Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-12-14 - Workshop Agenda Packet - PC-HPCTHE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1 WORKSHOP 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 II I. CALL TO ORDER II Roll Call Chairman Oaxaca Vice Chairman Macias Munoz _ Wimberly _ Fletcher 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. 11 III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION 11 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 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP DECEMBER 14, 2016 �cn aA Page 2 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. 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. 11 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 DECEMBER 14, 2016 ARANCHO Page 3 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 Vicinity Map Planning Commission Workshop is Ba Foi Ar DECEMBER 14, 2016 --------------------------- N W £ E = i nth St' ! 't /.e se Line ia\ J 1 Church Church 4 3thill Foothill N C I N N E L N ttl Arrow row C ar v 1 Jersey = i 8th .._.. C7 6th� H —� c 6th W 4th i i5 7r Meeting Location: City HalllCouncil Chambers 10600 Civic Center Drive Item A: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00826—PDC OC/IE LLC: Northwest corner of Utica Avenue and 4th Street. Item B: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00626—THERALDSON HOSPITALITY: Northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 4th Street STAFF REPORT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ri DATE: December 14, 2016 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner BY: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner SUBJECT: PRE -APPLICATION WORKSHOP FOR 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 —APNs: 0210-081,-19 and 20. Review Process: The Pre -Application Review process provides a project proponent with the opportunity to present schematic designs to the Planning Commission prior to a formal application submittal, in order to receive broad, general comments and direction. The focus of the meeting is a discussion by the Planning Commissioners regarding the technical and design issues related to the proposed project. The meeting is not a forum for debate and no formal decision or vote is made. After the meeting, staff prepares general minutes of the meeting, which are provided to the applicant. Site Characteristics: The project site is located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Utica Avenue and is comprised of 2 parcels with a combined area of 14.02 acres and is currently undeveloped. To the north, across Bentley Street, there is a multi -tenant office complex. To the east, across Utica Avenue, is a vacant undeveloped site. The Planning Department is currently reviewing a Design Review (DRC2016-00670) and a Specific Plan Amendment (DRC2016- 00931) application for this site; a proposal to develop a 235,325 square foot industrial building. To the south, across 4th Street within the City of Ontario, is a residential apartment complex. To the west, at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 4th Street, is a vacant undeveloped site. The Planning Department is currently processing a Pre -Application Review (DRC2016-00626) for this site to obtain feedback from City staff and the Planning Commission for the proposed development of two hotels and a restaurant. The zoning of the subject property and the properties to the north and west is Industrial Park (IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD). The HAOD occupies a small portion along the western property line that extends from the north to south end of the property and is approximately 10 feet in width. The zoning of the properties to the east is Empire Lakes Specific Plan Area 5. The zoning of the property to the south is Urban Residential District (Ontario Center Specific Plan), which is within the jurisdiction of the City of Ontario. Project Overview: The project involves the development of three (3) industrial logistics buildings that contain a total of 305,745 square feet. The office and warehouse square footages within each building are as shown in the table below. Item A —1 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 2 Building Area Square Feet Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Total Office - 1st Floor 5,500 3,250 2,000 10,750 Office - 2nd Floor 5,500 3,250 2,000 10,750 Warehouse 112,000 141,145 31,100 284,245 Total 123,000 147,645 35,100 305,745 Building one, which is located north of 4th Street and west of Utica Avenue, contains potential office areas at the southwest corners of the building. Building two is located approximately 150 feet to the north of Building one and is shown on the conceptual site plan to contain potential office area at the northeast corner of the building. Building three is located south of Trademark North Parkway, approximately 60 feet north of Building two, and contains potential office area within the southeast quadrant of the building. Each building will be made up of concrete tilt up panel walls that incorporate decorative reveal lines as the primary building material, with a combination of glass, metal awnings, columns and decorative texturing as the secondary building materials. The buildings will'be setback from the street and interior property lines to meet the minimum requirements. The project will also comply with the maximum allowable building height and floor area ratio (FAR) for the Industrial Park District. The site has a total of six vehicular driveway access points: two along Bentley Avenue, two along Utica Avenue and two along 4th Street. The northwesterly and southwesterly driveways are designed to be shared entrances to allow access to the properties to the