. An Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 20150410083), Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP), and Facts and Findings to support the AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ('Eu�cnMOrrGA APRIL 27, 2016 Page 5 Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared by the Planning Commission and the City Council. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Mike Smith, Senior Planner, presented the updated staff report and a brief PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) and noted several letters that had been received are on the dais for the Commissioners'review. He said Commissioners Fletcher, Oaxaca and Wimberly submitted some questions following the last meeting for staff and/or the applicant to answer and that he would re -state their questions prior to supplying the answers. He said he had already spoken to the Commissioners and provided the information requested but for the sake of the record he would re -state the questions and answers as follows: Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked if we are trying to solve a regional or City housing problem with this development. Mr. Smith said no, this project is not intended to address a specific situation. He said the project is a response by the applicant to address market conditions. Staff has also observed homes are bought before being completed and vacancies are very low and staff is often approached by developers about the process for residential development in the City. He said there is not the same level of demand to build other types of development such as office uses or industrial. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked if there is enough critical mass of transit frequency or mode variety now or in the future that would drive occupancy of rental units or home purchases in Empire Lakes or is it "TOD lite" with a limited number of commuters. Mr. Smith said it is not expected to be a full TOD and we still expect residents to use their cars and that is why standard parking requirements are in place -staff is looking at it holistically. We want to take advantage of the station and we know that not all will use it but the potential is there in the future so we are trying to plan ahead for a possible future demand. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked about Lewis' prior experience as a developer, phasing, anchor tenants and walkability. Mr. Smith said this will be answered by the applicant. Mr. Smith began to re -state Commissioner Fletcher's questions however, Commissioner Fletcher said he wanted to ask his own questions within the framework of his comments during Commission comments. Chairman Wimberly asked for clarification regarding the expected phased areas. Mr. Smith said the first phase is located between 4th and 6th Streets, the second between 6th and 7th Streets and the third is between 7th Street and the railroad tracks (moving south HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION in - AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 �'�UCAMONGA Page 6 to north). He said a minimum of 50, 000 Square Feet of non-residential development in the Overlay is required, if only 20,000 square feet is developed south of 6th Street, 30,000 square of non-residential use is required north of 6th. He said with respect to Open Space, it is 160 acres which is about 1.92% of the total City open space. He said the General Plan recognizes open space as an important amenity, and therefore we are looking at it from an overall perspective. He said it is private property. The loss relative to City's total open space overall is minimal. He said with respect to the course as an amenity, the applicant is supplying open space as part of the project and also fees to help maintain them will be assessed. He said the City requires the applicant to pay funding towards the joint public use facility for the CSD, Library, and Police and a fire station will also be developed in the future. He said the applicant will also be required to pay development impact fees for these services. He said with respect to water- CVWD reviewed the supply assessment prepared by the applicant and they certify they have enough water to supply the project. He said regarding schools -the superintendent says they have the capacity to supply student services as well. Regarding traffic -Jason Welday/Traffic Engineer will respond as well as the air quality consultant. Jason Welday, Traffic Engineer said the traffic analysis was prepared in accordance with the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan and with input from the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Ontario and Caltrans and all studies were done in accordance with CEQA. James Kurth said he is an air quality manager and that operational emissions produced mostly by cars will create impacts. He said the AQMD thresholds do not consider larger projects like this. He indicated fewer impacts occur when development such as this is close to rails and bus lines. Chairman Wimberly asked for clarification regarding the water analysis and the concerns of residents having to reduce water use and the amount of water estimated for the project. Jo Lynne Russo-Pereyra of the CVWD said this is a regulatory compliance issue and not a water supply issue. She said the water district has been preparing for this since 2009-but the State did a blanket regulation/one size fits all cut in water usage. She said it is a flawed strategy although the Governor did anticipate additional building/development and therefore modified landscape requirements. She said they are also looking at per capita use which has lessened. Mr. Smith said all impacts were analyzed in the E/R and appropriate mitigations were stated and the document has been on review for public to review and for comment. He concluded his report and response to the previous questions at about 8:12 PM. Chairman Wimberly asked the Commissioners for any additional questions. Commissioner Fletcher said he has respect for Lewis companies and is uncomfortable with HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RntvCHO APRIL 27, 2016 Cucntuotvcn Page 7 unfounded attacks on them. He said they have a different set of interests, it is not a question of good or bad. He said his concern is about the process with respect to little opportunity for the public and commission to comment and felt that this item coming to the Commission was a surprise -he summarized the dates and subjects of various meetings held over the course of the last 2 years. He said he wanted more conversation about alternate -appropriate land uses that might bring more City revenue, less impacts and higher paying jobs. He said staff indicated this did not occur -the EIR only addressed other levels of density and not other uses. He asked how much population is needed to support TOD. He thought that improvements to the station would occur before any other big developments. Mr. Smith said the number of apartments is about 17, 000, and single-family residences is 40,000 per the Housing Element profile of 2015 from SCAG. Commissioner Fletcher commented that almost 113 of our housing stock is apartments -he said he was not aware of a shortage. He asked if we have a limitation on population growth or density in the City. Mr. Smith said according to the General Plan, in 2009 the number of dwelling units was 55,700 and for 2030 buildout it would be about 63,253. He said the population in 2009 was 179, 000 and anticipated population at buildout in 2030 is 204, 000. Commissioner Fletcher commented that economically he thought it was more important to create more jobs before housing and if there are not good paying jobs they would not be able to afford any housing, and that he did not feel it was accurate to say that people move out of the City because they can't afford the housing, they move because of job transfers etc. He said he believes there is a good mix of jobs in the City and is best if people can live and work in the City. He said he did not believe the open space of the golf course could be fairly compared with open space in the northern sphere that is not usable or accessible to most people nor would the developer be providing a large amount of open space within the project area. He asked about any conversations with the golf course owner regarding the economic feasibility of the course. He expressed concern about market driven development and a drain on City funds. Mr. Smith said he confirmed no discussions took place with the golf course owner — only with applicant and their consultants. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the commercial portion could never get built if no "market demand" exists. Mr. Smith said right now we are only reviewing overall plan, so development applications within each part of the plan will get reviewed in detail as they are applied for: they have to fulfill the intent of the plan. They do have to fulfill the minimum and if a specific application does not provide a non-residential component then it will have to be addressed down the HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CRANC"o APRIL 27, 2016 CAMPage 8 line with other future applications. He said the statement of market demand provides flexibility. Commissioner Fletcher asked the joint public facility is part of the 220, 000 square feet of non-residential uses -he asked if that is outside of the 85,000 square feet within the mixed use overlay. Mr. Smith said the joint use facility is roughly located at 7th Street and The Vine and is in the Mixed Use Overlay so it is included in maximum 85, 000 square feet. Commissioner Oaxaca asked if the estimates were based on full build out of the project as proposed. Mr. Smith said the fiscal impact analysis prepared by the City's consultant assumes full buildout and annual revenue. He said the revenue estimates are based on a base line number calculation. Commissioner Fletcher expressed concern that with that many units that could be built prior to the commercial component, most of the dollars will be spent at Ontario Mills and we get the costs for community services provided. He asked if it will be a drain on the City's budget. He questioned how the fiscal impacts could be estimated if the commercial uses are market driven and therefore unknown. He said development fees are one time fees but the expenses go on forever and inflation should also be considered. He asked if the joint facility be paid for by developer. Mr. Smith said the details of that are still in process but they will be solidified prior to the hearing before the City Council. He said currently the applicant is required to contribute 11 million dollars to construct and set aside the land for the facility. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the CFD pays for staffing and maintenance and if there are auto escalators. He said it sounds like a future drain on the General fund. Mr. Smith said there will be CFDs and escalators. He said existing maintenance districts are currently underfunded, but this development would join in and pay into those districts — he said there may be a future need to draw on the General Fund but the new CFD will have escalators whereas the old ones do not. Commissioner Fletcher said this will generate 1.5 million in fees and costs to the City would be about 1 million and the estimate of $500, 000 net annual revenue to the City — he said it is a thin margin considering future expenses and if those revenues do not materialize. He then questioned the mitigation to the public for the loss of recreational open space -what's proposed does not compare. He suggested the developer fund or develop another major segment of Central Park. He asked if this had been considered. AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ANCHORAPRIL 27, 2016 M"ONGA Page 9 Mr. Smith said the applicant is already required to pay park fees that go to the City's park funds and the City decides where those funds go. Commissioner Fletcher said those fees have nothing to do with the removal of this valuable resource that needs to be addressed and the suggestion seems reasonable in that we should compensate the people for the loss of their recreational open space. He said he is not convinced the project proposal is the best use of the land -the decision should not be based upon what provides the most value for the developer. He said since he does not consider this the best land use for our residents then he would also question the validity of the Statement of Overriding Considerations. He believed more discussion should have occurred earlier on. Mr. Smith said that with respect to the completion of Central Park, the applicant pays park fees and where those fees are best applied is a City decision. Bryan Goodman, said Lewis has had great involvement with the development of Central Park and if the City wanted to apply those park development impact fees to Central Park we would be supportive of that but it is a City decision. Commissioner Fletcher said that Lewis could do more, faster and cheaper there than the City has done in 30 years. He said he is confused about the financial study. He asked if they would say this project 15 years from now will not be a drain on the City budget. Bryan Goodman said regarding the sales tax, a footnote says 15% of tax revenue would be lost to other cities. He said we did our own analysis — we came up with a similar number. He said the CFD escalator is the mechanism that over time allows the cost of the maintenance to keep up with the revenue generated -this is the game changer. Commissioner Fletcher said he felt more about this project should have been brought before the Commission for more discussions before it got to this point of the process. Mr. Smith said that the process and availability of this project has been here and available for you to review: if we are approached by any applicant and they want to talk about what they need to do for a proposal, typically we would not engage with the Planning Commission at that time. We provide the applicant with information and comments. When it comes to the Commission it is more concrete -at public scoping the project is still embryonic. It develops from there and at the workshop you could then at least visualize what was being proposed. Commissioner Fletcher said it is not the specifics of the project that is his concern — it is the use/land use change - we should have met regarding appropriate land use to the City. He said his whole past experience is in income%xpenses and if we can't maintain ponds and AA PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R,,,,,G,o APRIL 27, 2016 Cucnhtorrcn Page 10 parks, then we should look at uses that bring tax benefits to the City. We never looked at alternative uses in spite of his request and there was a lack of public meetings to discuss this. Vice Chairman Oaxaca thanked staff for their diligence for responding. He commented that the realities of special districts are that some have not been able to keep up. Although there is additional revenue, multi -family development has a lower assessment rate. He asked if Mr. Welday could summarize the change in levels of service (LOS) at specific intersections. Mr. Welday displayed a graphic of several intersections with significant impacts that can be mitigated with some changes such as signal timing. He noted some intersections will not improve and will suffer additional delays. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked if it is a safe conclusion that intersections studied will have fairly significant effects over time even without the project. Mr. Welday said project/no project completion and even ambient growth, was taken into account. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said one individual provided comment re: potential effects of other proposed projects in the region and how are they accounted for with respect to traffic. Mr. Smith suggested the preparer of the EIR would be best to respond. Sarah Brandenberg of Fehr & Peers said they considered already known and approved projects in the area and those noted by SCAG through 2025. Commissioner Oaxaca asked her to address the specific project comment regarding other large housing projects in the area with respect to the connection of larger housing projects related to cumulative impacts. Tina Anderson of Bon Terra Psomas said they performed an outreach to Ontario and other neighboring areas to develop the list of contacts for each topic studied in the EIR. Vice Chairman Oaxaca confirmed that CEQA requires the agency to focus on the effects of the project being considered in context with other identified projects in the area not just the individual project identified and its effects on the Lead Agency. Bryan Goodman said with respect to the job breakdown of 118, 000 jobs identified within 3 miles of the site found in the Census — financial, insurance, real estate professional and technical services is 18%; risk management, administrative services and remediation is 15%, retail trade is 14%, transportation/warehousing is 12%, fashion is 8%; a broad mix of good jobs. Household income in the same radius is about 75k on average which is in line HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 11 with their price points. He said with respect to the conditions for the joint use facility is - complicated -it is under construction. Randall Lewis said the Lewis Companies' experience with mixed use development is in Terra Vista which has 1.5 miles of retail, condos, schools, parks, apartments; a community which evolved over time and we have brought in the best consultants. He said with respect to other possible uses such as an auto mall or another Victoria Gardens, there is not a market for it here. He said they are expert in this market and what generates the demand; in this case it is household growth with spendable income. He said the retail use they do will have to get phased in. He said they partnered with Forest City at Victoria Gardens and they were very involved there. He said they are also working on the Chino Preserve that is a mixed use center. Commissioner Fletcher asked what type of home product will be offered. Mr. Lewis said their guesses and estimates are good. He would expect higher density detached houses, condos, and townhouses as they want to give options and this development will evolve over time. He said it will not be in just 3 phases but they plan to start at the south end and work north. Commissioner Macias offered support of the project and said that the information presented has not changed his mind on any matter. He said he believes we should provide a multitude of housing types and the City will grow like it or not. He referred to an article he read noting that people still want the best deal. He said things will change and land use plans all have to be flexible as we are a market driven society. He said Commissioner Fletcher made some good points, but some are policy issues that we are to consider at a different time and it is not valid to hold this project hostage because we did not deliberate policy issues such as the completion of Central Park. He said transportation options provided have been provided and the Golf course is not a significant amenity for all. Commissioner Munoz said he looked at the E/R and he had plenty of time to do so, he reviewed the comment letters, staff kept us up to date, and the E/R was specific. He said the benefits outweigh the impacts. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said this was a valuable discussion and he appreciates all the comments and he thanked the CVWD for the District comments and clarification. He thanked staff for clarifying his questions and explaining why we need this development -it is an issue of housing and housing diversity and the ability to own or rent a home. He said clarity with respect to transit development was given. He said he is very familiar with transit and how it relates to areas surrounding it. He said he looks to the future with the knowledge that we won't get it all at once. He said the City is hoping to be ahead of the game and on the leading edge; this is forward thinking and this developer has some success in doing that. Mr. Lewis checked the box of success factors -in that he is creating a community in response to the market and it considers the City's needs over a period of time. He said HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES aavcxo APRIL 27, 2016 nMoNGA Page 12 traffic will increase even without this project and we could stand still and be victims to the traffic growth or try to be proactive. He said he understands the concern about the loss of the golf course -but this is the best possible option. Commissioner Fletcher said that with respect to policy issues not specific to this development perhaps upcoming workshops will give more opportunity to discuss those. He said he has always opposed market driven development as it results in not the best development long term. Chairman Wimberly thanked staff Lewis Companies for providing options so all have a choice. He said he appreciated all the comments. Moved by Macias, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-1 (Fletcher opposed) to recommend approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115 and forward all applications and the EIR to the City Council for final action. The Chairman called a recess at 9:40 PM and the full Commission reconvened at 9:51 PM. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2016-00180 - GFR INVESTMENTS - A request to add a free standing garage, rear yard access driveway, perimeter walls, and remove an adjacent Eucalyptus windrow for the Ernst Muller House, associated with a request to subdivide 5.0 acres into 11 lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan on the east side of East Avenue, south of the 210 Freeway, located at 6563 East Avenue; APN: 0227-071-17. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19968, and Design Review DRC2015-00589. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item was heard in conjunction with items F & G VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NCHOR4APRIL 27, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 13 F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19968 - GFR INVESTMENTS - A request to subdivide 5.0 acres into 11 lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan on the east side of East Avenue, south of the 210 Freeway, located at 6563 East Avenue; APN: 0227-071-17. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00589 and Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00180. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00589 — GFR INVESTMENTS - A Design Review for 10 lots within the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan on the east side of East Avenue, south of the 210 Freeway, located at 6563 East Avenue; APN: 0227-071-17. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19968 and Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00180. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) for Items E, F and G. He said staff received a letter from the South Coast Air Quality Management District. He said staff recommends adding a condition to prepare an HRA. The condition will read. