Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015/08/12 - Minutes - PC-HPC THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 12, 2015 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California • I: CALL' TO ORDER- ' Pledge of Allegiance 7:03 PM Roll Call 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; Rebecca Fuller, Administrative Secretary; Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist ll; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner, Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Dominick Perez, Assistant Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Mike Smith, Associate Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner 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 KIHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCt10 AUGUST 12, 2015 CUCAMONGA Page 2 III: .,' .-ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS A. PRESENTATION OF A RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION HONORING THE SERVICE OF COMMISSIONER FRANCES HOWDYSHELL, RETIRED Presentation by Chairman Wimberly B. OFFICIAL WELCOME TO COMMISSIONER RICH MACIAS Announcement by Candyce Burnett, Planning Director CONSENT.CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION•_N'AND PLANNING CO : .,I -�" COMMISSIO1viMISSION C. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES DATED JULY 22, 2015 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 3-0-0-2 (Munoz. Macias abstain) 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 DRC2015-00111 —PULTE HOMES—A request for the architectural and site design of 5 single-family residential homes on 5 lots in the Low(L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, located on the southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Golden Prairie Drive — APN: 1087-281-01, 02, 03, 04 and 05. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration on July 12, 1989 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map 14139 and no further environmental review is required. E. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2015-00580 — PULTE HOMES - A request to increase the allowable wall heights for a total height of 8 feet along the side yards of Lots 1 and 5 in connection with the proposed development (Design Review DRC2015-00111) of 5 residential homes located in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan at the southwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Golden Prairie Drive — APN: 1087- 281-01, 02, 03, 04 and 05. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION _ ,, AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 GGCANONrd Page 3 and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Negative Declaration on July 12, 1989 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map 14139 and no further environmental review is required. Dominick Perez. Assistant Planner presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Steve Ford, Pulte Homes said he would answer any questions. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Seeing none, he closed the public hearing. The Commissioners all voiced their general support of the project. Moved by Munoz. seconded by Fletcher. carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolutions approving Design Review DRC2015-00111 and Minor Exception DRC2015-00580 as presented. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2013-00961 STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC —A request to change the General Plan land use designation for an 8.32 acre parcel of land within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area from Very Low(VL) Residential(.1-2 dwelling units per acre)to Low(L)Residential(2-4 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue -APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related Cases: Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment ORC2013-00962 Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936, Variance DRC2014- 00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2013-00962 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC — A request to change the Etiwanda Specific Plan zoning designation for an 8.32 acre parcel of land within the Etiwanda Specific Plan area from Very Low(VL) Residential (.1-2 dwelling units per acre)to Low (L) Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related Cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936, Variance DRC2014-00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18936-STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC—A request to subdivide 8.32 acres of land into 17 lots (Lots #1-16 for residential purposes and Lot #17 for an existing church) for a site located within the Very Low(VL)Zoning District(A -2 units per acre)of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area for a site located on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue - APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ` AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 CUcA'"°NG" Page 4 environmental impacts for consideration. Related Cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, Variance DRC2014-00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2014-00219 - STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC—A request to increase the maximum permitted property line wall heights from 6 feet up to 11 feet related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 for a site located within the Very Low(VL) Residential District(.1-2 dwelling units per acre)of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue -APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of the environmental impacts for consideration. Related Cases: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113. J. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2014-00113 — ' STORM WESTERN DEVELOPMENT INC. -A request to remove up to 50 trees related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 for a site located within the Very Low (VL) Residential District(.1-2 dwelling units per acre)of the Etiwanda Specific Plan area on the south side of Carnesi Drive and east of Etiwanda Avenue; APNs: 0227-061-03 and 82. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Related Files: General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961, Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-00962, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18936 and Variance DRC2014- 00219. Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He stated that an additional petition was received 2 days ago and a letter was received today from Fish and Wildlife. all of which have been placed before the Commissioners for their review. In response to the letter from Fish and Wildlife. he said staff has drafted additional conditions to address the possible impacts to Burrowing owls. Corrections to resolution 15-62 for the Tentative Tract found on page F-J 239 of the agenda packet were also placed before the Commission (copy on file). The secretary read into the record the recommended mitigations as follows: 1) Perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, .survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol. • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix 0 (Breeding and Non-breeding Season Surveys and I' J HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 CUCAMONGA Page 5 Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre- construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre-construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre-construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. if ground-disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre-construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. ' • During the non-breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non- migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre-construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. • During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they should be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction"area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. 2) Perform a bat survey prior to removal or relocation of the on-site palm trees. Retain a qualified bat biologist to perform appropriate. species- specific surveys to determine if bats are occupying the trees slated for removal. If bats are found to be roosting in the trees-, tree removal will be limited to between October 15 and February 28 to avoid the bat maternity season. If removal is proposed outside of this date range the applicant will work closely with the qualified bat biologist to implement additional avoidance and minimization measures (for example, removal of the tree skirt between October 15 and February 28, followed by removal of the tree at a later date). HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES t RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 CUCAMONGA Page 6 Jay Wallea of 22323 Normandy representing the applicants thanked staff for the report and accepted the proposed additional mitigations. Chris Nielsen expressed opposition to the GPA and ESP amendments and said he supports Layout 3. He presented a lengthy letter supporting this layout as a compromise (copy on file) stating a GPA is riot needed, the lot sizes would be the same as the Toll Brothers development, and the Emergency Vehicle Access could be added off of Pinon and street access could be gained from Carnesi. Chris Nielsen (Mrs) continued with their support of Layout 3 and concluded that the current proposal does riot meet the General Plan. Regina Johnson said she attends Cross and Crown Church and that the proposal is a big opportunity for the church and community. She said the project allows them to clear debt ' and to help others. She said the Developer has done a great job to consider the neighbors and their concerns. Raybir Husson said he is opposed and the proposal is unfair as it will affect the value of their hones, access is not the residents'problem. His objections included losing equestrian lots, traffic concerns, pollution, loss of 100-year old trees. and moving utilities. Hai Lin 6790 Di Carlo Place agreed with the prior speaker. A severe, change in zoning/change in infrastructure is not justified. She said there will be a safety issue with the access and their homes will lose value. Kevin Johnson said he is a 20-year resident and a member of Cross & Crown. He expressed support and said we should look for the greater good. He supports expanding community engagement. Lorraine Meng. a resident of the To// Brothers development did not see the compelling reasons to change the General Plan nor allowing a variance and cutting trees to accommodate the developer. She strongly objects. David Long said he is not member of the church but cared for the vacant acreage for 40 years. He said he dislikes the trees and never saw a burrowing owl there. He expressed support as these homes will go for a million and won't hurt anyone's values. He said he has seen many changes to the ESP, we have good schools and good people: this would be good for all. Jerry Bredlaw, said the homes on Pinon were built under County standards which are lesser standards; they have been there for 48 years. The developer agreed they should not go through Pinon. He said this development will increase all home values. Manning homes HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 CUCA.NONGA Page 7 was given a variance and he did not see a problem there. He offered his support. klya Thona said the church's problems should not be corrected at the expense of the Toll Brothers home owners. Hakan Ozsomer. 13010 Pinon Street expressed concern about a large tree that he fears will fall on his house when they start to put in the footings. He asked that the tree be cut down. Shereece Monroe stated she has been selling real estate in the community for 10 years. She said people buy there because it is exclusive and secluded and she understands the homeowners'concerns. She said when the wall is broken through on Carnesi, buyers will not want to purchase homes there because of possible accidents. She said the project will negatively affect home values. Marlyn Diaz 13190 Carnesi said the wall has been there over 12 years, she objects to ' destruction of the wall, she fears an increase in traffic and lower property values. Pedro Diaz objected because of increased traffic and property devaluation. He said he would consider going through the church property for access. Patrick Lee objected citing traffic, safety issues and breaking the wall. David Liu said the developer should satisfy the entire community. Maggie Trin objected to breaking the wall, and cited traffic concerns. Jacqueline Littlejohn said property value is affected by romps, therefore the wall needs to remain. She