west of the subject site. The site contains a total of 216 parking spaces that are equally distributed throughout the entire site. According to Section 17.64 of the Development Code, the project is in compliance with the required parking ratios specified for industrial uses based on the square footages provided. Auto Parkinc Required Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Stalls Office 1/250 s.f. 44 26 16 86 Warehouse 1st 20k @ 1/1,000 s.f. 20 20 20 60 2nd 20k @ 1/2,000 s.f. 10 10 6 26 above 40k @ 1/4,000 s.f. 18 26 0 44 Total 92 82 42 216 Each building contains trailer dock doors. Buildings one (12 doors) and two (14 doors) are designed with the dock doors to be centrally located and screened from 4th Street as shown on the site plan. There are 8-foot tall metal manual operated gates at the east and west ends of this dock area, which will screen the trailer parking from the properties to the east and west. Building three contains a total of three dock doors and is shown to include a concrete tilt -up screen wall with an 8-foot wall swing gate around the dock area. Each site contains exactly one trailer parking space per dock door, which is consistent with the Development Code trailer parking requirements. The Development Code requires a minimum of 15 percent coverage of landscape area per parcel or project. The parcels containing Buildings one and three will contain landscape in excess of the minimum requirements, however, the parcel containing Building two will have 12.3 Item A —2 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 3 percent landscape coverage. Although the landscape coverage for Building two is deficient, the overall average landscape coverage for the project is 15.04 percent. The landscape plan indicates there will be trees around the project perimeter and throughout the parking lot, including 15 gallon Brisbane box trees, an evergreen species, along the west end of the site. This will help screen potential industrial uses at this site from future development to the west. The site contains above ground utility lines along the southern edge of the property, on the north side of 4th Street. Two of the poles will need to be relocated due to the proposed right turn lane for the drive approach at the southwest corner of the property. Also, the site plan shows a proposed bus stop along 4th Street. The bus stop detail provided in the full-sized plans indicates the design of the bus shelter will be architecturally compatible to the proposed buildings onsite. The project also involves a proposal to subdivide the site into a total of three parcels. The size of each parcel complies with the minimum lot area requirements specified within Section 17.36.040 of the Development Code (Development Standards for Industrial Districts), which requires a minimum lot area of .5 acres. The table below provides the areas of each proposed lot. Site Area Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Total Square Feet 256,400 272,161 82,192 610,753 Acres 5.89 6.25 1.89 14.02 Lastly, a street vacation application is currently being processed through the Engineering Department for the vacation of two unimproved streets: Trademark Parkway South and Winston Avenue. If approved, this request will eliminate the requirement for street improvements as shown on the attached lot line adjustment exhibit (Exhibit F). This request does not involve the vacation of any portion of 4th Street, Utica Avenue, Bentley Street or Trademark Parkway North. Staff Comments: According to the Development Code, industrial logistics buildings containing office and warehouse areas are a permitted use within the Industrial Park District. However, a portion of about 10 feet in width of the project site that runs from north to south is located within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Therefore, all industrial distribution uses, including buildings and trailer loading and storage areas, will need to be located outside of this area. Building three, which is shown on the site plan to be setback from the westerly property line by 5 feet and 7 inches, will need to be relocated outside of this area. The purpose of the Haven Avenue Overlay District is to establish a high -end office corridor with special commercial and service related retail to serve office users. According to the Development Code, the "Haven Avenue Overlay Zoning District is intended to result in a progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development." Because of the proximity to the site of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, special attention was given to the building elevations adjacent to 4th Street. As shown on the graphic below, the south elevation of Building one was designed to have an appearance of a multi -tenant office building, which can be seen by the amount of glass used. In addition to the glass and awning elements, the plans indicate a textured material will be used on the building's exterior walls. Staff recommends the concrete tilt up panels incorporate a sandblasted concreted finish, as opposed to a tile or stone veneer. Item A —3 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 4 The site plan indicates there are two employee break areas at the south end of Building one. However, the dimensions are not shown and the amenities within this area are not indicated. Additionally, Buildings two and three are not shown to include an employee break area. Per Section 17.122.030(A)(1)(a) of the Development Code, employee break areas shall be provided for office and industrial projects and provide plazas where employees can rest and eat lunch, preferably away from public entrances to buildings, loading areas, or other high -traffic areas. Tables and/or benches