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the applicant shall prepare a Health Risk Assessment and any requirements and/or conditions shall be incorporated into the Landscape Plan and building plans. The HRA shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review prior to incorporation into the Landscape Plan and building plans. Chuck Crowell said his is available for questions. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing (one person spoke during public comment in support of the tree removal request, her comment is repeated below). Patricia Wallen spoke regarding the GFR project (Items E, F & G) she noted she lives adjacent to the site. She supports the removal of the eucalyptus trees as they cause much work and mess in her yard although she will miss the privacy they provide. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Commissioner Macias said he had no problems with the application and offered support. Commissioner Fletcher said it is a nice attractive design and thanked and complimented the applicant for making the minor adjustments requested by the DRC. He offered his support. Vice Chairman Oaxaca had no issues appreciated the adjustments based on the DRC comments. He noted that the windrows are getting old and they have a much shorter life HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES LR�NC"on APRIL 27, 2016 uCMONGPage 14 than redwoods. He said as they continue to disappear we have a replacement policy incorporating more appropriate trees. Chairman Wimberly said he lives in the area and noted we are seeing the last of those trees and it will be interesting to see what is put in their place. He said the project should be well received. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to approve the applications for the Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2016-00180, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19968 and Design Review DRC2015-00589 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-01149 - CARIYENIS WELLNESS - A request to operate a massage establishment within an existing 1,114 square foot tenant space within the General Industrial (GI) zoning district located at 9087 Arrow Route, Suite 100; APN: 020901219. 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 as a Class 1 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15301) exemption, which covers existing facilities. Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Cariyenis Garcias said she is the applicant and available for questions. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-01149. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-01132 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to eliminate Development Code Section 17.38.060 (H) (8) which requires the preservation of an existing grove of eucalyptus trees related to the development of a 193-unit multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities for a site located on 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100- 201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 �UCAMONGA Page 15 CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2014-01131- FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to change the zoning designation for 8.8 acres of land from Community Commercial (CC) to Mixed Use (MU) related to the development of a 193- unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014- 01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19945 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to subdivide 8.8 acres of land for residential condominium purposes related to the development of a 193-unit, multi -family mixed use development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site of within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100- 201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016. L. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01130 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 193-unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a site located on 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016. M. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00169 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to reduce the required parking by 44 spaces (52 spaces if 3,246 square feet of retail tenant space is developed) related to the development HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 16 of a 193-unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site of 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014- 01131, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016 N. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2014-01134 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to remove approximately 184 trees related to the development of a 193-unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site of 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014- 01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016. O. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2015-00318 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to review the Uniform Sign Program related to the development of a 193-unit multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014- 01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016. Chairman Wimberly noted a continuance has been requested for Items I-O. Commissioner Fletcher commented about his desire for the applicant to build the 3,200 square foot commercial use at the same time as the residential use and also the requirement for a minimum of 2 commercial uses. He said the project description says there is a potential for commercial space. He said he thought it was clear that portion was to be developed and the applicant got the impression they could build it as 3 apartments and at a later date, and with better market conditions, they would build the commercial portion of the project. He recalled that at DRC it was clear this was not optional. He HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 Cucn€ONCA Page 17 expressed concern that if we keep fudging then all we get in the end is high density. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said she understood that as a DRC requirement but when this application came in, those standards were not in place. She said the new overlay districts address these specific areas. She said Development Code changes are in process and staff re -noticed this item with an amended description to define the mixed uses. Commissioner Fletcher noted that the discussion was that we would go along with the idea of a TOD and density bonuses for the developer provided we were given the 2 uses. He said we are not fulfilling what we want. He said that if he can't fill 3,200 square feet than he needs to go back to the normal standard of less density and more parking. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he has the same recollection. He said the design was nice but he still shares the concern about the previous standards and what we are responding to. He said it might be better to remind the applicant of this. He said the description has tilted more than what he is comfortable with. Ms. Burnett noted that upcoming workshops will address this issue but this application was submitted 18 months prior to developing these standards. She said we thought this would be a true transit development with a flex space to support the transit line. That was the original intent of this development. We did the re -noticing to address that issue to define uses in MU districts with a TOD. Commissioner Fletcher reiterated that if they want density bonus and parking reduction then they have to give the 2 uses- the agenda indicates it as an option. Ms. Burnett assured the Commission that staff not ignoring the DRC. She said this is what is being brought forward to the Commission to evaluate. Commissioner Fletcher said he thought the DRC had the purpose and that if the DRC does not approve the design it does not go to PC. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said the DRC did not want the applicants to drive our decision, we wanted staff and Commission to drive those standards. There we no additional comments. Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to continue Items 1-0 to the May 11, 2016 meeting. P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSEMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00887 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - An amendment to change the land use designations of multiple parcels within the City, generally located along Foothill Boulevard (near major street intersections with other streets such as East Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES g; NCHO APRI L 27, 2016 CucAMGNGA Page 18 E N. and Hermosa Avenue); in the vicinity of the intersection of Base Line Road and Amethyst Avenue; and at the southeast corner of the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Candlewood Street from their existing designations (which varies but includes, for example, General Commercial and Office) to Mixed Use, and to correct, as necessary, existing tables and text in the General Plan that specify the uses and range of development required on various parcels in the City that are currently designated for Mixed Use development; APNs: 0207-211-05, 0207-211-42 through -46, 0208-101-17 through -20, 0208-632-46 through -50, 0208-321-24, 1077-621-20 through -27, 0208-353-01 through -03, 1100-031-06, -07; 1100- 041-01 through -03, 1090-601-04, -06 through -08, 1090-601-20, and -21, 1100-161-01 through -03, 0229-311-14 and -15, 1100-191-04, and 1100-201-03, -04, -06, and -07. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. CONTINUANCE REQUESTED TO MAY 11, 2016. Chairman Wimberly noted a continuance has been requested. Mike Smith, Senior Planner said the continuance request is to further refine the proposed amendment. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked if there could be more discussion prior to the May 11 meeting date. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said this project merely clarifies the zoning map in conformance with the General Plan and to add some areas that were missed in the designation. This is more of a cleanup item. Mr. Smith said we are adding several parcels to the Mixed Use District and to allow us to narrow down what parcels were affected. He said there are no specific standards related to this. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to continue Item P to the May 11, 2016 meeting as requested. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 Cu ONCA Page 19 None VIII. ADJOURNMENT 10:40 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on April 21, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO APRIL 27, 2016 UCAMONGA Page 20 documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday; 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF ;RcHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 11, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California E- I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 7:07 PM Roll Call Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias A Fletcher X II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None III. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ;%AMNC MAY 11, 2016 ON Page 2 A. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00975 — D.R. HORTON - A request for site plan and architectural review of 31 single-family residences on 6.5 acres of land in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan located on the northwest corner of Kenyon Way and Lark Drive; APN: 1089-011-04. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map 18508, Variance DRC2016-00154 and Minor Exception DRC2016- 00256. The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for this project on June 3, 2015. 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 the previous Mitigated Negative Declaration. B. VARIANCE DRC2016-00154 — D.R. HORTON - A request to reduce the required setbacks on Lots 19 and 31 related to Design Review DRC2015-00975 for the site plan and architectural review of 31 single-family residences on 6.5 acres of land in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan located on the northwest corner of Kenyon Way and Lark Drive; APN: 1089-011-04. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map 18508, Design Review DRC2015-00975 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00256. Related Files: Tentative Tract Map 18508, Design Review DRC2015- 00975 and Variance DRC2016-00154. C. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00256 — D.R. HORTON - A request to increase the maximum wall height up to 8 feet due to a grade difference related to Design Review DRC2015-00975 for the site plan and architectural review of 31 single-family residences on 6.5 acres of land in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan located on the northwest corner of Kenyon Way and Lark Drive; APN: 1089-011-04. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and gave a brief PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Maile Macabio, project manager for DR Horton said it was a pleasure working with staff and that she was prepared to answer questions. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no comments, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fletcher said the design is compatible, the variance reasonable, and the Minor Exception makes sense. He thanked the applicant for listening to the DRC. Commissioner Munoz agreed and added that it is a challenging area to develop -they did well to accommodate the constraints of the property. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION t AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 (aUCAMONCA Page 3 Vice Chairman Oaxaca agreed that it is a good design, a good selection of plans & homes and is responsive to market conditions. Chairman Wimberly concurred and said it is an infill project and has land challenges. He said staff and the applicant did a good job and he looks forward to seeing it complete. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to adopt the resolutions approving Design Review DRC2015-00975, Variance DRC2015-00154, and Minor Exception DRC2016-00256. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSEMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00887 — CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA —A proposed General Plan Amendment to 1) to change the land use designations of multiple parcels within the City, generally located along Foothill Boulevard near the intersections of East Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue, Haven Avenue, and Vineyard Avenue, and near the southeast corner of the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Candlewood Street, from their existing designations of General Commercial, Industrial Park, or Office (depending on the parcel) to Mixed Use; 2) to revise Tables LU-1, delete Tables LU-3 through LU-8, and LU-10 through LU-14 of the General Plan that describe the uses and development ranges permitted within each area designated for Mixed Use development and to correct numbering of Table LU-9; 3) revise Tables LU-15 through LU-18 that summarize and describe the build -out capacity for ' each land use classification throughout the City; 4) revise Figures LU-2 and LU-3 of the General Plan that identify the (existing and added) locations of the parcels that are designated for Mixed Use development; 5) revise text associated with these tables and figures; and 6) to correct any typographical errors and omissions within the existing text associated with these tables and figures; APNs: 0207-211-05, 0207-211-42 through -46, 0208-353-01 through -03, 1100-031- 06, -07; 1100-041-01 through -03, 1090-601-04, -06 through -08, 1090-601-20 and -21, 1100-161-01 through -03, 0229-311-14 and -15, 1100-191-04, and 1100-201-03, -04, -06, and -07. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item was continued from the April 27, 2016 meeting date. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. This description is a revision of the original published on March 24, 2016 and was re -noticed on April 28, 2016. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Commissioner Fletcher asked where residents will go for their services if we are abandoning the idea of providing commercial/community services at the east end of town. He mentioned potential loss of revenue and a previously conceived community center. He asked what other developers indicated they would be interested. He asked if existing uses located in this area would still be allowed. He said he is not opposed to changing the land uses along Foothill Boulevard but we should encourage developers to put in what these folks need. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 {�'UCAMONGA page 4 Mr. Perez said there are existing commercial services along Foothill -several portions developed and some are not. He said this issue was not specifically analyzed. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the existing uses would still be allowed. Mike Smith, Senior planner responded that those uses would still be allowed. He said the applicants would be asked to be sure the new uses integrate with the existing There is the intent to provide integration. Mr. Smith said on the parcels that are vacant, they would be required to have 2 land uses or 2 housing types and the developer would have to meet the intent of the Mixed Use District. He said staff has received calls expressing interest in Mixed Use development and are encouraged that we have done the standards, but the interested parties have not yet provided concrete plans, just interest in a mix of residential and commercial uses. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz said he had no concerns, he was glad there is the ability to tweak the General Plan and that he supports the changes. Commissioner Fletcher asked if changing the General Plan but not the zoning map provides staff more control over the submitted projects. Mr. Smith said that with each proposal the applicant will be required to apply for an amendment to the map -and that the applications would run together with the design review and get reviewed concurrently. The amendment would then go to the City Council for final review and action. Commissioner Fletcher said he believes the change is good and may revitalize Foothill Boulevard. He said staff will have to be vigilant in enforcing the design standards. He asked if future developers will have to produce an EIR and if that would be difficult. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said each project will have to do a site specific environmental assessment. He said the fine tuning of their environmental review will be' based upon what is proposed. He said with respect to future applications, because we don't know what mix of uses will be provided, it would be impossible to analyze the impacts now. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said this is the best opportunity to maximize the best use of these locations. He said a lot of these parcels are vacant and what is developed is non- conforming. He said there are lots of reasons they have not been developed but changing the land use will create more opportunity to maximize their use and is a much more HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 UCAMONGA Page 5 responsive approach to what the City needs and will help redevelop the Foothill corridor. He said this is good work by staff. Chairman Wimberly said this is a broad measure that allows these areas to be beneficially developed. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to recommend the approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00887 and the proposed Negative Declaration to be forwarded to the City Council for final action. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014- 01132 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC — A proposed amendment to Development Code Table 17.36.020-2 (Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts) to clarify permitted uses in the Mixed Use Zoning Districts and allowing Transit Orientated Developments (TOD) within % mile of a transit stop and to amend Section 17.36.020 A and B, Figure 17.36.020-1 and Table 17.36.020-1, to add the proposed site to the Development Standards for Mixed Use Zoning Districts Tables, Figures and Text for consistency with the proposed Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131 amending the zoning designation of the site from Community Commercial (CC) to Mixed Use (MU)) for the development of a proposed 193- unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities for a site located on 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APN's: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. This description is a revision of the original published on March 24, 2016 and was re -noticed on April 28, 2016. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2014-01131- FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to change the zoning designation for 8.8 acres of land from Community Commercial (CC) to Mixed Use (MU) related to the development of a 193- unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APNs: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. This item was continued from April 27, 2016. ;HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R,�wcHo MAY 11, 2016 CUcnMoivca Page 6 G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19945 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to subdivide 8.8 acres of land for residential condominium purposes related to the development of a 193-unit, multi -family mixed use development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site of within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APNs: 1100- 201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item was continued from April 27, 2016. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01130 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request for site plan and architectural review of a 193-unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a site located on 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APNs: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item was continued from April 27, 2016. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00169 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to reduce the required parking by 44 spaces (52 spaces if 3,246 square feet of retail tenant space is developed) related to the development of a 193-unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site of 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APNs: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014- 01131, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item was continued from April 27, 2016. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2014-01134 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to remove approximately 184 trees related to the development of a 193-unit, multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site of 8.8 acres of land within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the PHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R,�cHo MAY 11, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 7 northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APNs: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014- 01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item was continued from April 27, 2016. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM DRC2015-00318 - FOOTHILL & EAST, LLC - A request to review the Uniform Sign Program related to the development of a 193-unit multi -family residential development with the potential for 3,246 square feet of commercial space to support future mass transit opportunities on a project site within the Community Commercial (CC) Zoning District at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue; APNs: 1100-201-03, 04 and 07. Related Files: Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014- 01131, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item was continued from April 27, 2016. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He noted title changes of the resolutions before the Commission and the fact that the 3,246 square feet was noted as potential commercial space and is now shown as commercial and/or Live Work units. He said the proposal currently allows the developer to have live/work units to satisfy the requirement and the proposal is now for 190 units with 3 live/work spaces. Commissioner Fletcher questioned the Development Code Amendment — specifically the footnote about properties of 5 acres or less and the TOD. He said he would like to discuss these items separate from this project application. He said we are moving too quickly into high density and these are important topics needing discussion. He said he likes the design and he acknowledged the "two use" issue has been resolved although he had concerns about the parking. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said the intent is to take care of some clean up items to the Code at the same time, hence the footnoted items. Mr. van der Zwaag said the required parking is based on the existing code- the Mixed Use standards do not change the parking requirement for residential, office or commercial projects — 422 spaces are required. Ms. Burnett said the general parking standards are exactly the same as required for apartments/condos (based upon unit count and bedroom count) - the difference in Mixed Use standards is if they are asking for a variance or exception then they would have to provide a parking study to address the change or request for the lack in parking and that if HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RAxcxo MAY 11, 2016 (�uCA14toNGA Page 8 they were trying to meet other intents such as a true TOD development they could use it to justify a request for less parking. She said if they can't meet the -minimum standard then we work backwards and refer to a parking Study Management Plan and ask them for a Peer review parking study to determine if the parking is adequate or not. Commissioner Fletcher said the second peer review study did not confirm that the parking is ok-that group said it might be a problem. He said he has concerns about parking, the speed at which we are trying to build all this, and he expressed concern about making amendments to documents that we just enacted in order to help new development proposals meet those standards. He said he is opposed to off-site%n-street parking in that area. Mr. Van der Zwaag said the original study maintains the project can meet the standard because of a reduction of car use, close proximity to transit, and a large storage area for bikes is provided to encourage alternative transportation as well as a parking management plan that allows for more control, limitations and inspections and strong communication with residents regarding what is allowed. If their plan fails, and we get complaints, the parking may have to be redesigned and reduce units. The Peer review was concerned about an intense commercial use with evening hours and so the property manager will have to lease to uses that do not use parking during the evening hours. He said parking on East Avenue would provide an extra buffer of parking. Commissioner Fletcher said the DRC should see their site plan that shows the parking. He expressed concern that this has not been figured out yet. Vice Chairman Oaxaca expressed similar concerns noting they had a discussion at DRC regarding parking, hence the agreement for a Peer review: they said there is a 9%+ shortfall and he is not comfortable with the street parking option. He said mitigations were suggested and it sounds like we are depending on a lot of policing and constraints on the potential retail uses. He said he wants the developer to be closer to meeting our standards and for them to consider other options. Kamran Benji, the applicant for Foothill & East deferred to his traffic engineer regarding the Peer review and noted the main concern is night time parking. He said other cities are willing to consider lesser parking standards and they have exhausted other parking options. He said East Avenue is not a major street and does not have a lot of traffic. Commissioner Fletcher asked what unit count adjustment they would have to make to meet the parking requirements. Mr. Benji said they would have to consider the financial impact and the delays and impacts already experienced due to the recession. Commissioner Fletcher said we need to consider the best interests of our residents and HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 GUC IONGA Page 9 quality life as well as development -parking in the neighborhoods can be a difficult problem. Commissioner Munoz asked for an explanation of the changes to East Avenue to accommodate extra parking. Mr. Benj said it would be on the west side of East Avenue. Mr. van der Zwaag said it would require the loss of a lane on East Avenue. Dan James, Sr. Civil Engineer said the traffic engineer reviewed this request and said he is open to parking on East Avenue and the reduction of a lane is acceptable. He said the details are not resolved yet. The number of stalls has not been finally determined. Mark Bertone of Madole Associates said a new study closes the #2 southbound lane. Improvements for walkers would be added south to the development. It appears the parking may extend north beyond the project northerly boundary. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said it appears to accommodate 11 vehicles and then possibly more north of the project northerly boundary. Mr. Bertrone said about 62 spaces extending north beyond the utility corridor. Mr. van der Zwaag said only one house on the corner of Via Veneto would potentially have a parking space adjacent to the homeowner's property. Chairman Wimberly asked if the applicant reviewed the number of units that would need to be reduced to meet the parking requirements. Ambarish Mukherjee, representing LSA said they did not. Mr. van der Zwaag said it is roughly 2 vehicles per unit and so to keep all the parking contained on site it would drop the number of units by 15-20. 1:54 Mr. Mukherjee said other cities are looking at this new type of development. He said there is a lack of adequate surveys and parking metrics to look at, so they have looked at other communities where they have done this type of development such as Pasadena. Other cities when they do mixed use/high density there are parking issues because there is more population within a smaller area. He said to provide enough parking for this type of development would result in a huge parking area which contrary to the concept of high density/mixed use development. He said with respect to the Peer review: without taking any credits, this will be short 40 spaces. If credits are considered, it is only short about 10-20 spaces. Because of a lack of rates for Mixed Use development, it was difficult to determine final results. He said the Peer review did not refute the findings it just expressed concern about parking during the evening hours. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 CcCAMONGA Page 10 Serafin Maranan, Principal at Architects Orange said with respect to unit reduction, they felt the parking study reinforced that the parking is adequate. If had to reduce 10-15 units. Commissioner Fletcher suggested they split the difference to 12 units, thereby meeting the parking requirement without going offsite. He said the history of city says we have tried to avoid off -site parking. He asked if they can agree to a condition of no off -site parking. Mr. Benji said considering all the reductions, they meet the requirements. He said with respect to the parking plan -it may not be written but we have agreed to concessions and negotiated with City staff; it includes monitoring and enforcement. Ms. Burnett noted that Commissioners Fletcher and Oaxaca are referring to larger policy issues. She said urban development looks and feels different and it has never been done in our city -we thought it might be difficult. She said we have been setting the stage for this and now we have to look at how we shift to allow this type of development. She said the idea of "No on -street parking" does not fit the urban model -it would mean no Mixed Use development will work anywhere -part of the problem is density. True urban development with 4 stories would never meet the parking requirement. She said we have a training scheduled with other professionals to help the Commission understand this type of development. She said staff knows they are 9% deficient and that is why there is a Minor Exception request. The study and the peer review did not consider the possibility of on - street parking, that came later after other options were explored. She said we know this is a change and parking provided may be acceptable to be below the standards in some locations in the city but not in others. She said these are larger policy decisions that will have to be considered by the Commission and the City Council. She said we are generally in favor of supporting urban development and it is a change from what we have seen in the past. She said the applicant tried to make deals with the other property owners without success. Commissioner Fletcher expressed concern about amending the General Plan noting that the two footnote items slipped in. He said he likes the design and location, but not the parking. He said it would be great if they came in with fewer units and we could still achieve our TOD goals. He said this should have come back to DRC since it did not meet the parking requirement. Mr. Benji said they did discuss parking at the DRC. Commissioner Fletcher said nothing was said about 65 cars parked up East Avenue. He asked if they could agree that all the parking would be on site. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said there is not a mechanism to enforce that requirement if East Avenue is opened for parking as streets are intended for parking -law enforcement would have no way of matching up vehicles with where people live. ;HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RA�NC MAY 11,2016 I Page 11 Vice Chairman Oaxaca said with respect to Ms. Burnett's comments that the Commission ventured into a policy discussion and did not intend for the applicant to be burdened with that. He said his project should not be driving policy. He said he would be in favor of considering using other metrics used by other cities for this type of development. He asked for more specifics on how the applicant's team looked at the parking credits/reductions that can be given for this type of development. Mr. Mukherjee said they used the guidelines from San Bernardino County which allow for transit credits and shared parking credits mixed use development. He said when those were applied, it reduced the demand and then the project would meet the city's requirements. He said the peer study mitigation was only a recommendation. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said the transit component is expected to evolve over time. He asked if the future transit is expected to alleviate the some of the parking demand. Mr. Mukherjee it is how transit and land use interact. The use can create a trigger for transit. If the transit plans move forward you will see a demand in the future that could lessen the impact of the parking. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Daniel Gurrera said there is already a parking problem on Marshall Court which he concluded emanates from nearby apartment residents. He said once cars park on the street, there is no enforcement. He said he is opposed to 190 units and removal of a lane from East Avenue. He expressed concern about lower property values and lower income residents as well as safety because of students walking on the east side to school. He thought people are being dropped off and picked up there. Bond Mendez said she lives west of San Sevaine and she would like Mixed Use development, howver, she has a concern about the parking overflow from the San Sevaine Apartments —there is parking overflow and it is a management problem. She does not support parking on East Avenue for safety reasons. She said only 3,200 square feet out of the total square footage is very little commercial. She said she is supportive overall. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing after seeing and hearing no further comment. He redirected to the Commission for comment. Commissioner Munoz said it is a difficult project and he thanked the applicant for their work over the years and meeting the challenges. He said he sees some issues with the parking that can be overcome with good management. He said the City has not ever done this before and it is challenging. He said he appreciated the comments from the residents. He said he is inclined to move forward in spite of reservations and we need a chance to learn. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Rarrcxo MAY 11, 2016 CucAn�ONGA Page 12 Commissioner Fletcher said he likes the design. He expressed concerns about the parking and too many units and item F (Zoning Map Amendment) has 2 policy issues that have nothing to do with this application that he would rather discuss that at a workshop. He said he would rather see the applicant go back and look for compromises and send the project back to DRC for the parking issue. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he shares the uncertainty. He said conceptually the project approach is the right one and said they did a great job on the design. He said he has heard enough that if conditions are structured appropriately we could move forward and he is not opposed to street parking as it is part of our evolution and we have seen it work elsewhere. He agreed Item F would be better addressed elsewhere -he asked if they could vote on Item F separately. Steven Flower said we have a number of Development Code changes included as Item F that have been initiated in the draft resolution but is up to the Commission to make a recommendation to Council. If the Commission wants to support the one Development Code change that supports this development but not the other two you could make a mixed recommendation, but we would have to explain why in a revised resolution. He said we would also need to change the resolution to reflect the removal of those items. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he would be comfortable with that separation and if he could base a motion upon that. He asked that we schedule a future discussion about parking requirements for this type of development that will help us make a recommendation on these projects so that we set a consistent guide for future applicants. Chairman Wimberly agreed and concurred in that the project looks great but we have uncovered policy issues that need discussion elsewhere. He said we should not penalize the applicant for this. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly to recommend approval of the Code changes and Zoning Map Amendment as presented and to approve the other resolutions for the rest of the project as stated in the staff report. The motion failed 2 in favor 2 against (Fletcher and Oaxaca voted no, Macias was absent). Vice Chairman Oaxaca suggested a new motion to remove portions of Item F — remove the two footnotes. He said he would like to provide the applicants a complete picture as to what they can expect as far as expectations and give us an opportunity to have discussion regarding these new types of development with uniform guidelines. Donald Granger, Senior Planner said the goal could be accomplished by redacting the two offending footnotes because they do not apply to this project because it is over 5 acres in HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 �'UCAMONOA Page 13 size. Steven Flower said we should bring back a new resolution for the Development Code but it would add two weeks to the applicant's timeline and we want the Council to see this action clearly. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he did not want to delay the applicant and therefore withdrew the motion. Mr. Flower suggested that because on Page 152 of the agenda packet 1) a and b do not strictly apply to this project, the resolution could be amended. He suggested a recess. Chairman Wimberly announced a 5 minute recess at 9:55p.m. The Commission reconvened at 10:07pm with the same members present (Macias absent). Mr. Flower read into the record that Section 6 of Resolution No. 16-24 shall be as follows: 6. The Commission does not recommend that the City Council approve the following aspects of the Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132 because these matters are not necessary for the proposed development of the project site and require further study(s) and consideration: a. Amend Development Code Table 17.36.020-2 to add a footnote stating that `on project sites of 5 acres (net) or less, two or more housing types/product, such as detached and attached SFR; SFR and MFR, combinations of SFR, townhomes, condominiums, and apartments; etc., shall satisfy the requirement for providing a combination of two or more uses." b. Amend Development Code Table 17.36.020-2 to add a footnote stating that "subject to Planning Commission Review and Approval, Transit Oriented Developments within % mile of a transit stop are exempt from meeting the minimum two land use requirement. " Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to recommend approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2014-01132 and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-01131 to be forwarded along with the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts to the City Council for final action with a revision as noted in the record. Specifically, the Commission revised Resolution 16-24 (page E-K 152 of the agenda packet) for the Development Code Amendment to remove Planning Department Conditions 1) a and b that added footnotes to Table 17.36.020-2 because these items do not apply to this project and were matters of policy the Commission wished to discuss at a later time. The Commission also adopted the resolutions of approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19945, Development Review DRC2014-01130, Minor Exception DRC2016-00169, Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-01134 and Uniform Sign Program DRC2015-00318. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 14 IV. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION L. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None M. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None V. ADJOURNMENT . --- 10:13 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 5, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 11, 2016 CucnMONGA Page 15 opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 25, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7:05 PM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER :::]I Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca A Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney; Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Mike Smith, Senior Planner, Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, Jerry Dyer, Principal Civil Engineer 11 II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission mayreceive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING RANCHO COMMISSION MINUTES CUCAMONGA MAY 25, 2016 Page 2 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. Bellen Mackenzie who lives in the La Ventana Community spoke regarding a KB Homes Community Meeting. She stated the residents want to see the community built out, but it looks desolate with machinery and trailers and broken down fencing. She is requesting KB to clean up the site as the common areas look bad and need beautification. Luana Hernandez residing at 6797 Hellman Avenue spoke regarding the Route 66 Historic Gas Station. She stated the Gas Station is now open Thursday, Friday, and Saturday from 10:00 a.m. — 12:00 p.m. and on Sunday 12:00 p.m. — 3:00 p.m. The museum sells items, such as keychains and books to help raise funds to build -the back garage bay area. There will be a Car Show on June 25, 2016 and they will be selling bricks as another fund raiser. III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated April 27, 2016 B. Consideration of minutes dated May 11, 2016 C. Consideration of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Fiscal Year 2016/17 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0 (Macias abstain from item B, Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Consent Calendar as presented. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19669 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING - A request to subdivide 9.6 acres of land into 6 parcels related to the construction of 6 industrial buildings totaling 171,322 square feet for a site located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Mayten Avenue in the Industrial Park (IP) Zoning District; APNs: 0229-012-53, 54, 70 and 71. Related Files: Design Review HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING A� COMMISSION MINUTES ,CUCAMONGA MAY 25, 2016 Page 3 DRC2015-00782 and Master Plan (Amendment) DRC2015-01018. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00782 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING - A request for site plan and architectural review of 6 industrial buildings totaling 171,322 square feet on 9.6 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Mayten Avenue in the Industrial Park (IP) Zoning District; APNs: 0229-012-53, 54, 70 and 71. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19669 and Master Plan (Amendment) DRC2015-01018. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-01018 - CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING - A request to modify the Rancho Cucamonga Corporate Park Master Plan (DR99-11) for 9.6 acres of land to change the project site layout and to eliminate the property line setbacks for two abutting buildings for a site located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard at Mayten Avenue in the Industrial Park (IP) Zoning District; APNs: 0229-012-53, 54, 70 and 71. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00782 and Tentative Tract Map SUBTPM19669. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and gave a brief PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Richard Dick, the property owner, thanked staff and said the new facilities will bring jobs and is a good use. He thanked staff for allowing the modification of building setbacks related to the abutting buildings 4 & 5. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and hearing none, closed the public hearing. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and the Resolutions ofApproval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19669, Design Review DRC2015-00782 and Master Plan Amendment DRC2015-01018. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00797 — RGA OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN - A proposal to construct an industrial building of 339,000 square feet on a parcel of 696,465 square feet (15.99 acres) in the General Industrial (GI) District located approximately 1,100 feet north of 6th Street and 395 feet north of the terminus of Santa Anita Avenue; APNs: 0229-271-24, 25, and 26. Staff has HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING RANCHO COMMISSION MINUTES CUCAMONGA MAY 25, 2016 Page 4 prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Mike Smith, Senior Planner, announced that a communication was received from CDFW and that staff is requesting a continuance to an unspecified date to allow time for staff and the applicant to address the concerns related to the biological analysis. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Macias, carried 4-0-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to continue the items to an unspecified date. H. DESIGN REVIEW MODIFICATION DRC2016-00182 - KB HOME - A review of the revised plotting and architecture for 25 single-family residences within a previously approved 76-lot subdivision of about 53 acres in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east side of East Avenue, about 150 feet north of the 210- Freeway - APNs: 0225-452-13 through -17, -19, 0225-465-01 through -03, -15, -16, -18, 0225-085-06 through -09, -11, -12, and 0225-062-02 through -08. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122, Variance DRC2009-00020, Tree Removal Permit DRC2009- 00224 and Design Review DRC2013-00743. On November 9, 2011 a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18122. California Environmental Quality Act Section 15162 (a) 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. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, gave the staff report and a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). In response to Chairman Wimberly she reported the remaining product is single -story. John Miles of KB Homes thanked staff, and said Ms. Cavasos was very helpful. He said the development will still offer the original 5 floorplans-they are not changing the program -they are merely adding 3 additional floorplans to offer buyers a total of 8 choices. He said the new plans are In compliance with the ESP. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Craig Artis, a La Ventana resident said he opposed changing the price point of neighborhood/estate lots ... He said the homes seem small and he disagrees with the market research that indicates a smaller home preference of buyers. He said Andalusia and Coral Sky are selling well and the best-selling model is 4,000 sq. ft. He asked to see HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING A- COMMISSION MINUTES CUCAMONGA MAY 25, 2016 Page 5 the research before the decision is made. Priya Induru, a resident of La Ventana said she was one of the first residents —she liked the large homes/exclusivity. She said she wants to see the stats and she is opposed to the modification and if approved wants a refund and will move elsewhere. Norma Deras, also a La Ventana resident said that she was told it would be 2-3 years before buildout and only a year later they want to change the homes. She said it is not in their best interest. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Mr. Miles to responded and affirmed that the existing plans will remain, 3 new plans are being added. He said the new plans will reflect about an $80, 000 reduction with the large plans in the mid-800k and smaller plans will be in the 700k range. He said he does not believe it will change the makeup of the community. The single -story homes will look larger from the front and will have a larger back yard. He noted that Staff was adamant that all design elements and features be transferred to the new floorplans for continuity with the existing. He said KB is concerned about making buyers happy. Each buyer signs disclosure that the product may change as the development goes in. He said the demand for single -story homes is much stronger than two-story homes. He said he would make copies of the market research available to the homeowners and staff. Commissioner Macias noted that the Design Review application meets the requirements, the other issues are outside of this review. He said that even if the marketing analysis is provided, it will not change anything. Commissioner Fletcher confirmed that out of 25 houses yet to be built, about 8- or 113 of the total remaining will be of the 2,400 square foot size. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz concurred with Commissioner Macias and accepted the developer's responses. Commissioner Macias noted that the applicant can apply for these changes, it is legal to do so. Commissioner Fletcher said that although there is a concern of the residents, he believes it will be compatible; there will be no change in density or lot size and 2,400-3,115 square foot product will provide a better mix and should not diminish the neighborhood or value. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING RANCHOCOMMISSION MINUTES CUCAMONGA MAY 25, 2016 Page 6 K. He said the designs are nice and appropriate. Chairman Wimberly concurred and said the elevations of the new plans will provide lot coverage and a good visual from the street. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review Modification DRC2015-00182. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00811 - DCI INVESTMENTS - A request to develop 12 single- family homes on 4.36 acres of land in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located on the north side of Wilson Avenue, west of Etiwanda Avenue, at the southwest corner of Altura Drive and Tejas Court; APN: 1087-261-12. Related File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18960. 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 as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers infill development. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) Rich Scott of DCI Investments said it will be a first class architectural product and that he spent much time with staff. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing none, closed the public hearing. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-0-1 (Oaxaca absent) to adopt the Resolution approving Design Review DRC2015-00811. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Wimberly mentioned the Library will be having Star Wars Read this weekend. HISTORIC PRESERVATION in COMMISSION AND PLANNING RANOHo COMMISSION MINUTES CUCAMONCA MAY 25, 2016 Page 7 Commissioner Fletcher asked staff about the historic gas station sign location. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, gave an update re: the easement issue with Lamar Signs. Lamar is working with the Route 66 Gas Station to find a new location. She said the proposed location will cause the sign to hang over the right of way but should not affect anything. They will present this to Lamar Signs to negotiate -staff is hopeful fora resolution. IF- VI. ADJOURNMENT 11 8:04 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 19, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING R cHo COMMISSION MINUTES GucnMorrcn MAY 25, 2016 Page 8 distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF RANCHO uCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 8, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7:03 PM Roll Call CALL TO ORDER 11 Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher A Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary 11. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing anyissue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CRANCHr°cn JUNE 8, 2016 Page 2 III . CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated May 25, 2016 Moved by Munoz, seconded by Macias, carried 3-0-1-1 (Oaxaca abstain, Fletcher absent) V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2016-00042 — SUNNY'S PERFECTION - A request to allow for a massage establishment within a 2,055 square foot unit in an existing shopping center located within the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Lemon Avenue; APN: 0201-272-06. The project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 as a Class 1 exemption (Existing Facilities) for the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines. Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and a brief PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). She said one person called with some questions regarding the regulations and conditions. Ms. Nakamura also explained revocation could commence if the business is not operated in a lawful manner. The caller was satisfied with her answers. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Mr. Dong said he will try to follow the business laws and he is mindful of the preserving the reputation of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Moved by Macias, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher absent) V. ADJOURNMENT 7.13 PM THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL IMMEDITATELY ADJOURN TO THE RAINS ROOM TO DISCUSS PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00361-LVD TERRA VISTA, LLC 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 2, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO J U N E 812016 CUCAMONGA Page 3 the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). pHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ftCHO JUNE 8, 2016 Page 4 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 8, 2016 - 7:00 PM* Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center ***RAINS ROOM*** 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California E- . CALL TO ORDER 7.20 PM Roll Call Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher A Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Tabe van der Zwaag; Associate Planner, Donald Granger, Senior Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary I. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO J U N E 8, 2016 AMONGA Page 2 ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00361 - LVD TERRA VISTA, LLC -A request for conceptual site plan and architectural review of a 214-unit, multi -family residential development on 11.8 acres of land within the Medium High (MH) zoning district of the Terra Vista Community Plan located at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Church Street; APN: 1077-422-97. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, briefly outlined the purpose of the workshop and gave a brief PowerPoint presentation and staff report (copy on file). He introduced the applicant's team. Adam Collier, Project Manager, Jonathon Siemsen, Sr. Project Manager Van Daele Homes, Michael Van Daele, President Van Daele Homes, and Scott Adams of Bassenian Lagoni, Architects Michael Van Daele said the project is innovative, unique and affordable and benefits the City bringing modern tasteful modern architecture in the range of 1400-1600 square foot housing product. He said some units have an elevator option and the front units function as detached homes. Commissioner Comments: Commissioner Munoz asked about the units fronting the street on the east side of the project and if they would have walkup stairs. Mr. Van Daele said they are not designed to be a "Brownstone" walkup. Scott Adams (Architect) and Jonathan Siesman talked about the amenities, spaces provided to engage the community, gathering areas, ADA compliance, gated areas that are resident accessible using key fobs, pedestrian connectivity, paseos and the fact that 2-car garages are provided for each unit. Mr. Van Daele reported that with Mr. Lewis' permission, he conducted a focus group of residents from the Santa Barbara development to help determine what the residents prefer in the way of amenities. Commissioner Munoz pointed out that there are no amenities near the Terra Vista side (southerly) portion of the site. Mr. Van Daele said there are some pockets of space that are not planned yet. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES Rn�vcHo J U N E 8, 2016 G�cnMorrI Page 3 Mr. Collier said they are aware of the reductions needed i.e. building separations, parking, open space with respect to balcony/patios and setbacks. He noted the private open space calculation does not include the roof deck option. Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked with respect to the focus group if the concept of open space was discussed and was the opinion that there is a value added with that. Mr. Van Daele said the group focused more on community amenities. He said this project is more reflective of another complex already built, the discussion of roof decks did not come up. Mr. Collier reviewed the parking noting 502 spaces are provided and 574 are required. He said they may eliminate the optional bedroom space in Unit 3 — which gives a 19 space reduction; eliminate the small office of Unit 2 —which gives another 18 space reduction. He said if we allow 27 spaces on Terra Vista Parkway it would be parallel parking; the total Minor Exception request is for 35 spaces — which would be a 7% overall reduction from the number of spaces required. Mr. Van Daele said the total need is based upon the most optional rooms being selected for example, most bungalow buyers choose the 2 bedroom option rather than 3 bedroom unit. Mr. Siemsen said the project is actually overparked based on the floorplan count without any options. He said they have conducted preliminary traffic counts and the LOS remains same even when fully developed with another new school. Mr. Adams said they looked at the parking ratio in Terra Vista. They said a 2.5:1 resident to guest ratio is most common with many municipalities. Chairman Wimberly said with respect to their trying to attract a new demographic; he said the flow of guests on weekends can be very high. Mr. Van Daels said they surveyed all their homeowners and they rarely hear anything negative about the parking provided. Mr. Adams said the buyer profile is younger or move down buyers; the emphasis is not on cars, i.e.-extra bedrooms often become a nursery. They are not dealing with teenage drivers, that may also include boats, jet skis etc... Mr. Van Daele said there will be an HOA with CCR's and enforcement. He said the garages must be kept clear to park 2 cars and they would have a parking management plan that would allow periodic inspections of the garages. Commissioner Macias said he had a concern about the parking but he generally agrees PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES Rvcxo J U N E 8, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 with the analysis. He said he likes the layout, it is unique and this is good work. Vice Chairman Oaxaca agreed and said he thought the developer has addressed the parking concern. He said the street parking at Santa Barbara has not affected traffic much. He noted that they looked at who their market is; not teenagers with a million cars, i.e. young families, newlyweds, and singles. He said the reduction requests are the reality of this type of product. He said he likes the treatment along Terra Vista and the interaction along the street and sidewalk. He said he would like to see more in terms of recreational amenities in different areas of the site - perhaps smaller ones interspersed around project site. Commissioner Munoz said he did not have much to add. He is satisfied with the parking proposal, he likes the design, it is new and fresh, and he supports the change in density. He said the City needs this type of housing. Chairman Wimberly said he did not have much to add: he concurs with the other Commissioners and said he is excited about the architecture. He said this project should spruce up the area- it is very different. He said his major concern was about the parking but he believes their plan may have put him more at ease. He said he looks forward to the plans coming forward for the Design Review Committee. Mr. Van Daele thanked Mr. van der Zwaag and Ms. Burnett for ideas, advice and their help. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said that staff asked for something different and contemporary but to also be respectful of the neighborhood and also add an edge in terms of design. She said this is friendly product that lives well. She said the gathering spaces vs larger patios can work. She said she investigated the affordability of rooftop decks and it is more reasonable than she first believed. It was noted that the top deck option might result in high sales. I V. ADJOURNMENT 8:12 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 2, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO . J U N E 8, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 5 If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." . Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,486 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CitvofRC.us IAA THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 22, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7.03 PM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER 11 Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Brian Sadona, Associate Engineer, Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, Flavio Nunez, Management Analyst ll; Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Mike Smith, Senior Planner II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS 11 This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CRANCHO JUNE 229 2016 Page 2 None None A. 1.1 III. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS IV. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION Consideration of Regular Meeting minutes dated June 8, 2016 Consideration of Adjourned Meeting (Workshop) minutes dated June 8, 2016 The Consent Calendar was adopted. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. TIME EXTENSION DRC2016-00356 - GOLDEN MEADOWLAND, LLC. AND RANCH HAVEN, LLC. - A request for a time extension for previously approved Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16072) to subdivide 150.79 acres into 359 lots in the Low (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Residential District, with an average density of 2.3 dwelling units per acre for the entire project, in the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located at northeast corner of Wilson Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue. APNs: 1087-081-12, and 19 through 24. Related Files: Development Agreement DRC2002-00156, Annexation DRC2002-00865, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00461. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the project covered by a prior Environmental Impact Report certified by the City Council on June 16, 2004 by Resolution 04-204 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner gave the staff report and brief PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) John Schafer representing the applicant had nothing to add. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment closed HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA CRni4,oNcn JUNE 22, 2016 Page 3 the public hearing. Moved by Macias, seconded by Munoz, carried 5-0 to approve the Time Extension as requested. VI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION D. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None E. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None VII. ADJOURNMENT 7:12 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 16, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANGHo . J U N E 22, 2016 CUCAMONGA, Page 4 speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA T WORKSHOP MINUTES OF RANCHO C',,�UCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 22, 2016 - 4:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center 'COUNCIL CHAMBERS*'"* 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 4:05 PM Roll Call Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, Flavio Nunez, Management Analyst ll; Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist Il; Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, Dat Tran, Assistant Planner, Kimberly Rhoads, Assistant Planner, Francie Palmer, Communications Manager, Lori Sassoon, DCM/Administrative Services; Bill Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director, Councilmember Williams; Tasha Hunter, Engineering Technician; Michael Toy, Info. Services Specialist 1, Carlo Cambare, Engineering Technician; Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer 11 II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO J U N E 22, 2016 CucnMortcn Page 2 which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None 11 III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. A TRAINING WORKSHOP REGARDING STRATEGIES USED TOWARDS THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUCCESSFUL MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH RESPECT TO DESIGN, PARKING, TRAFFIC AND MARKET CONDITIONS. The workshop was opened by Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, with a brief summary of the recent Development Code revisions and future revisions under construction as the concepts and standards for Mixed Use Development are incorporated into the City's planning documents. Joseph Janczyk gave a PowerPoint presentation, (copy on file) re: supporting economic data that makes Mixed Use development an attainable and sustainable reality for Rancho Cucamonga and lends support to the idea that this type of development can benefit the City by providing another vehicle towards economic sustainability for future generations. Commissioner Fletcher asked Mr. Janczyk how to correlate job growth vs housing demand. Mr. Janczyk said for every 100 new jobs, a demand for about 65 — 70 new homes whether it be single-family homes or apartments is generated. Neal Payton gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) on how Mixed Use Development feels and the experience of it and why it matters. He talked about the characteristics of high performing "walkups"and what factors make these developments most successful: sociability, access and density. Commissioner Macias asked about the use of high density development. He said Rancho Cucamonga does not have the densities or critical mass to support this. He suggested we look at smart growth opportunities for communities that are less than a major urban core. He expressed concern that as we attempt urban communities we may end up with little "fortresses" everywhere. He asked how a city blends smart growth within the existing infrastructure so we don't get this pattem of nodes. He asked if transportation is the key. Mr. Payton said that question leaves much to address. He said a multiway boulevard might be applicable here because we already have arterials but how to connect to the arterials might be more subtle. He said it may be a way to front boulevard arterials that PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO J U N E 22, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 3 is "humane" Mr. Payton agreed it is a good point Commissioner Fletcher said it is a good point of 619 walkups existing in 30 of the largest communities of U.S. He thought they were only built in very dense areas. Mr. Payton disagreed and said one example is found in Claremont. He clarified that it does not mean they are in dense places, but they are in metropolitan areas. He said there are several in our area. He said Claremont is a good example of low density walkable urbanism. Commissioner Fletcher