said the Church should have sold their driveway. Norris LittleJohn said he bought into Toll Brothers because of the community, it's ideal because of the wall. He said he paid over one million for the home because of the seclusion, separation, privacy, and less traffic. Tammy Kolarik said she is part of Cross and Crown church and they need their parking to grow; they value their home too. Raymond Grigolla cited fears about drainage; he said they will have to import a lot of dirt. He had concerns about the elevation and he opposed the wall being broken. ' Sharon Huey thanked Storm for their integrity. She said she attends all community activities and would love to see it grow. Robert Ramsdale said he lives north of the Carnesi tract. He said the Commission has done a great job in Rancho Cucamonga: he trusts the work and wisdom they put in and it is HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES jjnncfro AUGUST 12, 2015 CccnHovcn Page 8 in the best interest of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Kurt Ajata said he opposes breaking the wall for reasons already staled, the General Plan is already in place, this is not really a transition zone and the proposal is not fair. Rick Swartz objected to the wall being taken down; he bought because of the wall and it is an injustice to take it down. Patrick Thona said he bought because of exclusivity. He said compromise is needed. He asked the church and builder to consider the current homeowners. Rogelio Hernandez said the Commission has not considered all options. June Beamon said she has lived on Vista Street since 1969. She offered support, the developer has done a lot to consider everyone. She said the older tract streets are narrower and more traffic in the older tract would not be good. She said it makes sense to ' open to Carnesi and it is not fair to the church to access from their driveway. Luis Garcia questioned the fire access location. Paul Russel from Cross and Crown said the developer spent a lot of money and time to make everyone happy. He suggested the church has the property rights to tear down the wall. He said he is in favor of the project. Catherine "unintelligible/unknown"' said they compromised 25 years ago to let To// Brothers in. She said the first plan took 460 feet of the wall down and now it is only 60 feet. She said the traffic impact will not be significant and she thinks this will improve property value and the community. She expressed support; it is a win-win. She said Storm has worked hard to compromise; it's good for community. Tina Reddix said onlyY2 inch lies on church property and the wall was in the price of the homes. The Applicant stated in rebuttal that they are aware of the many concerns from the surrounding community and they compromised with all of there. He said the project meets the intent of the ESP, similar design of the street exists all over the City, there is a provision whereby they can ask for zone changes for some flexibility, and new home sales typically bring in 15% over existing house product. He said everything has been reviewed by staff and it is acceptable. He said they have reduced the length of the wall section to be ' removed. Candyce Burnett. Planning Director said there has been much concern about possible impacts related to traffic and stone water. She said all was analyzed by specialists in their HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 CacnHONcx Page 9 fields and they concluded there would be no impacts if mitigations were imposed. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer said the assigned class of streets will accept the level of anticipated traffic. With respect to drainage-only the southerly portion will have drainage to retaining the wall; the current flow is southerly and it will continue to flow southerly, nothing will drain to Carnesi, it will drain to the new street and southerly and then east to Pinon then south to Victoria. Ms. Burnett said with respect to the GPA and ESP amendments that there is a process to consider amendments when there are inconsistencies. She said the General Plan is a guiding document and living document-there are inconsistencies therefore these proposals can be considered. She said the Applicant gave many options to review and there are complications with all the options. We consider many factors and there is more consistent development if the amendments are considered. She said Option 2 has more good planning principles, and still meets the goals of the General Plan. ' Vice Chairman Oaxaca asked about the Emergency Vehicle Access off of Pinon and the suggestion to shift that location. Mr. James said Pinon Street predated incorporation of the City. Fire trucks have to back up to Pecan and do a 3 point turn. He said that if the area was vacant and a new subdivision was to be built, the City would not approve that layout with current our standards. He said for the alternate layout, he did not look to see if that would have the proper turning radius. Steven Rower, Assistant City Attorney said with respect to the claim that the wall was constructed on the church's property; staff has determined that the wall straddles the property line between the church and city property. He said the wall was built voluntarily by Toll Brothers. He said we cannot require Toll Brothers to maintain the wall and there was no formal legal agreement for the church to maintain it. There was no easement that ran with the current homeowners. If it is the church's wall it is their prerogative not to maintain it. Commissioner Munoz said he appreciated all comments/concerns— everyone will have to give as there is no perfect plan. The developer bent over backwards trying to find a solution for everyone. Impacts regarding traffic, the wall, etc. can be mitigated and everyone has rights. With respect to the General Plan change, a basis must be provided and all things considered he said he supports the project as presented. ' Commissioner Macias said he reviewed all the materials. He thanked staff for the comprehensive review and found the report very straightforward. He offered support and moved for approval. Commissioner Fletcher thanked the Director for the explanation for the process of the amendments. He said he personally does not like applications with many changes that r, k� HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION J AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 CCCAMONCA Page 10 need to be made. He said it happens with infill projects and in order to bring a conventional project that makes sense then these need to be considered. He said the developer has clone the best he can to accommodate and make a viable project. 