and shade trees and/or shade structures are required. Break areas shall be designed and sized to comfortably accommodate furniture and amenities, should have a minimum size of five hundred (500) square feet and have seating for at least ten percent (10%) of the anticipated workforce. Break areas shall be provided at a rate of one per building within an office or industrial complex comprised of multiple buildings, or one per office area within a multi -tenant industrial building, whichever is greater. The site plan indicates turf block parking is proposed in areas adjacent to Buildings one and two. Section 17.64.080 of the Development Code states, "each required parking space and aisle, shall be graded, drained, and surfaced so as to prevent dust, mud, or standing water and shall be identified by pavement markings, wheel stops, entrance and exit signing, and directional signs, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. All new parking spaces shall be painted with double stripe pavement markings." For this reason, staff recommends revising the design of this area to include fully paved parking spaces in place of turf block parking. Buildings one and two have trailer docks and trailer parking within a screened area between the two buildings. Building three is shown to include a concrete tilt -up screen wall and 8-foot tall swing gate around the dock area. For the screening material that will be used between Buildings one and two, staff suggests using a combination of concrete tilt -up screen walls and solid metal swing gates, similar to the material used around the dock area of Building three. With respect to the concrete tilt -up screen walls for Building three, the walls are proposed to be setback from the curb face at the distance of 15 feet. Section 17.36.040 requires all walls that exceed a height of 3 feet to be consistent with the required building setback of 25 feet. Therefore, the Item A -4 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 5 screen walls must be relocated to be setback no closer than 25 feet from the face of curb along Trademark North Parkway. The dock/trailer parking area for Building three contains a drive aisle between the dock parking and employee parking. Because of the relocation of the screen wall per the comments given above, the drive aisle width for this area will be reduced and may create difficulties in vehicle maneuverability. Although the current Development Code does not contain minimum drive aisle width requirements for drive aisles adjacent to loading docks, the previous Development Code (prior to the 2012 Development Code update) did contain these standards, which required a minimum of 50 feet not including additional width for truck parking. Staff recommends maintaining a drive aisle width consistent with these specifications. Discussion Outline: Land Use: Although the project is not located adjacent to existing distribution warehouses, and the subject property is partially located within the Haven Avenue Overlay District, the General Plan and Zoning Map allows for the proposed industrial and office uses. The Planning Commission should provide input and state any concerns regarding the proposed land uses. 2. Layout: Staff is generally in support of the overall conceptual site plan, with the exception of the technical issues discussed above. The project is designed in a manner to provide adequate screening to the existing and future adjacent developments. The Planning Commission should provide comments or state any concerns regarding the layout of the site (i.e. parking, trailer storage, drive approaches, etc). 3. Architecture: Staff is generally in support of the architectural elevations that were presented. The materials and design are complimentary to the existing office uses within the vicinity, including the office complex to the north and northwest, the office buildings to the east of Utica Avenue and the office development west of Haven Avenue. The Planning Commission should provide comments regarding the proposed architecture. Required Entitlements: The development of an industrial project on the subject property will require the following entitlements: 1. Design Review - $11,187 2. Tentative Parcel Map - $8,245 3. Initial Environmental Study - $2,853 4. Uniform Sign Program - $2,186 NOTE: 'Fees are subject to change by Council Resolution. Special Studies: The following special studies will be required at the time of formal submittal: 1. Delhi Sands Flower -loving Fly Focused Survey 2. Biological Resources (birds, mammals, reptiles, plants, flora and fauna habitat). 3. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study. 4. Traffic Impact Analysis. Item A —5 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 6 5. Cultural Resources Report (with Tribal Consultation per AB52). 6. Noise Impact Analysis. 7. Photometric Analysis. 8. Water Quality Management Plan. NOTE: Additional special studies may be required following the formal submittal of the required applications. Respectfully submitted, 4 b v_-' Candyce Burnett City Planner CB:DP/jy Attachments: Exhibit A - Applicant's Letter Exhibit B - Full-sized Plans (Distributed Under Separate Cover) Exhibit C - Pre -Application Review Department Comments Exhibit D - Engineering Division — Underground Utilities Policy Exhibit E - Engineering Division — Driveway Policy Exhibit F - Street Vacation Exhibit Item A —6 Letter of Justification/Explanation Pre -Application Review Submittal NWC 4th Street & Utica Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga Applicant: PDC OC/IE LLC (Panattoni Development Company, Inc.) Site Information: The subject site, approximately 14.02 acres, is located at the northwest corner of 4th Street and Utica Avenue ("Site") in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The Site is bound by 4th Street to the south, Utica Avenue to the east, and Bentley Street to the north. There are approximately 15 acres of existing, dilapidated vineyards to the West of the Site, ultimately bound by Haven Avenue. Environmental: The Site is predominantly covered by dilapidated vineyards. With the exception of two irrigation standpipes, there are no aboveground structures located at the Site. Unpaved farm roads pass north -south and east -west through the vineyard. The Site's northern and eastern portions are covered with sandy soil and sparse vegetation. The Applicant intends to develop three (3) light industrial buildings on the Site to replace the existing vineyard. Land Uses/Zoning: The Applicant proposes to construct three (3) light industrial buildings on the Site. According to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Map adoped by City Council on July 18, 2012, the Site is currently zoned Industrial Park (IP). The Industrial Park (IP) zoning designation, as further outlined in the 2010 Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, "accomodates master -planned concentrations of light industrial, research and development businesses, green technology, and general and medical office uses". The Applicant's proposed development of three (3) light industrial buildings is therefore consistent with the current zoning designation of Industrial Park (IP) for the Site. EXHIBIT A Item A-7 Comoatibilitv: The Applicant's proposed development of three (3) light industrial buildings totaling±305,745 SF on the Site are compatible with the surrounding uses and will improve the immediate area with superior design elements. To the east, the Site is neighbored by an approximately 235,325 SF planned industrial building currently in the entitlement/CEClA approval process with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. To the north, the Site is bordered by an existing business park of single -story office buildings. Both of the surrounding uses to the east and north are consistent with the proposed use of the Applicant's proposed development of three (3) light industrial buildings. To the west, Tharaldson Motels ll, Inc. is currently processing a mixed use development incorporating hotel, office, and retail properties with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The Applicant is currently working with Tharaldson Motels Il, Inc. to ensure the shared frontage of 4th Street is a streamlined transition from the mixed use development to the Applicant's proposed light industrial project. The Applicant has incorporated several design elements along the 4th Street frontage, including meandering sidewalks and plush landscaping, to create an inviting pedestrian walkway along 4ch Street. Additionally, the Applicant is providing enhanced elevations along 4th Street to create an office facade for the proposed light industrial buildings. For additional detail, please reference the rendering included as part of this Pre -Application Review Submittal. For all of the above reasons, the Applicant is confident the proposed development of three (3) light industrial buildings will be compatible with the surrounding uses and improve the immediate area of Rancho Cucamonga. Sincerely, Michael Sizemore Development Manager Item A —8 UNDER 1 � 1 COVER EXHIBIT B Item A-9 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP DEPARTMENT COMMENTS PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 1 Engineering The following Engineering Pre -Application Review comments should be taken into consideration prior to the formal submittal: 1. The City of Ontario will need to approve all direct connections to the 4th Street storm drain. All drainage studies that impact their downstream facilities will be routed to the City of Ontario for review. The Engineering Department suggests talking with the City of Ontario as part of the preliminary review phase to get a better understanding of their requirements. 2. Corner cut-offs and curb radii shall be per City standard 100. 3. Fiber conduit per City standards is required along the frontage of the entire project on Trademark, Bentley, Utica, and 4th. 4. The existing condition of the pavement on 4th Street will require replacement or overlay. The limits of pavement rehabilitation will be determined during the formal submittal process. 5. The condition of Utica Avenue will be inspected during the submittal process. 6. Undergrounding shall take place along Haven Avenue and 4th Street per the undergrounding policy. 7. Development impact fees will be collected upon issuance of the building permit per the engineering fee schedule. Note that fees are subject to change annually. 8. Provide a standard knuckle on Bentley Street per City Standard Plan 110. 9. Provide a bus bay -right turn lane into the project site per City Standard Plan 119. 10. Coordinate with development to the west as they are not proposing a shared driveway on the west property line. 11. The projects shall comply with the Engineering Division policy for utility undergrounding, which requires all lines to be undergrounded or in lieu fees paid, except for 66kV or larger electrical lines. Traffic The following Traffic Pre -Application Review comments should be taken into consideration prior to the formal submittal: 1. 4th Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial' standards as required and including: a. Protect or repair curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, traffic signal equipment, and signing and striping as required. b. Provide a bus bay -right turn lane into the project site per City Standard Plan 119. EXHIBIT C ItemA-10 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP DEPARTMENT COMMENTS PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 2 c. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including minimum driveway approach widths, distance from intersections, and spacing from otherdriveways. d. Modify curb ramps to the latest ADA standards. 2. Utica Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Industrial Collector" standards as required and including: a. Provide, protect, and/or repair curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and signing & striping as required. b. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including stacking distance, approach widths, and driveway distance from an intersection. 3. Bentley Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Collector with Median" standards as required and including: a. Provide, protect, and/or repair curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and signing & striping as required. b. Provide a standard knuckle on Bentley Street per City Standard Plan 110. c. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including driveway approach width. 4. Trademark Parkway North frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Collector with Median" standards as required and including: a. Provide, protect, and/or repair curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and signing & striping as required. b. Provide a standard knuckle on Bentley Street per City Standard Plan 110. c. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy including driveway approach width. d. Show sight lines for the driveway along Trademark Parkway. A no -build easement may be required to provide adequate line of sight. Tree removals may be required along Trademark median. Fire District The following Fire District Pre -Application Review comments should be taken into consideration prior to the formal submittal: 1. The two 26' wide driveways on Utica are not required, but if provided it must accommodate the fire apparatus turning radius of 20' on the inside and 46' on the outside. Consult with Engineering regarding the width of the driveway requirement. 2. Obtain a fire flow letter. 3. Correct the turning radius around Building 1. 4. Indicate the location of the fire access doors. 5. Provide building data including type of construction. Item A —11 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP DEPARTMENT COMMENTS PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00826 - PDC OC/IE LLC December 14, 2016 Page 3 6. A Reciprocal Access and Water Agreement will be required favoring the Fire District due to fire lanes and water supply crossing property lines. 7. Exterior walls in the proximity of property lines may be prohibited from having unrated opening, spandrel glass would be preferred to meet Planning requirements. If you have any questions, please contact Moises Eskenazi, Senior Plans Examiner at (909) 477- 2710 Extension 4209 or at moises.eskenazi@cityofrc.us Item A —12 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA — ENGINEERING DIVISION EXISTING OVERHEAD, UTILITY REQUIREMENTS A. POLICY: All developments shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal of the related supporting poles along all streets (alleys, railroad or channel rights -of -way, etc. adjacent to the development limits as follows: 1. Lines on the project side of the street; a. The tines shall be undergrounded at the Developer's expense. b. In those circumstances where it is decided that undergrounding is impractical at present for such reasons as a short length of undergrounding (less than 300 feet and not undergrounded adjacent), a heavy concentration of services to the other users, disruption to existing improvements, etc., the Developer shall pay an in -lieu fee per Section 6. C. The Developer shall be eligible for reimbursement of one-half the costs of undergrounding from future developments as they occur on the opposite side of the street. 2. Lines on the opposite side of the street from the development: The Developer shall pay a fee to the City of one-half the amount per Section 6 as contribution to the future undergrounding of the lines on the opposite side of the street, 3. Lines on both sides of the street: The Developer shall comply with Section 1 above and be eligible for 'reimbursement or pay additional fees so that he bears a total expense equivalent to one-half•the total cost of undergrounding the lines on both sides of the street. 4. Pole lines containing 66KV or larger electrical lines; All lines shall be undergrounded or in -lieu fees paid in accordance with Section 1, 2 or 3 above, except for 66KV or larger electrical lines, 5. Undergrounding Limits; Undergrounding shall include the entire project frontage and extend to: (a) the first Pole off -site from the project boundaries (across the street for corner properties), (b) a new pole erected at a project boundary (across the street for comer properties), or (c) an existing pole within 5 feet of a project boundary (except at a comer). EXHIBIT D ItemA-13 E w u v K1 � � - - • - . I, LOCATION OF EXISTING Project No. 60' Il OVERHEAD UTILITIES CD N v Site v o 1n 100' ro IN " I I E, T 350' J.-- 65' "A" Street LEGEND; 66KV — 66KV or larger Electrical i E — Other Electrical T — Telecommunications — Supporting Pole Item A —14 UNDERGROUND UTILITIES FLAN SUBMITTAL Plan Submittal(s): All development submittals shall contain an 6 %" x 1 t" drawing to scale accurately showing the type and location of existing utility lines and supporting poles on both sides of all streets (alleys, railroad and channel rights -of -way, etc.) adjacent to the project limits and extend to the first existing pole off -site from the project boundaries. The drawing shall conform to the sample below. 