said he likes the concept but expressed concern about having little pockets everywhere because of how spread out our city is. Mr. Payton said we need to think of working for generations after you -development slowly fills in and should not worry us. He suggested we think of stones in a pond -the ripple spreads and grows and they eventually meet each other. He said every suburban jurisdiction has this challenge. If one developer is successful, other developers will see that and then it takes off. Jeffrey Tumlin gave a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He said Commissioner Macias asked the right question. It is hard work for a community like ours, built for the automobile to transition to a hybrid place. He said that we know most of Rancho Cucamonga is not walkable and will not be changing. He said we should aim towards linking them. We have already made some progress noting that Terra Vista and then Victoria Gardens are 1" and 2nd attempts -link the good places that you have. He said rethinking our approach to transportation can help take this place and respond to market preferences to build and respond to future needs while maintaining the economy. We have to manage for the current population and plan for the future. He said a major problem is the belief that adding another lane of highway will solve the congestion problem because it changes the land value further down the road and encourages sprawl and additional development down the road only to exacerbate the congestion. He said it is a problem of linear thinking vs system thinking. Commissioner Macias noted that after retiring from a career of being a transportation planner he said he has seen many presentations on the subject and this one of the best he has seen. Commissioner Fletcher said he was encouraged by the idea of the abundance ofjobs in Rancho. He said he always believed that if we created more jobs in Rancho, people would be able to live in the city they work in that it would solve many of these transportation problems. He said he has heard we have to keep growing to be sustainable (economically) but development fees will not help 40 years in future. He asked for comment regarding building to pay bills vs maximizing retail space and PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO J U N E 22, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 increase revenue for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Mr. Janczyk said considering the expected economic growth and the favorable sector of incomes of people as that growth continues, and their desire for minimal commutes, and without new development, the City will benefit as their incomes grow, they will purchase homes, remodel them or the City could choose to develop more. It is a choice of the City to bring in high quality, high profile firms with high paying jobs- but the City then has a basis to make those choices. Mr. Tumlin said there is a declining ratio of incoming tax dollars vs infrastructure costs. He said a big component is the high cost of streets. He suggested it can be solved by reducing infrastructure/streets with smart design i.e. right sizing, to increase the land value per unit of infrastructure may increase density or quality. He said there is an optimum range of density -once development is above 12 units per acre; walkable retail becomes possible and there is enough market there to support stores within walking distance and also may justify running transit that has reasonable frequency. He said higher density at 35 units -per acre is more magical with walkability with transit and still makes driving possible. He said higher than that creates a detriment if people are still driving. About 12-50 units per acre with transit is great. He said to plan for that quality of development first in nodes at existing or future major transit stops then connect those nodes along major corridors. He said it creates a lasting economic value for single- family neighborhoods as well because homes are then located in a walkable area and also have access to transit (favorable to milllenials). Mr. Payton said along Foothill Boulevard there is about 105 acres of raw land —1 FAR is 4.5 million square feet of "stufr' (development). He said with a correct code there would be pockets of suburban/urbanism, but over 20 years, the older strip malls will see the favorable change in the value of the land and they will jump in. We have enough land that could have a big impact along that corridor. He said another big advantage for Rancho is that we have deep parcels as well. Commissioner Macias said we need to rethink the plan with different metrics from years before. Sacramento has sucked local communities dry of resources. He referred to his own grown children: although they are gone and out of the house, they may eventually return to Rancho. They value/want both lifestyles: urban and walkable vs driving — they enjoy walking and they like having the choice to drive. He said he is now in retirement and enjoys walking but walking to the market can be inconvenient because of street crossings and other factors discussed in the presentation. Mr. Payton said that if we can offer the choice it makes this a richer place and attracts a broader segment of the population. He said in San Bernardino County, the list of walkup places include Redlands, downtown San Bernardino, Monrovia, and downtown Pomona — they all have in common a tighter grid, planned since World War 1I, which allows them PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO JUNE 22, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 5 to infill. He said our empty parcels are best hope. Commissioner Macias said there is a lot to be said about aesthetics. He said he personally chooses to dine at Claremont Village because it is aesthetically pleasing; it's a place to go -people gravitate there. Mr. Payton pointed out that the restaurants like to be there as well, it is mutually reinforcing -it is all about the experience. Mr. Tumlin said Victoria Gardens is trying to imitate this. The downside is that it is a walkable village surrounded by a moat of parking; most people have to drive to get there. He said the challenge is how to connect Victoria Gardens to Foothill Boulevard (transit) and other pieces that you are working on — realize that it is incremental change and it will change slowly. He said it is important to make sure as you contemplate new development to be sure it contributes positively to those already here. Trade a streamline approval process for development impact fees —require a baseline of beauty and contribution to future economics of the City and to better it. Commissioner Macias said we need to do a better job teaching people that transportation costs money. Freeways are not free; transportation and parking are costly. Mr. Tumlin said we use the communist method -we all pay whether we use them or not. Those people not using the roads are paying for all the infrastructure and it encourages more motorists. He said providing unlimited mobility is creating our mobility problem - there is no free lunch; it is more efficient for the user to pay. Ms. Burnett said we are looking at next phase of Mixed Use development. She asked for next step goals/suggestions for the City along Foothill Boulevard. Mr. Payton said we should look at the maximum block size; see that streets align; calculate on street intersection density to support walkability (about 150 per square mile) — with the grid all else is possible. Mr. Tumlin said do not start with regulations; start with vision and desired outcomes; describe the qualities of what you like in buildings/then the streets/then the feel of place and then consider your goals of health, levels of traffic then develop the regulations based on that. Develop the design and management regulations in order to achieve the desired outcome. He said do not not be afraid to throw out all of your old regulations - they were designed to solve a different set of problems a long time ago; but they are not what you need to solve current problems or to achieve our current aspirations. Focus the regulations on the positive. Point developers and landowners toward what you want and not on your fears. 41 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO JUNE 22, 2016 CUaAM°NCA Page 6 Commissioner Fletcher noted a prior comment re: protecting the existing communities and to not allow the new development to have an overflow effect on them -he said he believes we can do both (preserve the existing and have new mixed use development). Mr. Tumlin said we should ask our residents how development can be used to make our neighborhoods better. Enter into a compact with developers to get what you want. Mr. Payton noted that street trees are really important, home values with street trees get a premium. Mr. Tumlin said there is an increase in walking rates when shade is provided. IV. ADJOURNMENT The Commission adjourned at 6:30 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 16, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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." 91 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES GMIOHO JUNE 16, 2016 nMorrcn Page 7 Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,486 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CitvofRC.us f4, THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA T THE MINUTES OF R NCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION p THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 13$ 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 7 p.m. Roll Call Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director; Nicholas Ghirelli, Assistant City Attorney, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer; and Rebecca Fuller, Administrative Secretary. II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS 11 This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None r-. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO J U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of Regular Meeting Minutes dated June 22, 2013 B. Consideration of Adjourned Meeting/Workshop Minutes dated June 22, 2013 The Consent Calendar was adopted. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 5-0. IV. SCHEDULED MATTERS/PLANNING COMMISSION C. SELECTION OF PLANNING COMMISSION OFFICERS Vice Chairman Oaxaca will serve as Chairman and Commissioner Macias will serve as Vice Chairman for Planning Commission. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Munoz, carried 5-0. D. SELECTION OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS Chairman Wimberly and Commissioner Macias will serve on Design Review Committee. Moved by Chairman Wimberly, seconded by Commissioner Munoz, carried 5-0. Commissioner Munoz will serve as First Alternate on the Design Review Committee. Moved by Commissioner Fletcher, seconded by Vice Chairman Oaxaca, carried 5-0. E. SELECTION OF TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS (COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVES) Vice Chairman Oaxaca and Commissioner Fletcher will serve on the Trails Advisory Committee. Moved by Chairman Wimberly, seconded by Commissioner Munoz, carried 5-0. Chairman Wimberly will serve as First Alternate on the Trails Advisory Committee. Moved by Chairman Wimberly, seconded by Commissioner Munoz, carried 5-0. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION " inHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO J U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONCA Page 3 F. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None G. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None VI. ADJOURNMENT 7: 08 p.m. THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL IMMEDIATELY ADJOURN TO THE RAINS ROOM TO DISCUSS PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00428 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES. 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 7, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA RANCHO J U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONM Page 4 All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office^and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 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. •. T T THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WORKSHOP MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 133 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center ***RAINS ROOM*** 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:14 p.m. Roll Call Chairman Wimberly X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Macias X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director; Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Dat Tran, Assistant Planner; Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer; and Rebecca Fuller, Administrative Secretary. 11 II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP/MINUTES RANCHO JULY 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00428 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATE — A request for a Planning Commission Workshop to review a proposed mixed use development of 207 residential units, including 18 live/work units, 17,800 square feet of commercial space (5,300 retail and 12,500 live/work), and 11,800 square feet of office space, on 5.7 acres of land in the Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD), located at the southwest corner of Haven Avenue 26th Street — APN: 0209-131-01. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, briefly outlined the purpose of the workshop and gave a brief PowerPoint presentation and staff report (copy on file). He introduced the applicant's team. The Applicants representing the project were Chuck and Suzanne Buquet with Charles Joseph Associates, Serafin Maranan, Jennifer Easton, Paul Hofer with Architects Orange; and Joe Lutz and Dean Nucich with Urban Offerings. Chuck Buquet said the project is innovative, unique and will bring a blend of uses for residents; a work place and a place to live in a centralized area for Haven Avenue and will create new opportunities. Serafin Maranan gave a brief presentation. Commissioner Fletcher asked for clarification on the layers of the work/live area and the businesses. Mr. Maranan explained the project is a 5-story building that contains 207 residential units (consisting of 18 one -bedroom live/work units, 107 one -bedroom, units, and 82 two -bedroom units) that occupy portions of the first, second and third floors and the entire fourth and fifth floors. The commercial (5,300 square feet) and live/work (12,500 square feet) components are located on the ground floor, within the eastern half of the site, and generally along Haven Avenue and 26th Street. A portion of the third floor adjacent to Haven Avenue and 26th Street contains 11,800 square feet of office. 2,800 square feet of this office area is dedicated to a co -working office area for on -site residents. Parking will be located at ground level below the residential units -a majority of the parking will be located in the western quarter of the property. Mr. Buquet commented that this layout and design is for all types of generations and life styles. Dean Nucich commented they were excited to be part of this mixed use project in the City, and loves seeing activity in spaces which will be utilized the entire time and not PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP/MINUTES Ncxo J U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 3 just the typical 9 to 5. This area will be a central meeting place for the community. Commissioner Fletcher asked for clarification for the live/work units. Will there be one tenant for both office space and living space or will it be single tenants for each unit. Mr. Buquet explained that there will be many different combinations of live/work spaces. There will be separate tenants that may have an adjoining door to their business; and residents may have an office space to be able to use; the leases will be flexible on the tenants needs. Commissioner Fletcher asked if there was going to be designated office suites for tenants. Mr. Buquet commented that there was going to be a designated office use, strictly to be used by the residents living in the facility. If they are working out of their homes this will give them an area to utilize for their businesses rather than their homes. Commissioner Fletcher asked if this is an open area and or a suite. Mr. Buquet explained there will be an open area on the 3rd floor for this use; a shared tenant office usage. Dean Nucich explained that the shared office area for tenants will have shared printers, shared cafe and tables to encourage co -working. A lot of research in what amenities tenants want and the age ranges for this research is from 25 to 40 who are entrepreneurs that do not want to sit in their houses or apartments and would like to be around others and possibly share ideas. This area will have polished concrete floors which would be more of a loft /coffee environment. Chairman Wimberly commented that the location will be a hot spot location for someone that doesn't want to be connected to their house, not be bored, and to have interaction with others. Mr. Nucich explained that the trend for these tenants/residents is they want to be a part of a community and have a sense of place to be able to interact and talk with others. Chairman Wimberly asked if the residents can set up a meeting in this area without having to rent out the space, what the process would be for this type of location, and if they would have a time frame at which they can use this office area. Mr. Nucich explained that it will depend on the uses and various models, where it is located. If the location becomes too popular, then a signup time sheet may be used. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP/MINUTES WNCHO J U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 Commissioner Fletcher asked what the average square footage is for the work areas. Mr. Maranan replied 700 - 750 square feet for an office and bedroom. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director asked Mr. Maranan to expand on the design, layout and plotting of the buildings and the uses. Example; a 2-story live/work unit, single unit, unit types. Mr. Maranan comprehensively described the different units/layers horizontally then vertically. Commissioner Munoz asked for more clarification of the office spaces along Haven Avenue, if it was traditional office space or an open work area. Mr. Buquet explained that this was not going to be the traditional type of work space - that this was a unique working area. Commissioner Fletcher asked if this was going to have a store front appearance. Mr. Buquet explained that it will be a store front area which but they will not be providing a class A or class B office building -this is a unique hybrid mix live/work, co -work, and retail. Commissioner Munoz asked if they are setting an area for the traditional office space around the Haven corridor or if that option will be eliminated altogether. Mr. Buquet explained that it would be dependent on the models that the Commission approves which would create the energy and the different atmosphere. He doesn't want to have vacant spots that are empty but an atmosphere of activity. Commissioner Fletcher asked if someone has a store front office/account/attorney which have many customers, what sound proofing measures are being considered. There can be noisy children which the tenants below/above may be trying to work. He also asked if a tenant from the first floor could have access to the second floor, what access would one have and need. He asked if there were garbage chutes or if one has to take their garage up and down the stairs. Mr. Maranan said they are designing for separate occupants from noisy to quiet sound conditions. He also stated that there are stairs for each unit and if there are different tenants for the levels then there would be a lockout for that area. There are stairs and elevators depending the area. He commented that there will be trash chutes and recycling chutes. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKS H 0 PIMINUTES P�NCHORJ U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 5 Commissioner Macias stated that the project was clever and agreed with the applicant that this is a unique project and he said he likes it. He said he is not concerned about the parking but would like to stress that anything that fronts Haven Avenue needs to be really an aesthetic brand of the concept. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he is not concerned with the parking issue; sometimes it is an issue but at this time his concern is decision making for the significant changes in the specific plan and zoning. He said he needs to understand the larger context and would like to gain more information and look at the long term. He indicated that more effort is needed to be made to better understand, and explain, the potential parking issues associated with mixed use projects. Ms. Burnett, asked the Commission for discussion and feedback regarding Haven Avenue to start the ground work for setting the Development Code changes, overlay changes, and the changes in terms of vision of Haven Avenue; amending the land use on Haven, and envision how that looks, where it belongs, and if we use separations of existing buildings around existing transit and/or areas categorized for transit. She said an example to look at is the BRT and start thinking about the possibilities. Where we set the Code potentially activates where people and businesses belong. During the process for a later date will be discussing the Code changes/the general changes. Mr. Buquet said the residential use is an eye popping area that will change the view/ it is the right type of mixed use to establish the bar. Vice Chairman Oaxaca commented that they want to look at mixed use in the project and understand and look at other locations. He said he wants to become familiar with the short side and long side of development along Haven Avenue. Commissioner Munoz said the architectural plans and amenities are looking good, the only concern is the change in the Development Code and the parking changes. Commissioner Munoz expressed concern regarding the parking because they had received feedback from the City Council about their approval of the mixed use project at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. Mr. Buquet said he understands the Planning Commissioners concerns. He believes the current parking concerns will not be the same for this location and they will be getting their direction from staff and will be adhering to all comments and new regulations. He also stated that the parking will be assigned parking for the residents that will be located there. Ms. Burnett indicated staff will begin researching and developing parking requirements for mixed use projects and include the Planning Commission and City Council in evaluating the requirements in joint workshops so that everyone is clear on the technical issues. Staff has already started the changes for the Development Code PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP/MINUTES RANCHO J U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 6 standards so the changes are implemented before the project comes back to the Commission. She said Staff has internally started working with consultants to have the current and new standards in place. Commissioner Fletcher expressed that he was glad to hear that there will be more workshops on the changes would appreciate joint workshops with the Council for vision changes and Development Code changes so that the Commissioners and City Council share ideas and so they can hear each other's comments. He commented this area was designed to attract major companies and the vision is good for the residents. He said he likes the project and believes that this location is a true mixed use facility and offers a lot of amenities which younger workers will appreciate, work in and live close by. This will attract the major companies, will bring in more revenue and more jobs. He said he likes the design/upscale 5-story building on Haven Avenue. While recognizing the intent and nature of the project, he wants Staff to work towards ensuring that the parking issues are resolved and any conflicts on neighboring properties minimized. Ms. Burnett stated that the City Engineer is working with staff from the comments of the Mixed Use Training Workshop held in June. The City Engineer will look at the no change zones and would be involved in the implementation of strategy for the adjacent residents, create parking districts, permit parking districts, and have parking permits. Chairman Wimberly commented that this project is out of the box, likes the project, and liked the presentation. He concurred with fellow Commissioners the need to know the standards and the Development Code updates so they know what to approve. Commissioner Fletcher asked with respect to parking if the developer's operators have experience with and what level and what density, economics and experience do they need to consider building underground parking and parking garages. He said he needs to know what the vision of the City is so the Commission can make the proper decisions. Chuck Buquet suggested we talk to Jeff Tumlin, one of the presenters that was at the previous workshop as he is extremely knowledgeable. Ms. Burnett said staff is researching these issues and thresholds. Mike Smith, Senior Planner stated that many developments that are now mixed use have a parking issue. He suggested attending other mixed use workshops so they understand what the commission wants and the standards. He said we will pay attention to how other projects are going so everyone understands for the future. Staff is aware of the concerns. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKS HOP/M/MUTES RAlYCHO J U LY 13, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 7 Next Step(s): Initial submittal of applications for General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, and Development Review. Final review and action will be by the City Council (due to the General Plan and Zoning Map amendments). Staff will begin researching and developing parking requirements for mixed use projects and include the Planning Commission and City Council in evaluating those requirements in joint workshops. 11 IV. ADJOURNMENT 8: 44 p.m. 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on July 7, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on.the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." . Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES g�,cHo JUNE 167 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 8 All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. ' Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,486 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CitvofRC.us THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 10, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias X Munoz X Wimberly X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney; Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Jennifer Yoshida Office Specialist l; Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission orthe Planning Commission from addressing anyissue not previously included on the,Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OUCANCHO AUGUST 10, 2016 Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of regular meeting minutes dated July 13, 2016. B. Consideration of adjourned meeting/workshop minutes dated July 13, 2016. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0, to approve the Consent Calendar. 11 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-01190 — FIEDLER GROUP FOR RALPHS FUEL CENTER - A proposal to modify previously approved Conditional Use Permit DRC2010- 00348 to allow the construction of an extension of 1,200 square feet to the existing overhead canopy, and installation of two (2) new fuel dispensers, at a gas station within an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan (TVCP) located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Base Line Road; APN: 1076-481-25. Related files: Minor Design Review DRC2015-01191, Conditional Use Permit DRC2010-00348, and Development Review DRC2010-00348D. On March 9, 2011 a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit DRC2010-00348. California Environmental Quality Act Section 15162 (a) 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. D. MINOR DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-01191 — FIEDLER GROUP FOR RALPHS FUEL CENTER - A proposal to construct an extension of 1,200 square feet to an existing overhead canopy, and install two (2) new fuel dispensers, to a gas station within an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District, Terra Vista Community Plan (TVCP) located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Base Line Road; APN: 1076- 481-25. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-01190, Conditional Use Permit DRC2010-00348, and Development Review DRC2010-00348D. On March 9, 2011 a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Development Review DRC2010-00348D. California Environmental Quality Act Section 15162 (a) provides HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 10, 2016 C CAMONGA Page 3 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. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report and Powerpoint presentation. She noted two proposed amended conditions placed before the Commissioners for their consideration (copy on file): delete the requirement for automatic fire sprinklers and also delete and reword #2: to read "Due to the condition to restripe the east leg of the intersection of Valencia Avenue at Haven Avenue, loops on the east leg shall be reinstalled per the City's latest project plans and specifications. The work shall include but is not limited to, Type D loops at the limit line, Type E loops elsewhere. Type D and Type E loops on separate detector channels, and new detector lead-in cables and detector cards for each added detector channel. " Commissioner Wimberly asked if the modifications to the site will improve circulation. Ms. Cavazos said breaking up the linear planter and adding about 20 directional signs will improve circulation during peak hours. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the arrows are between the pumps and if they are directional. Ms. Cavazos reported that all the directional arrows will be painted on the pavement t improve circulation to and from the pumps. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Ken Barton of the Fiedler Group representing the applicants said they accept the amended conditions. He noted they are also restriping on Valencia to improve the stacking problem. Commissioner Fletcher informed Mr. Barton of needed improvements at the pumps such as replacing worn out key pads, lack of receipt paper and pump trigger issues and said the location is great but service at Costco is better. Mr. Barton indicated these concerns are not part of the project but he would let corporate know. He said the problem with the pump trigger is due to the prior customer "topping off'. Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolutions approving Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-01190 and Minor Design Review DRC2015-01191 with the amended conditions. E. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2016-00616 —CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend Titles 5, 9 and 17 of the Municipal Code to amend regulations regarding PAUGUHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RArrcHo ST 10, 2016 C°�UCAMONGA Page 4 new and existing massage establishments. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA section 15601.b.3. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and Powerpoint presentation. Commissioner Wimberly asked for clarification regarding the chain of authority with respect to the Titles 5 and 9 portions of the application. Mr. Perez explained that before the use was A CUP which runs with the land and now the permit is being removed from running with the land and will run with the business operation which gives more authority for the City to revoke the permit if the business is not complying. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said the review prior to issuance of the permit will be at staff level. The City will no longer regulate it as a land use and it will not be under Commission review, the City now will regulate it as a business. He said it will be the same type of review and but regulated by another arm of the City. Commissioner Wimberly said it seems the Commission is being by-passed and the Commission has been removed from the process. He said the process also seems a little muddled for Doctors to add the use to their practice. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the owner can appeal if his permit is revoked and if a complaint comes in on a business, who would handle that. Mr. Flower said there will still be regulated as a land use but the regulation will be more specific to the operator than the land use. He said a revocation is appealable to the City Manager. The permit review and decision to issue or not to issue a permit is made in the Planning Department, and the operator's expertise and background are reviewed. if the decision is appealed it goes to the City Manager or his designee and if they don't like the decision, they can file a lawsuit. He said other types of licenses and permits issued by the City that also follow this path. He said the Planning Director will handle the complaints on these business operations. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing and hearing and seeing no comment, closed the public hearing. He mentioned that there are specific conditions listed that would trigger suspension/revocation. He asked how the conditions will be tracked and if there will there be regular checks and if the conditions can be enforced. Mr. Perez said there is a massage task force in place that conducts inspections to ensure compliance and would also work with other agencies if operators are working outside of good business standards. He said this new process is a work in progress. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MONGA AUGUST 10, 2016 Page 5 Mr. Flower said there is a provision in the new Title 5 found on page 22 of the agenda packet (Section 5.18.170) that provides for inspections. He noted that the State still certifies these individuals -and they can't practice without the certification. He said there is another level of review in that we can do a cross check with the State if we believe someone does not have the proper background. He said there is no feasible means to make sure all are up to date and current at all times but if complaints come in then we can start looking at other things that we might not look at in the initial application. He said the regular inspections gives us a chance to see the red flags. Commissioner Fletcher said the State conducts a background check. Mr. Flower said we confirm with the State if needed. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Municipal Code Amendment DRC2016-00616 by the City Council. F. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2016-00563 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A supplement to Development Code Update DRC2010-00571 amending Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to revise development standards for the Mixed Use (MU) District by removing maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirements. The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for this project on October 21, 2015. 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. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner gave the staff report and Powerpoint presentation. Commissioner Fletcher asked what was the original intent and purpose to establish FAR. Mr. Grahn said at the time it was to restrict the overall size of the development. He said we did not realize the full impact of the restriction and how it would affect the proposition of mixed use and marketability. In response to Commissioner Fletcher, he said the restriction affects parking, density, building height, landscape standards, setbacks etc. Chairman Oaxaca summarized by noting it does not fit for mixed use development. Mr. Grahn said this requirement would prevent the higher residential density and commercial component we are looking for along Foothill Boulevard. inHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 10, 2016 C,UCAMONGA Page 6 Commissioner Wimberly said it would essentially eliminate the residential component at a higher density. Commissioner Munoz asked how this will impact parking for mixed use development and if it will require less, the same or more parking. Mr. Grahn said will not require more parking. He said the parking requirement will still be tied to the number of bedrooms for the residential component and square footage for the commercial component. If an applicant comes in with more bedrooms per unit, then the parking calculation standard will trigger the need for more parking. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Macias, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2016-00563 by the City Council. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION G. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None H. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None VI. ADJOURNMENT 7:50 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 4, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RAtrcHo AUGUST 10, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 7 If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION "1D THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 24, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California Pledge of Allegiance 7.02 PM Roll Call I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias X Munoz X Wimberly X Fletcher A Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer, Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission mayreceive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to rive minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CRC N� AUGUST 24, 2016 Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HiSTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated August 10, 2016. B. VACATION OF A PORTION OF BASE LINE ROAD, LOCATED EAST OF AMETHYST STREET (V-232) — NAS ALTA LOMA, LLC — A request to vacate a portion of Base Line Road, located east of Amethyst Street — APN: 0202-161-10. Related file: DRC2008-00909 Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher absent) to adopt the Consent Calendar. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and(orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. Ali such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT DRC2016-00667 — 7418 ARCHIBALD, LLC - An amendment to Development Agreement DRC2014-00610 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and 7418 Archibald, LLC, for the purpose of providing a senior housing project in accordance with the Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SHOZD), including deviating from certain development standards, for the development of a 24,641 square foot, 60-unit, senior apartment complex on 2.25 acres of land located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road; APN: 0208-03-158 and 0208-031-59. The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for this project on June 3, 2015. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review of Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing none, he closed the public hearing. Moved by Macias, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher absent) to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Development Agreement Amendment DRC2016- 00667 by the City Council. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES C� N� AUGUST 24, 2016 Page 3 V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION - D. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Munoz reported that the League of California Cities is hard at work planning for the 2017 Planning Commissioners Academy to be held in Los Angeles at the Airport Marriott, March 1-3, 2017. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Chairman Macias said he will be absent for the meetings of October at a minimum for medical reasons. VI. ADJOURNMENT 7:13 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 18, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES R�ucHo AUGUST 24, 2016 �',,UCAMONGA Page 4 It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal tiled must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 7:00 PM Roll Call Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias A Munoz X Wimberly X Fletcher X It is noted for the record that Vice Chairman Macias' abserice is excused. Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, City Planner, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Albert Espinoza, Asst. City Engineer; Dominick Perez, Associate Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Mike Smith, Senior Planner 11 II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. 'State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 CUCAMONCA Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated August 24, 2016 B. Vacation of Portions of Center Avenue, located west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route (V-233) Moved by Munoz, second by Wimberly to adopt the Consent Calendar as presented, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) 11 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION -J The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. —A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue — APN: 1087-081-25. Per CEQA Section 15073.5.c, staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and with a public hearing will consider the project and amended mitigation measures. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Issues were resolved and mitigation measures were clarified and strengthened with respect to the questions received on the Biological Resource portion of the environmental assessment and the Cultural Resource Mitigation measures. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. John Schafer, Vice President of Richland Ventures, Inc, said he is looking forward to moving ahead with the project. Seeing and hearing no further comment from the public, Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing. Chairman Oaxaca noted that he appreciates the City's thorough approach to CEQA review and how the City works with the applicants to allow for development but also has many HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 MAMMA Page 3 acres in reserve as a biological resource to help find a balance. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to adopt the Resolution of Approval for the project and to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION D. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None E. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None 11 VI. ADJOURNMENT 7:15 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 22, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RnrrcHo SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 cUC =Ca Page 4 It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,662 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 26, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance TOO PM Roll Call Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias A Munoz X Wimberly X Fletcher X It was noted that Vice Chairman Macias is absent and it is excused for medical reasons. Additional Staff Present., Candyce Burnett, City Planner; Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Albert Espinoza, Asst. City Engineer; Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer; Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Mike Smith, Senior Planner; Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner; Jennifer Yoshida, Office Specialist I. II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 26 2016 C,1ONGA � Page 2 Luana Hernandez asked about the whereabouts of the Veteran Memorial Plaques at the old fire station. Chairman Oaxaca replied that staff will get back to her on that. III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated September 28, 2016 Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1(Macias absent) IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION —J The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00006 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to develop a 182-unit multi -family residential development (including 5 live -work units) on 4.78 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hermosa Avenue; APN: 1077-601-13 and 1077-601-14. Related Files: Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00007and Minor Exception DRC2016-00455. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2016-00007 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to remove 62 trees for the development of a 182-unit multi -family residential development (including 5 live -work units) on 4.78 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hermosa Avenue; APN: 1077-601-13 and 1077-601-14. Related Files: Design Review DRC2016-00006 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00455. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00455 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to reduce on -site parking by 25% for the development of a 182-unit multi -family residential development (including 5 live -work units) on 4.78 acres of land in the Mixed Use (MU) District, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Hermosa Avenue; APN: 1077-601-13 and 1077-601-14. Related Files: Design Review DRC2016-00006 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00007. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO OCTOBER 26, 2016 CUcnMONCA Page 3 Items B, C, and D were heard together. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He thanked the applicant's team for their cooperation and assistance. Commissioner Fletcher expressed concern regarding the parking for the live work units and whether those spaces are on site, behind a gate or dedicated in some way. Mr. Grahn said they are on site, not behind a gate and are not reserved for the residents - they are open parking spaces during the evening hours. He noted the applicant is preparing a parking monitoring program that includes restrictions such as not allowing residents to use their garage for storage instead of parking a car there. