Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-29 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 12-29 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 A REQUEST TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE LOT DEPTH (FROM THE REQUIRED 200-FOOT MINIMUM TO APPROXIMATELY 135 FEET) FOR TWO (2) LOTS OF A PROPOSED 5-LOT SUBDIVISION IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0225-181-73. A. Recitals. 1. K.U. &Associates filed an application for the issuance of Variance DRC2011-00963 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application is related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964; and b. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place; and C. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet (north to south); and d. To the north, south, and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the east are a single-family residence and a telephone company facility. The only street access to the property is via Arapaho Road that terminates at the midpoint of the west property line of the site. Adjacent and parallel to the north property line is a Community Trail of approximately 20 feet in, width, while adjacent and parallel to the west property line is a local equestrian trail of 15 feet in width; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-29 VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 2 e. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan; and f. The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow a reduced lot depth for Lots 1 and 5 (the subject lots) of the proposed 5-lot subdivision; and g. Per Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, the required minimum lot depth for residential lots within the Very Low (VL) Residential District is 200 feet; and h. The proposed lot depth of the subject lots will be approximately 135 feet; and i. The proposed lot width of the subject lots will be approximately 190 feet, while the lot area of the two lots will be 25,910 square feet (Lot 1) and 24,309 square feet (Lot 5). 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. The proposed residential subdivision is an in-fill project with limited reasonable lot configuration options. The overall north to south dimension of the project site is approximately 331 feet. If it was possible to not have a public street serve the subdivision, Lots 1 and 5 would still be only approximately 165 feet in depth and an associated result would be that Lots 2 through 4 would have no direct access to a public street which is not a permissible condition. The project site is bound on all sides by existing development. Therefore, there is no opportunity to acquire additional land, specifically to the north or the south, which would allow Lots 1 and 5 to be greater in depth. Reducing the number of lots to allow for greater lot size is not reasonable as most of the proposed lots are already significantly larger than the minimum required for this development district. b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. The project site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road approximately 200 feet east of the intersection of that street with Choctaw Place. It is bound to the north, south, and west by existing residential development and associated improvements. The extension of Arapaho Road will generally bisect the project site. Alternate alignments of the proposed extension such as shifting it further south or north are not possible because of the limits imposed by technical standards for street design including minimum dimensions for street width, curve radii, and cul-de-sacs. The project site was part of a larger parcel that was partially developed with a telephone switching facility on the east side. In May 2006, the larger parcel was subdivided into two(2) parcels. The part of the property that was developed with the telephone switching facility became a separate parcel,while the larger, undeveloped part of the property was sold to the current owner (the applicant). As the telephone facility occupies the entire smaller parcel, it was not possible at the time of the subdivision, nor is it possible now, to consider the option of a street connecting the project site with East Avenue which, in turn, could have provided the applicant the opportunity to propose an alternate subdivision design. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-29 VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 3 C. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. The overall dimensions of the project site are approximately 442 feet(east to west)by approximately 331 feet (north to south). Requiring that all lots be 200 feet in depth would necessitate a re-design of the subdivision. This would cause a different set of challenges. All lots must have public street access and the extension of Arapaho Road will bean east to west direction. In order for the depth of each lot to be 200 feet, the long axis of all lots, i.e. the axis along which lot depth is measured, also would have to be in an east to west direction. The only way to reasonably accomplish this would be to eliminate one of the lots. However, the result would be excessively large lots relative to the existing properties in the neighborhood and the development district in general. Furthermore, the orientation of the long axis would not match the long axis of the other properties within the existing residential development to the west that have primary frontage along Arapaho Road. This will affect the location of, or preclude altogether, improvements such as room additions and accessory structures as the setbacks would be oriented differently as well. d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. The proposal is an in-fill project. The principal purpose of the minimum lot depth standard is to allow horse keeping, while still maintaining a minimum separation of 70 feet between horse corrals (or similar equestrian facilities) and dwellings on neighboring properties per Section 17.08.030(E)(2)(b) of the Development Code. The reduction in the depth of the subject lots from 200 feet to 135 feet will not be in conflict with this requirement as it will be off-set by the width of each lot. Each lot will be an average of approximately 190 feet wide; the minimum lot width in this development district is 90 feet. Also, the potential homes on the subject lots will be required to comply, and will comply as proposed by the applicant, with all applicable minimum setbacks. Similarly, the opportunity to have horse keeping will continue to be available. Horse corral locations are proposed at the northeast and southeast quadrants of Lots 1 and 5, respectively, and will be at least 70 feet from the nearest existing neighboring dwellings and the proposed dwellings on Lots 2 through 4. Lastly, Lots 1 and 5 will be 25,910 and 24,309 square feet in area, respectively, which will exceed the minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet applicable to the development district of the site. e. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The reduced depth of the subject lots will not affect neighboring properties and/or property owners. Practical differences in the physical attributes/characteristics between the lots in the surrounding area and the subject lots will be limited. All proposed structures on each lot will comply with the applicable setbacks; the applicant is not requesting any modifications to the rear or front setbacks. Although the subject lots will be approximately 135 feet in depth, they will be approximately 190 feet in width. Therefore, the separation between structures and common property lines will be consistent with the existing residential development within this development district. The floor area (including the garage) of each of the proposed one-story homes on the subject lots will be generally equal to the floor areas of the surrounding homes. The overall floor area of the homes on Lots'1 and 5 will be 5,198 and 3,870 square feet, respectively. Similarly, the overall area of Lots 1 and 5 will be 25,910 and 24,309 square feet, respectively; the lot areas of the neighboring properties to the west at 13186 Arapaho Road and at 6323 Choctaw Place are 22,165 and 21,168 square feet, respectively. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, togetherwith all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessmentfor the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-29 VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the reduction in the lot depth (from the required 200 feet minimum to approximately 135 feet) for Lots 1 and 5 of a proposed 5-lot subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place -APN: 0225-181-73. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-29 VARIANCE DRC2010-00963— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 5 1) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: ;,-- Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: (�L'a�'� Candj6e Burnett, Senior Planner 1, Candyce Burnett, Senior Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of June 2012 by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, OAXACA, MUNOZ, WIMBERLY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HOWDYSHELL ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: NONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT M DRC2010-00963 SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: K.U. & ASSOCIATES EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE LOCATION: APN: 0225-181-73 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents,officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval,or in the alternative,to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion,participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 12-29, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s)are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Time Limits 1. Variance approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 1 Project No. DRC2010-00963 Completion Date 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the. time of building permit issuance. 2 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2012 Res &Stf Rpt\DRC2011-00563 6-13.doc