60 El.I w w, u N �I p Io 190, _ IL Project.NO, CUP 86-14 LOCATION OF EXISTING bVERHEAD UTILITIES Site I T 350' "A" Street LEGEND: 66KVE - 66KV or Larger Electrical E - Other Electrical T - Telecommunications • - Supporting POle 1 of4 N ,lu 100, 65' Updated 3.22,2010 Item A —15 RESOLUTION NO. 87-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ESTABLISHING A REVISED POLICY FOR THE UNDERGROUNDING OF EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO.86-77 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga wishes to repeal Resolution No. 86-77 which adopted on the 28th day of May, 1986 and established the revised policy contained herein; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga wishes to remove unsightly existing overhead utility lines in order to promote a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within the City; and WHEREAS, it 'is necessary to establish a policy to inform property owners and developers of the City goal. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved and established that all developments, except those contained in Section 7 and any others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergrounding all existing overhead utility lines including the removal of the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development as follows: 1. Lines on the proiect side of the street": a. Said lines shall be undergrounded at the developer's expense. b. In those circumstances where the Planning Commission decides that undergrounding is impractical at present for such reasons as a short length of undergrounding (less than 300 feet and not undergrounded adjacent), a heavy concentration of services to other users, disruption to existing improvements, etc„ the Developershall pay an in -lieu fee for the full amount per Section 6. c. The Developer shall. be eligible for reimbursement of one-half the cost of undergrounding from future developments as they occur on the opposite side of the street. 2. Lines on the opposite side of the street from the proiect: The Developer shall pay a fee to the City for one-half the amount per Section 6. 3. Lines on both sides of the street: The Developer shall comply with Section 1 above and be eligible for reimbursement or pay additional fees so that he bears a total expense equivalent to one-half the total cost of undergrounding the lines on both sides of the street. 2of4 Updated 3,22.2010 Item A -16 4. Pole lines containing 66KV or larger electrical lines All lines shall be undergrounded or in - lieu fees paid in accordance with section 1, 2 or 3, above, except for 66KV or larger electrical lines. 5. Limits of Responsibilities: a. in -lieu fees shall be based upon the length of the property being developed from property line to property line (the center of adjacent streets for corner properties). b. Undergrounding shall include the entire project frontage and extend to; (1) the first existing pole off -site from the project boundaries (across the street for corner properties), (2) a new pole erected at a project boundary (across the street for corner properties), or (3) an existing pole within 5 feet of a project boundary, except at a corner. 6. Fee Amount: The amount for in -lieu fees shall equal the length (per Section 5,a) times the unit amount as established by the City Council based, upon information supplied by the utility companies and as updated periodically as deemed necessary. 7. Exemptions: The following types of projects shall be exempt from this policy: The addition of functional equipment to existing developments, such as: loading docks, silos, satellite dishes, antennas, water tanks, air conditioners, cooling towers, enclosure of an outdoor storage area, parking and loading areas, block walls and fences, etc. b. Building additions or new free standing buildings of less than 25% of the floor area of the existing building(s) on the same assessor's parcel, or 5,000 square feet, whichever is less. c. Exterior upgrading or repair of existing developments, such as: reroofing, addition of trellis, awnings, landscaping, equipment screening, repainting and exterior finishes, etc. d. Interior tenant improvements and non -construction CUPS. e, The construction of a single family residence on an existing parcel. Existing overhead utility lines located in trails, alleys, and utility easements with a heavy concentration of services to adjacent developments and the utility lines are 500' or more from the right of way dine of a Special Boulevard. g. Residential subdivisions of four or fewer single family residential parcels, where the utility lines extend at least 600' offsite from both the project boundaries and the adjacent property is not likely to contribute to future undergrounding. * All references to streets shall also mean alleys, railroad or channel rights -of -way, etc, lof 4 Updated 3,22,2010 Item A —17 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS loth DAY OF DINE 1987. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: ATTEST: I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly, and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 10 day of June, 1987, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: EMERICK, CHITI'EA, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSTAIN': COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY 4of4 Updstod 3,22,2010 Item A -18 Y CITY OF RAI\`CHO GUCAM01\G IiYE'E Iv ul ➢�IVEWAY POLICY A. ProiectSubmiIs : A map (plan) to scale;shall'be provided showing the location of existing, approved, and proposed drivevrays and streets.within the vicinity of the driveways proposed for the project. The required dirtance'otFN(.e :wi"II vary with the project.type-and location. As a general rule, 600' From llie project boundaries will be sufficient; However, in some cases more or less distance will be required. B. Arterial Streets: 4- Lane (64' curb to curb width) or larger: I. Spacing (measured between driveway centerline.