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the lower floor of the 5 live/work commercial units are conditioned only for commercial uses and if the gates will be open during the day and locked at night. Mr. Grahn said there is nothing currently in place to prevent someone from living in the lower floor area. Commissioner Fletcher questioned whether it is really a mixed use project as although there is opportunity to use it for commercial it is not really a commercial use -it has to be conditioned. He also asked where will clients of those units park. He asked what is the stacking area from the front gate to Foothill Boulevard and if it is adequate to prevent backup and overflow during rush hours. Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer, said based on the exhibit there is about 200-250 fee there is plenty of stacking on site and should not be a problem. Commissioner Fletcher said he is still concerned about changing the parking requirements and the high percentage (24%) of the requested parking reduction. He noted occasional complaints from residents with other developments that were developed under the old standards. He said the parking plan needs to work. He asked what additional measures would be in place for enforcement if problems and projections are off. He said he would feel better if the parking reduction was conditionally permitted: he felt 95 spaces is a lot. Mr. Grahn said if the parking reduction was more than 25%, then it would be a separate CUP application. He said the applicants looked at other projects; they have a different bedroom mix with more drivers and storage is allowed in garages. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said Condition # 3 is not the only way to respond to problems. He said if additional mitigation measures are needed, it can be brought back to the Planning Commission for review or modification. He said the trigger for such action is typically complaints, and often staff becomes aware of it and will bring it to the Commission's HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO OCTOBER 26, 2016 CUCAMONCA Page 4 attention. Chuck Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, 9581 Business Center Drive, stated he represents the applicants. He thanked staff noting it is a complicated project and new to the City. He said they listened to all that was said to them by staff and the Commission all along the way. He spoke of the additional review required for the parking. He said there are no flex spaces for this project, the spaces will only be used by others when those commercial uses are closed. He said the development contains primarily one bedroom units — hence fewer drivers/cars. He said there was no intent to cut corners, this will in fact have a mix of uses. He said the amenities offer a lifestyle choice, the owners make sure people do not use garages for storage, and there is an upscale design and use of materials. Jonathon Cornelius, Project Manager, said roughly 60% are 1 bedroom. He said they will own and manage the property, therefore, if enough parking is not provided, they lose tenants. He said they always have a parking management plan. He said with respect to the live/work units, the Planning Commission was clear about respecting the use for commercial -he said the lower floor is not really suitable for living space as it is only a big open box with a bathroom in the back. He said they would abide by the Mixed Use concept. He said the parking for the live/work units is 18 spaces. Commissioner Fletcher asked if the applicants would have a problem with having a condition for the ground floor to be commercial or office use only. Mr Corneilius said no, not a problem. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Dan Daniel stated he lives in the project area. He expressed concern about the height of the buildings, a lack of parking and overflow parking that is occurring from the adjacent Belagio project and perceived line of sight issues into neighboring properties. Mr. Buquet responded and said the -unit mix of Bellagio is family oriented, ours is not and there is a mechanism in place for follow up — He said the sky deck is an entertainment amenity -the focus is on their own courtyard, not neighboring properties. He said the parking according to the peer review exceeds what is needed. Jonathon Cornelius said the sky deck will feature views of the pool and mountains and the other units close to the perimeter of the development will block the view of neighbors. He said they do not underpark because tenants will be unhappy and leave. Mr. Buquet asserted that they reviewed and re -reviewed the parking on Hermosa with the Assistant City Engineer. He said their improvements will include widening and street improvements and restriping on Hermosa. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1NCHO OCTOBER 26, 2016 CUC%ONM Page 5 Mr. Espinoza said he made sure this layout for on -street parking on Hermosa works. He said it is possible that in the future we may "squeeze down" the street and subsequently lower the speed limit. John Ortiz said he lives on Stafford Street directly north of the project site and people can see in his back yard now. He noted noise issues and said the traffic is bad; everyone has 2 cars and guests with cars and he believes future residents of this development will be parking on his street. He asked if he will have Edison poles in his back yard. He was concerned about the value of his house and what kind of wall will go up as teenagers are currently walking atop the walls and hanging out. Ryan Almond said he is a resident at Motel 66... He had concerns about how soon development will start; he has not been given any information about how long he may have on this property. He said Bellagio residents regularly park in their lot. Mr. Daniel said even people with one bedroom have 2 cars. He said a special condition is needed. Mr. Buquet said parking for this development is sufficient, and more realistic for what they are doing. He said the sky deck is over 200 feet away from the property line of properties to the north. He said they have identified some line boundary issues and they intend to go through and correct the lines. He said they will construct the walls and work with property owners on that. He added that this is not a child intensive project. Mr. Cornelius said they will build a retaining wall, then a step and then a 6-foot wall atop that. Most will gain larger back yards except for one property on the corner. Commissioner Fletcher asked for clarification regarding the Edison easement. Mr. Cornelius said it is not on their project property and they will be cognizant of sight lines. John Ortiz suggested underground parking would solve everything and asked if that had been considered. He said historically Hermosa is a drainage wash. Mr. Buquet said there is no flood risk or hazard and they are trying to change and better the look of Foohill and Hermosa. He said sub -parking does not pencil out and not an issue. He said they will contact the residents of the motel with development timing information. Hearing and seeing no further public comment, Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing at 8:30 PM. Commissioner Munoz had no further questions. He thanked staff and the applicant. He commented the Commission has seen the project proposal several times and granted that Mixed Use & High density development can be confusing. He said as the City approaches HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO OCTOBER 26, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 6 buildout-things will have to change. He said staff has worked hard to transition our thinking, approach and understanding of these types of development. He said he understands the concerns of the residents. He said with respect to the design -we asked for something different and we got it -it is bolder, high end, articulated and provides the Mixed Use component. He offered support of the application. Commissioner Wimberly fully concurred and also thanked the applicant and staff. He said he is looking to staff for future Mixed Use components and Phase 2 of the Development Code Amendments for parking requirements. He said he believes this development will enhance property values. He also offered support. Commissioner Fletcher explained that when he expresses concerns, he knows others may have the same concern and they should be heard and explained in the public forum. He said underground parking that does not pencil out just means it is too expensive. We are in transition phase as Planning or the City Council wants more urban type development but most of our population moved here for an upscale suburban community. He said Foothill Boulevard is the appropriate place for mixed use and urban style architecture. He said the design is nice. He said his concerns are about parking and he wants a condition regarding commercial live/work units. He said the parking management plan will have to be submitted to the Planning Director for review. He said he has been assured we have a process to correct things if there are parking problems. He said he wants a condition regarding the use of the commercial units. Mr. Flower offered a revised Planning Condition, "The ground floor of the 5 live/work units facing Foothill Boulevard shall be occupied only by non-residential uses." Chairman Oaxaca said we are facing a new generation of residents with a different perception of what their living space should be. Alta Loma is representative of what we thought it should be at that time. He said these are first steps to a new approach and healthy way; we are learning as we go. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to adopt the Resolutions of Approval for Design Review DRC2016-00006, Minor Exception DRC2016- 00455 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00007, with the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. The conditions were amended with the addition of Planning Condition 47 as described above regarding the live/work units. r-MIRIV.0 E. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20026 -10235 ALTA LOMA, LLC - A request to subdivide a parcel of 1.67 acres, into six (6) parcels, in the Low Residential (L) District located south of 19th Street between Hermosa Avenue and Haven Avenue; APN: 1076-121-03. 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 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES )[�ANCHo OCTOBER 26, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 7 Guidelines as a Class 32 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332) exemption, which covers in -fill development on no more than 5 acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. Related case file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2016-00613. Nikki Cavazos, Assistant Planner gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). She said one email was received regarding the project and a perception of lower property values. She said one call was received with positive feedback. Hank Jong thanked staff. He said they will comply with the conditions. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Fletcher, carried 4-0-1(Macias absent) to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20026. F. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT DRC2015-01174 — 4TH AND MILL. - A request for live entertainment at 4th & Mill Bar, Pizza and Grill, within the Mixed Use Retail (MUR) zone of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan located at 11260 4th Street - APN: 0210-581-02. Staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 as a Class 1 exemption of the guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act. Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). She reported no public comments have been received. Commissioner Wimberly eluded to prior problems with Entertainment Permits associated with bars and the crowd they advertise to. He asked about the advertising for this business. Ms. Nakamura said staff has already monitored their social media and website along with the PD to get an idea of what they are offering. She said it is mostly sporting events with beer specials. She reported no calls for service since the new owners took over. She said the PD met with the applicants and let them know what is required and that we would bring back their permit to the Commission if needed. Keith Gardner, representing the applicant said he enjoyed working with staff and he agrees with the conditions. Commissioner Fletcher asked if he owns and/or operates other bars and if they are contemplating others. He said it is a good location and a nice facility with many future residents and apartments near them. Mr. Gardner said this is the first one and that is why they requested the other opportunities. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no public comment, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO OCTOBER 26, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 8 closed public hearing. . Commissioner Wimberly said the patrons will come to you. Commission Munoz had no comment and wished them good luck. Chairman Oaxaca had no issues. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Entertainment Permit DRC2015-01174. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION G. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None H. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None 11 VI. ADJOURNMENT 9:05 PM 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on October 20, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES cHo OCTOBER 26, 2016 C,uc ONGA Page 9 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 will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,597 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA i THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION N-1 THE PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 9, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 7:00 PM Roll Call Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias X Munoz A Wimberly A Fletcher X Chairman Oaxaca welcomed back Commissioner Macias from medical leave. Additional Staff Present: John Gillison, City Manager, Elisa Cox, Deputy City Manager; Nettie Neilsen, Community Services Director; Daniel Schneider, CS Supt.; Christen Mitchell, Management Analyst ll; Candyce Burnett, City Planner; Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer; Dominick Perez, Associate Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Mike Smith, Senior Planner; and Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner. II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1NCHO NOVEMBER 9, 2016 C�lUC%ONCA Page 2 from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated October 26, 2016 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca carried 3-0-2 (Munoz. Wimberly absent) to continue the approval of the consent calendar to the next meeting date. IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00295 — INFINITY DESIGN UA—A request for site plan and architectural review of a 108-room, 5-story hotel to replace an existing Carrows restaurant on 1.41 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard and east of Mayten Avenue in the Industrial Park (IP) District at 11669 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 0229-012-48. Related File: Minor Exception DRC2016-00296. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2016-00296—INFINITY DESIGN UA —A request to reduce the required on -site parking of a proposed 108-room, 5- story hotel to replace an existing Carrows restaurant on 1.41 acres of land located on the south side of Foothill Boulevard and east of Mayten Avenue in the Industrial Park (IP) District at 11669 Foothill Boulevard; APN: 0229-012-48; Related Case: Design Review DRC2016-00295. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Items B and C are related and were heard together. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 9 2016 AANCHORCcnPage 3 Richard Dick stated he is the owner of the property to the south of the proposed project. He questioned the parking reduction. He said he intends to post his property with signs stating hotel guests are not allowed on the property. He asked how the parking reduction was determined. Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing. Chairman Oaxaca asked about the applicability of the CCR's with respect to the change of use from a restaurant to a hotel use Mr. Van der Zwaag said there will be no changes to the CCR's. Chairman Oaxaca confirmed that the CCR's are under the control of the property owner. The 2 spaces in question have been removed and CCR's have a reciprocal arrangement. Mr. Van der Zwaag said the 3 spaces at the end of the drive aisle are not shared in the parking agreement. Commissioner Fletcher asked what buildings are included in that agreement. Mr. Van der Zwaag noted on the map that Mr. Dick's property is in it and all the buildings to the west are included to Milliken Avenue. Carl Ballard of Coombs Associates said he did the parking study. He said they looked at our Code and 3 similar hotels which they evaluation 3:00 a.m. and at 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. He said they noted the usage at 3:00 a.m. is higher than at 3:00 p.m. He said this project provides well above what is needed and no off - site parking is needed. Commissioner Fletcher said the design will be an interesting addition to Foothill Boulevard and he is ok with the parking reduction as long as the neighbors post the parking. Vice Chairman Macias said he likes the design, and he is ok with the parking reduction. Chairman Oaxaca said he agreed and noted the shuttle service should resolve any parking issues. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher, carried 3-0-2 (Munoz, Wimberly absent) to adopt the Resolutions of Approval for Design Review DRC2016-00295 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00296 with conditions as presented. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00170 —CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — A request for site plan and architectural review of a 34,944 square foot gymnasium along with 20,536 square feet of outdoor covered basketball courts HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES cHo NOVEMBER 9, 2016 CUCAMONCA Page 4 on 4.63 acres of land (total parcel area is 9.5 acres) located on the east side of Rochester Avenue in the Industrial Park (IP) and General Industrial (GI) Districts - APN: 0229-021-41 and 44. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He noted for the record a change in the parcel number and that the change would be reflected in the resolution. Victoria Jones and Janet Ryerson, Park and Recreation Commissioners, were welcomed and recognized. Chairman Oaxaca asked if the City's team had any comment. Nettie Neilsen, Community Services Director said staff covered it well. She said the facility will replace the gym for the current sports center which has been in use for 19 years. Chairman Oaxaca said this is an opportunity to offer more to the community than the other site. Ms. Neilsen said the gym currently used is located in an old retail center and the lease is up. She said the courts are not regulation size and there are roof problems. She said the new facility is regulation, and has a better area for staff and the concession area. She said the old center has no outdoor space and the new provides extra room for circulation and security. She said the new facility could also serve as an evacuation center if needed. Commissioner Fletcher said it is attractive, offers benefits, and will be used by many. He said it will be well received by the community. Vice Chairman Macias said he was at the DRC and he is excited about the novel design and amenities. Chairman Oaxaca agreed the old center did its part and the new facility is exciting and also meets our high standards with amenities. He thanked staff for their hard work and participation in the project. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher, carried 3-0-2 (Munoz, Wimberly absent) to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2016-00170 with conditions with a correction to the APN number as noted by staff. E. DESIGN REVIEW MODIFICATION DRC2016-00345 - BIANE FAMILY PROPERTIES - A request to revise the conditions of approval for DRC2007-00951 (Planning Commission Resolution No.14-08) for the Biane Winery, a complex comprised of fifteen (15) HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES g�rrCHO NOVEMBER 9, 2016 CUCAMONCA Page 5 buildings/structures and three (3) single-family residences located on two (2) parcels with a combined area of 10.41 acres in the General Industrial (GI) District located on the south side of 8th Street, between Hermosa and Archibald Avenues; APN: 0209 201-19. On January 22, 2014, the Planning Commission adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for DRC2007-00951. 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, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Commissioner Fletcher suggested staff supply additional photographs and then asked for clarification of what a HABS Level 3 analysis includes. Mr. Grahn said the HABS 3 provides detailed photos, measurements of the buildings and the site, it documents the significance of the property and the conditions of the buildings and site including a full photo history. Jary Cockroft said he is representing the Biane Family Properties. He said he appreciates Mr. Grahn's and Ms. Burnett's assistance. He said he went back to LSA who did the original resource and impact study and reviewed the significance of these houses. They found them architecturally insignificant. He said the buildings have updated interiors and the exterior construction/design is very common for that time period. He said they accept the conditions of approval as written. He said they are not opposing the removal of the sidewalk as required in the conditions but they would like to work with staff to come up with a solution with respect to the sidewalk. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fletcher said he is ok with the report and application and has no concerns. He moved to approve the application. Vice Chairman Macias said staff and the applicant did a good job looking at alternatives. He agreed the loss of those houses does not impact the overall significance of the winery complex. Chairman Oaxaca agreed. He asked staff if there is flexibility regarding the condition re: the curb and gutter removal. Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer, said he would work with the applicant to determine if flexibility is possible on this issue. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ]�rcHo NOVEMBER 9, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 6 Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher, carried 3-0-2 (Munoz, Wimberly absent) to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Design Review Modification DRC2016-00345 as presented F. TIME EXTENSION DRC2016-00519 - TIM HARRISON - A request to allow for a one (1) year time extension of a previously approved 2-lot Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM17663) on 0.396 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Tryon Street, located at 7912 Archibald Avenue; APN: 0208-131-84. This project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines as a Class 15 (CEQA Guidelines Section 15315) exemption, which covers minor land divisions of four or fewer parcels. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Tim Harrison, the property owner, said the new arrangement provides a cul-de-sac and safer conditions for kids walking to school. He said Staff was very helpful and patient. Mr. Harrison said after approval he will do the improvements on Archibald first and then develop the lot with a single-family home and granny quarters later. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing, and hearing and seeing no further comment, Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, carried 3-0-2 (Munoz, Wimberly absent) to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Time Extension DRC2016-00519 as presented. G. TRAIL EASEMENT VACATION DRC2016-00780 — DANNY MOREL - A request to vacate a portion of an existing equestrian easement located along the southern edge of the property within the Estate Residential (ER) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and within the Equestrian Overlay District at 5820 Rolling Pastures — APN: 0225-122-96. Related File: DRC2013-00964. This project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15305 (Class 5 Exemption — Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He said they are working with the Fire District to obtain a notarized consent. He confirmed that the parcels to the east received approval for their fence in 2006. Commissioner Fletcher asked how the City made a mistake when block wall request is submitted and the construction is followed by an inspector. Mr. Perez replied that unfortunately the Building and Safety persons involved are no longer here. He speculated the house to the east was not there at the time and the Fire District may have been under construction. The Inspector may have reviewed the wall for structural HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO NOVEMBER 9, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 7 soundness but not for exact location. He said it was inappropriately placed on the property line. Danny Morel stated he is the applicant and property owner. He said his home is complete and ready to move in, all the block walls are built and they are just waiting on this final piece. He said all the neighbors are in favor of the proposal. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Larry Henderson representing Alta Loma Riding Club said their Board of Directors took action to oppose the application as it is bad precedence to decide this based upon a City mistake. He said they are sympathetic to the applicant but throughout the equestrian overlay there is the intent to protect feeder trails. He said to allow one neighbor to illegally build across an easement and expect the others to bend is bad planning. He said the City adopted the Trails plan in 1987 and this is a real concern for the riding club. He said staff is taking a cavalier attitude to the Equestrian Overlay — and piecemeal tearing up of those documents. He said they intend to oppose the application at the Council meeting as well. Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Macias said this is unfortunate and Mr. Henderson is right. He said staff needs to recognize the importance in the future but sometimes we need flexibility. He said he supports staffs recommendation. Commissioner Fletcher agreed with all the comments including those of Mr. Henderson. He said staff needs to protect our plans without making a lot of amendments. Equestrian lots are a benefit to the City. He said that at the Trails meeting he said he did not want to penalize the current property owner. He said in this case it does not really affect the trail circulation and he would support it. Mistakes were made by the City and he did not want to penalize the property owner. Chairman Oaxaca said he also was at TAC and his conclusion was the same. The applicant is doing his best to abide by the requirements and we do not want to penalize him for something that occurred long ago. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Macias, carried 3-0-2 (Munoz, Wimberly absent) to adopt the Resolution recommending approval by the City Council. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION . zHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO NOVEMBER 9, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 8 H. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES None COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS None 8:25 PM VI. ADJOURNMENT 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on November 3, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO NOVEMBER 9, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 9 distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,662 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. THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance TOO PM Roll Call Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias A Munoz X Wimberly X Fletcher X II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None I ZHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO DECEMBER 14, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 III. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. A RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR DAN JAMES, SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER, IN RECOGNITION OF 27 YEARS OF SERVICE TO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA The presentation was made by Chairman Oaxaca. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION B. Consideration of minutes dated October 26, 2016 (Continued from November 9, 2016) C. Consideration of minutes dated November 9, 2016 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to approve the minutes of October 26, 2016. The minutes of November 9, 2016 are continued to the next meeting. 11 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. D. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2016-00724 - GRIFFIN RESIDENTIAL —A residential design review of 11 homes on vacant lots in two existing subdivisions in the Very Low (VL) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located on Rolling Pastures Place west of East Avenue and south of Wilson Avenue (SUBTT 16113, Lot 5), and on Hunt Club Drive and Pinto Place east of East Avenue and south of Wilson Avenue (SUBTT 16114, Lots 7-16); APNs: 0225-012-07, thru -16 and 0225-811-05. The Planning Commission previously adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts on June 27, 2001 for SUBTT16113 and on April 26, 2006 for SUBTT16114. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects with the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). inHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES �cHo DECEMBER 14, 2016 CucnMONcn Page 3 Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Michael Vairin, Sr. Vice President of Community Development for Griffin Residential stated he represents the applicant. He said they held two neighborhood meetings and received a positive response from the attendees. He said they accept all the conditions. Chairman Oaxaca closed the public hearing Commissioner Munoz said they worked successfully with the City and met all requirements; he offered support of the project. Commissioner Wimberly concurred and also offered support. Commissioner Fletcher concurred and offered support. He said he did not see much architectural detail on the houses. He said he said in the past what you see on the front is what you should also see on the back. He said the architecture is attractive but it should at least be on the front and back. Chairman Oaxaca concurred and said he did not see identifiable features in the architecture. He said he appreciates the applicant meeting with the neighbors. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to adopt the Resolution of Approval for Design Review DRC2016-00724 as presented by staff. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015-00797 — RGA OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN -A proposal to construct an industrial building of 339,000 square feet on a 17-acre site in the General Industrial (GI) District located approximately 1,100 feet north of 6th Street and 395 feet north of the terminus of Santa Anita Avenue - APNs: 0229-271-24, 25, and 26. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner gave the staff report and PowerPoint Presentation (copy on file). He noted correspondence was received in opposition of the project citing environmental concerns (copies provided to the Commission on the dais). He said he has met with the applicant and they are asking for a continuance to an unspecified date. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Douglass Chermak of Lozeu Drury LLP 410 12th Street, Suite 250, Oakland CA 94607 asked for their letter of opposition be entered into the record. The letter was received by the Secretary. John Atwell representing the applicant stated they are working through most of the issues HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO DECEMBER 14, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 noted in the letter. Steven Flower suggested the public hearing remain open. Moved by, Fletcher, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Macias absent) to continue the item to an unspecified date as requested by staff to allow time to respond to the environmental questions posed by the opposition. VI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION F. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Munoz gave an update on the activities of the League of California cities. He said each fall the League decides what issues/strategies to pursue for the next year. For 2017 they are: Increase funding for critical transportation and water infrastructure; Develop realistic responses to the homeless crisis; Improve the affordability of workforce housing and secure additional funds for affordable housing; and Address public safety impacts of reduced sentencing laws protect local priorities in the implementation of AUMA and preserve City rights to deliver emergency medical services. G. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS 7:33 PM 11 VII. ADJOURNMENT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO A PRE -APPLICATION WORKSHOP HELD IN THE RAINS ROOM TO DISCUSS DRC2016-00826 (PDC OC/IE LLC) AND DRC2016-00626 (THERALDSON HOSPITALITY). THAT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:00 PM AND THOSE MINUTES WILL APPEAR SEPARATELY. 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO DECEMBER 14, 2016 C,UCAMONCA Page 5 certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 8, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,662 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES �ANCHO DECEMBER 14, 2016 cUCAMONC4 Page 6 Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. B THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WORKSHOP MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2016 - 7:00 PM* Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center ***RAINS ROOM*** 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Roll Call 7:45 PM Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias A Munoz X Wimberly X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary, Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Candyce Burnett, City Planner; Brian Sandona, Associate Engineer, Albert Espinoza, Asst. City Engineer, Rob Ball, Fire Marshall; Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll. II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. No communication from the public was received. (It was noted that although both items are being heard simultaneously, and an opportunity to comment on each individual project will be given. The final comments for both projects follow the discussion comments at the end of Item B.) Candyce Burnett, City Planner noted that both sites are on the Haven Overlay and relate to a gateway of the City. She referred to the intent of the Haven Overlay and how the designs should reflect this and also how they relate to Empire Lakes as well. She spoke of pedestrian connectivity, a walkable living lifestyle, giving the appearance of office development and how to work with the hotels with tall massing on Haven Avenue and the City's desire to match the PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO DECEMBER 14, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 2 massing. III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 — PDC OC/IE LLC —A Pre -Application Review of a proposed industrial development consisting of three (3) industrial buildings. with a combined floor area of 305,745 square feet on a parcel of about 14.02 acres, that is part of a vacant property consisting of 3 vacant parcels with a combined area of 25.6 acres (not including street dedications which will be vacated), located at the northwest corner of Utica Avenue and 4th Street in the Industrial Park (IP) District. B. PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00626 — THERALDSON HOSPITALITY DEVELOPMENT (THD) — A Pre -Application Review of a proposed commercial development consisting of two (2) 5-story hotels with 115 rooms each and one (1) restaurant with a floor area of 8,340 square feet (including an outdoor dining area of 2,000 square feet) on a parcel of about 297,000 square feet (6.8 acres), that is part of a vacant property consisting of 3 vacant parcels with a combined area of 25.6 acres (not including street dedications which will be vacated), located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 4th Street in the Industrial Park (IP) District, Haven Avenue Overlay District; APN: 0210-081-21. Dominick Perez, Associate Planner, facilitated introductions of the Design Teams for the applicants. He gave a brief description of the project proposals and general site characteristics. He noted that the staff report indicated the Panattoni site had a portion in the Haven Overlay. Staff has since determined that was not correct. A 235,000 square foot industrial building is also under review at the northeast corner of 4th Street and Utica Avenue. Exhibit F of Item A (page 20 of the packet) indicates a Lot Line Adjustment which will be heard by the Council tomorrow. He noted that the Haven Overly should reflect: a prime office corridor; high quality development that is progressive, urban, appealing and eye catching design. He said the restaurant pad is 8,340 square feet and -the elevations will be reviewed at a later time. He said Exhibit C for the hotels was only a conceptual design (page B-15). He said staff has already noted revisions needed in the staff report including decorative veneer suggesting tower elements, glass, glazing and glass accents on all elevations, metal features, trim/accents, metal features and bolder high -contrast colors to emphasize different areas of the buildings. He said the Panattoni development consists of-3 buildings; staff reviewed the square footages and access described on page A-2 of the agenda packet. He said the architecture has been revised and improved with a large amount of glazing. He said the material of the exterior has not been specifically called out but staff suggested a sandblasted surface rather than the proposed stone veneer. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES RANCHO DECEMBER 14, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 3 Commissioner Fletcher asked why the sandblasted finish is better than stone veneer. Canyce Burnett, City Planner said the stone tends to look more residential. She indicated that the City wants something more sleek/urban. Jacob LeBlanc of Panattoni said they will work with staff to blend in the design. Mr. Perez noted the employee break areas are indicated, but not specific as to what is included in them. He mentioned Turf parking is also indicated, but this material/concept does not currently exist in City standards and should be discussed. Ms. Burnett noted it does not hold up well depending upon the frequency of traffic on it. She said other materials can be used. Mr. LeBlance said they used it to help meet the landscaping requirement. Mr. Perez noted the dock screening area on the north side -wall is required to be on the outside of the building — the setback should be larger for maneuverability and what is shown is very tight. Commissioner Fletcher asked what is proposed for Section 1, north of the Theraldson site. Ms Burnett said nothing is proposed yet. Don Cape of Theraldson Hospitality said they currently have 3 hotels in the City running at 100% occupancy. He referred to the conceptual site plan and said the Hotels are now parallel to the street as requested by staff. Jacob Le Blanc of Panattoni said their work is primarily industrial. He said their proposed design has architectural features and they added glazing and massing. He said they want multiple tenants and with a quasi -retail —tenant mix. He said they broke up the massing for this along with outdoor areas. He said E-Commerce is changing things and the industrial market is very strong. He said they envision this as owner/user retail being absorbed by higher quality industrial. He said they are not opposed to an "Amazon" type facility; a plus is it provides lots of jobs. Carol Plowman of Lee & Associates said there is no other product like this in the Inland Empire and it will present a very upscale image. Jacob LeBlanc noted that on Archibald Avenue where QVC is located could have used more -it looks plain. He said this is different. He said they took this same approach in Anaheim and it has been very successful. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES PANCHORHODECEMBER 14, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 Mr. Perez referred to the hotels. He said the report discusses a Development Code Amendment required to allow us to push the buildings up to setback line. He said the amendment would allow them to have the maximum height at the setback_ line whereas the current Code is a more stepped/graduated approach with less height at the setback but increasing to the interior of the site. He said the idea is to bring them closer to the street for a more urban feel. Mr. Cape asked what the setback would be if the hotel along 4r' Street was lined up with the southernmost industrial building on the Panattoni site. He suggested they move the hotels back to allow more parking during the day for the restaurant. He said the current configuration will make it difficult to lease out because of the limited parking close to the restaurant pad. He said they have a similar situation across the street and it has not been leased for years. He said he needs about 34 feet to allow for one row of parking with a drive aisle along 4th Street. Mr. Perez invited the Commissioners to comment on the Haven and 4th Street site. Commissioner Munoz noted there was no architecture submitted to look at (the applicant provided a sample from a recent Temecula development) but the sample indicates nice articulation Mr. Cape said the room mix will determine how much articulation is achieved —double queens create the big "bump -outs" Chairman Oaxaca asked if these proposed hotels will be similar to sample hotels. He said if that is the case, it looks like they are moving in the right direction. He emphasized a desire for a sleeklmodern design. Ms Burnett said with respect to design: Staff looked at conceptual plans and our initial comment is that it is not enough for this location, the City wants higher quality materials. She said the articulation is fine. Mr. Cape expressed cautioned on storefront glazing as it is too costly for this room rate. Ms. Burnett said we are looking for a happy balance and where you place these elements is key -quality materials in the right place makes a difference. Commissioner Munoz said the architecture could be punched up. Commissioner Fletcher said it must be upscale and modern for a gateway. He said he is not opposed to setting buildings back off of the street because of the height and if it helps with the feasibility of the restaurant. He said he would like it to come back for a workshop prior to going to the DRC. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES vcHo DECEMBER 149 2016 FV CUCAMONGA Page 5 Mr. Cape said they need to get their civil design (site layout) done before investing in the building design. He said they are happy to come back. Commissioner Munoz said he is concerned about the viability of the restaurant. He asked the applicant to work with staff to make it work there in the corner. Chairman Oaxaca agreed. He said they are proposing a significant structure. He said he wants the consistency on Haven Avenue but he would be amenable to pushing back some along 4th Street to allow for parking for the restaurant. Ms. Burnett reported that staff pushed the applicants. She confirmed the entire site is in the Haven Overlay and is a City gateway; a main corner with one chance to do it right. It is a high profile area and there is no chance with office development. She said staff worked with our DOIT team to do this massing study to get perspective to get it right. She asked the Commission for comment on the setbacks. A general discussion occurred whereby the Commissioners considered a possible site layout that considered the one row of parking and also a prior concept that would place one hotel perpendicular to 4th Street rather than the building being placed parallel to 4th Street -the parallel arrangement was requested by staff. Commissioner Wimberly commented on the layout and viability of a restaurant and usable parking. He said he prefers the layout found on B-11 (denotes the 4th Street hotel flipped perpendicular with its short end to 4th street), Commissioner Oaxaca said he is open to an alternative to maintain the current orientation and push it back some (building on 4th Street would remain parallel to 4th Street). He said it is more important to him that both projects look consistent architecturally. Ms Burnett asked about the building adjacent to Haven Avenue. Commissioner Munoz said he is not opposed to what was proposed. He said the applicant should work with staff and keep to the regulations for the Haven Overly and work out the 4th street building orientation. Commissioner Wimberly concurred that they meet the Overlay regulations. He said the Commission will weigh in after the standards and requirements are met. Commissioner Munoz said he likes the layout that parallels the street but he is not opposed to pushing back the buildings. He asked hotel #1 along Haven could stay the same but make hotel # 2 perpendicular to 4th to allow for more parking. He said keep the Haven building close to Haven and work with staff. PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES �1NCHo DECEMBER 14, 2016 CocnMoxon Page 6 Ms. Burnett summarized by noting page B 91- Hotel 1 along Haven to remain as shown but flip Hotel 2 on its end perpendicular to 4th Street. She then asked for final comments on the Panattoni development. Commissioner Munoz said it looks good, the elevations are pretty good. Mr. LeBlanc said their next step could be to submit. He said the eyebrows and columns will be stainless steel; they are trying to get away from earth tones. Commissioner Fletcher said it looks nice and gives an office appearance. He suggested it be more modern; he asked for more glazing on the west side of the building. IV. ADJOURNMENT 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on December 8, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and 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." . PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES �Ho DECEMBER 14, 2016 cocAMoxcA Page 7 Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,486 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us