1 remember when Toll Brothers was in process; the value goes with the name. He said he did not think property value changes will be major as comps to the east would not be considered. If Toll Brothers wanted a walled community they should have put it on their own side of the street. He noted the reduction of wall section being removed from 642 feet to 60 feet and even with the break in the wall it will still offer the feel of seclusion. He said there is no housing product yet but he said they should be sure it is of high grade and design. Vice Chairman Oaxaca thanked all who stayed to comment and for the detailed report and responses. He said the Commission must evaluate based on facts, not opinions, feelings, or emotions. He said he lives down the street from Carnesi Drive and he experiences the same traffic issues. He concurred with his fellow Commissioners that the Developer came up with the best possible solution in this scenario. He said it is unfortunate the Toll Brothers ' owners were led to believe the wall belonged to them. The wall belongs to the church and no arrangement was made for its maintenance. He said he has not heard compelling arguments that overcome the applicant's efforts to make this work. He said he understands property values-we still have anxiety with the real estate market with respect to property values and they are complicated and many things contribute to property values. Toll Brothers owners are fortunate-you invested. He said he believes this project will not affect but enhance the community. He said the Applicant still has to come back with housing product that will have to meet our standards; we will hold to those standards and they will not be relaxed. Chairman Wimberly offered thanks to everyone for coming. He agreed that the facts are compelling. He thanked the Director and Attorney for clarifying the issues about the wall and he thanked the developer for making concessions. Moved by Macias, seconded by Fletcher carried 5-0 to adopt the resolutions approving Tentative tract Map SUBTT18936, Variance DRC2014-00219 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00113 as corrected and amended with the additional mitigation with respect to owls and bats and to adopt the resolutions recommending approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2013-00961 and Etiwanda Specific Plan Amendment DRC2013-0096210 be forwarded to the City Council for final approval, Chairman Wimberly announced a short recess at 9:23 PM. At 9:32 PM. Chairman Wimberly reconvened the meeting with all commissioners present. K. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015- ' 00421 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A supplement to Development Code Update DRC2010-00571 amending Title 17 (Development Code) of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to provide development standards for the Mixed Use development district, development and land use standards for the industrial districts, and to clarify definitions, HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION { AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Y� AUGUST 12, 2015 CUCAMONcn Page 11 administrative procedures, and correct prior errors and omissions. Related Files: CEQA Review CEQA2015-00018. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Mike Smith, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file) followed by Tom Grahn. Associate Planner and then Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner and then Dominick Perez, Assistant Planner. Mr. Smith noted that Staff has scheduled a study session with the City Council on September 16 and tentatively scheduled a public hearing before the Council on October 7. Commissioner Fletcher asked if there are any examples with respect to allowed uses in the Industrial Parks in Rancho. Mr. Smith said the JC Penney outlet at Haven and Civic Center Drive; the Code currently ' only allows for one major tenant to occupy the entire space. Chairman Wimberly mentioned a similar re-use in Pasadena. Commissioner Munoz asked if commercial repurposing applications would come to the Commission. Mr. Smith said all factors are still considered. Commissioner Munoz asked if allowed uses would still come to the Commission for review. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said the process for approving these projects is found on pages 66-68 of the agenda; the table indicates the level of review. A 'C' still means discretionary review at the staff level. Mr. Smith said they would still have to get a business license but for something like the Anaheim Packing house, further review would be required. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing none, closed the public hearing. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director noted a change on the resolution found on page K-48. She noted the reference to the Negative Declaration. She said the Commission is the ' recommending body and the City Council will adopt the Negative Declaration. Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Fletcher. carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution recommending the City Council approve the Development Cade Amendment DRC2015- 00421 with the noted change. r HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 12, 2015 CCCANONCA Page 12 : VLA_•: COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING CO1MTV4ISSIW, L. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES None M. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Chairman Oaxaca thanked staff for prepping him for this meeting. He said a few weeks ago he was contacted by a descendent of the first owner of the historic Minor House. He had an opportunity to meet with them and the family appreciated our actions over the years to encourage the preservation of the property. VIA:r.: .ADJOURNMENT- 10:04 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 August 6, 2015, 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 RANCHO AUGUST 12, 2015 CUCA.HONOA Page 13 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 $2,533 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.