$):. a, Sam e•sfdeofstreet--300' b. Opposite side of street ; align or separate by 300' (preferred) , 235' minimum. Does not apply to streets w'ithmcdia_ns, c. Additional service only driveways maybe allowed. d• Foof Rl Blvd: (east of Haven Ave.). - spacing shall be 660'. . . 2.'Distance [ram'intersections'(rneasured from BCB to near edge of driveway):. ' a..-SfenaI1ztd (existing or futurB) -200' h. other- 100' 3. For comer properties, driveways shall be restricted to the smaller side street w-heneverpossible'. 4.. Stacking"( distance from street face of curb to nearest edge of a perking stall perpendicular to the drive aisle): a. Commercial, service, and truck drives - 75' - b. Others - 50' 5. Deceleration lanes for driveways shall'be provided as required by the City Engineer. 6. Shared ddveways with adjacent properties shall be used where apprppriate for the proposed site or master plan, to meet spacing requirements, orwhere located nearproperty lines.. 7. . Single family residential shall not takediitc.t access. C. -Local rndustril / Commercial StrePtc 2 Lane (44' curb to curb width) '1. Spacing (Measured 6eCNcen driveway centerlines) ' . a... Same side of street - 1513% ' b- opposite side drstrcet - align oi• separate by 150'. 2. .Distance from intersections - saxne.as B2. -. 3_ Stacking.-25`. - 4. Shared driveways -.same'as e.6. D. Residential Collectors -2 Lane (44' curb to curb width):, ' I. Single family residential shall not take direct access. When absolutely necessary,.provide a"circular drive (preferred) or hammerhead to prevent backing into the street. 2. Driveways for larger projects (;other than single and duplex residential) shall conform to Section'C above., 3. This criteria shall also apply to local residential streets (36' curb to curb) that act as, functional collectors carrying 1500+ADT (now or in the future). E. General: I. Construct Drive Approaches in accordance with Standard Drawing No.101 ,a, b, or c. Driveways with medians shall have two 20' widei.drive aisles separated by a 10' wide median, The median shall not extend imo'the public right -of way. 2. Driveways and the projected onsite drive aisles shall be perpendicular to the street. 3. Project site plans shall provide For barking ' onsite to prevent backing from and'into public streets, except for single family . residential fronting local residenlial streets.. 4. Gated entries For residential projects shall conform to the separate "Residential Project Gated Entrance Design Guide". Other projects will require a special design allowing for visitor truth turning. . 5. In general, driveways serving comer single family units shalt be placed on 'the approach, versus away streets, to reduce conflicts between backing out and blind right turn movements, except where the approach strctt is a functional collector. Driveways on away. streets shall be located 50' minimum From the BCR'to the near edge or the maximum distance allowed by the lot size. 6: More restrlcOv❑ requirements than stated hereon may be imposed on re occasion to insu"fric safety as d=,-ned necessary by the City Engineer. ' EXHIBIT E IternAL19 W z w QI z w Q Si TRADEMARK PARKWAY NORTH iN45'37'571V (R) PRC �- NST31'27"W / 75.17' Q A6 0� � DR'�gY LR9040' 03�, EXHIBIT "B" NO2'35'05"V! (R) o 0 L-3p \Rc=� A ,? VARIES P lP 582'21'54"E (K pP,C S80'50'39"EARL - 3 SHEET 1 OF 1 S80'50'39"E 0 82.00' �=01'31 ' 15" R=391.00' L= 10.38` -82'50'27" © R=24.00' L=34.70' �\ \ S89'31'27"E 1 U 60.60' BENTLEY oSTREET „ II PARCEL "AllB 7.128 ACRES CDo TRADEMARK PARKWAY SOUTH VACATED PER SEPARATE INSTRUMENT M \� N89 31'27"W 590.04' Ln.i --- ---------------------- P.O.B. PARCEL A 0 PARCEL "B" Lo 7.382 ACRES 0 o z rn f N PARCEL 656.98' --'' Q TRADEARK MVACATED AY SOUTH PER T ( SEPARATE INSTRUMENT o PARCEL "C" w 1'4.090 ACRES � D z PARc'1" N > o n Q N Li Lo ,L=89'16'27" PARCEL B R=24.00' PARCEL C L=37.40' � 566.35' 4TH STREET N37'17'S0"W 73.04' WESTERLY LINE WESTERLY LINE WINSTON AVENUE PARCEL "C" 1 N PARCEL "B" /� PARCEL "C" SCALE: 1 "=200' DETAIL NOT TO SCALE VALMED EN61NEEfUG, INC CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND SURVEYING • LAND PLANNING 180 N. BENSON AVE, STE A, UPLAND, CA 91786 PHONE: (909) 982-4601 WINSTON AVENUE o Q VACATED PER z U SEPARATE INSTRUMENT H SEE DETAIL L=90'43'59" Q�' /I BELOW R-24.00' i L=38.01' ( 584.18' -� N89'31'27"VI 1,150.53' N89'31'27"VI 594.60' - (BASIS OF BEARINGS) P.O.C. I FnFNn. PROPERTY LINE — - - — CENTERLINE - POINT OF BEGINNING P.O.B. POINT OF COMMENCEMENT P.O.C. PLAT FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT PLNNING DEPARTMENT 11k_%J-71 DATE: December 14, 2016 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission C,UCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner BY: Mike Smith, Senior Planner SUBJECT: 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. Review Process: The Pre -Application Review process provides a project proponent with the opportunity to present schematic designs to the Planning Commission prior to formal application submittal, in order to receive broad, general comments and directions. The focus of the meeting is a discussion by the Planning Commissioners regarding the technical and design issues related to the proposed project. The meeting is not a forum for debate and no formal decision or vote is made. After the meeting, Staff prepares general minutes of the meeting, which are provided to the applicant. Site Characteristics: The project site is located at the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 4"' Street on a parcel of about 297,000 square feet (6.8 acres). The subject parcel is part of a larger property ("the overall property') that consists of three (3) parcels with a combined area of 25.6 acres. The overall property is generally square in shape with dimensions of about 1,200 feet (east - west) and between about 875 — 1,200 feet (north -south). It appears to have been used as a vineyard and has been inactive for an uncertain amount of time. With the exception of a large entry monument sign with associated trees and landscaping located at the southwest corner of the property, the overall property is undeveloped. The overall property is bound on the north, east, south, and west by Trademark Parkway North/Bentley Street, Utica Avenue, 411 Street, and Haven Avenue. The area of the overall property does not include about 3 acres within it that are currently "dedicated" for potential public streets. Staff notes to the Commission that these street "dedications" are in the process of being "vacated", i.e. returned to the property owner. The specific location of the project site is at the southwest 'quadrant' of the overall property. The dimensions of the project site are about 500 feet (north -south) and about 631 feet (east -west). Relative to the overall property there is a mix of vacant and fully developed properties. To the north, across Trademark Parkway North/Bentley Street, is a multi -tenant office complex (Stone Haven Business Park). To the east, across Utica Avenue, is a property that is minimally developed with an unused parking lot. A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 235,000 square feet on that property is currently under review (related file: Design Review DRC2016-00670). To the south, across 4'h Street, is a vacant property and an apartment complex in the City of Ontario. To the west is an office complex consisting of two (2) 3-story multi -tenant offices, a hotel (The Aloft), and two multi -tenant office/commercial buildings. A proposal by Panattoni Development Item B —1 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00626 — THERALDSON HOSPITALITY DEVELOPMENT December 14, 2016 Page 2 Corporation (PDC) to develop an industrial office/warehouse complex (related file: Pre -Application Review DRC2016-00826) on the northeast and southeast 'quadrants' of the overall property (Exhibit D), and immediately to the east of the project site, is currently under review by the City. The zoning of the overall property, including the project site, and the properties to the north and west is Industrial Park (IP) District. The properties to the east are within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (Planning Area V). Applicable to all properties along Haven Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and 41h Street is the Haven Avenue Overlay District (HAOD). The boundary of this overlay varies. It generally bisects the overall property at its north -south axis — the project site, itself, is entirely within this overlay. The zoning of the properties to the south is Urban Residential District and Urban Commercial District (Ontario Center Specific Plan) in the City of Ontario. Background — General Plan: Haven Avenue is an important street corridor and gateway into the City. Development in this area has been identified as very important to the City's image. Per Chapter 2 of the General Plan, the Haven Avenue Overlay District is the City's prime office corridor and described as an area for intensive, high -quality office development where a progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development is required. Land use policy LU-5.2 of the General Plan encourages development along the corridor that incorporates an intensity and design excellence that is consistent with its importance. Also, future office and business park development at this gateway location, particularly at major street intersections such as Haven Avenue and 4t^ Street, should be appealing, eye-catching, and representative of the design quality found throughout the City. The entry monument sign identified previously is one of twenty (20) that are required by the General Plan per Figure LU-7, and illustrates the importance of this corridor. These signs are intended to provide the first impression of the City. Project Overview: The applicant proposes a commercial development consisting of two (2) hotels and one (1) restaurant. The hotels are proposed to be plotted with their primary (long) axes parallel to Haven Avenue (Hotel 1) and 411 Street (Hotel 2). The floor area of Hotel 1 and 2 are 98,875 square feet and 66,775 square feet, respectively. Each hotel will have five (5) floors and 115 rooms. Due to the varying height of the parapets, the overall height of both hotels will be between 55 feet and 65 feet. The applicant has provided conceptual elevations (Sheets DR-4.1 and DR-4.2) and example renderings (Exhibit C) for discussion at the Workshop. According to the elevations provided, the hotel brands will be Staybridge Suites and Home2 Suites by Hilton in Hotels 1 and 2, respectively. The design theme used for the hotel buildings generally follows each respective brand's theme. The architecture is functional and reflects the purpose of the buildings. The footprints of Hotel 1 and 2 will be, respectively, "L" shaped and rectangular. Based upon the conceptual elevations, the exterior walls would be EIFS (exterior insulation and finish systems) panels textured to appear similar to a stucco finish. The main entrances for both hotels will face inward towards the parking lot. At each entrance there will be a guest drive aisle beneath a porte-cochere. As with most hotels, there will be ground -level, outdoor pools. Roof -mounted equipment will be screened by the parapets and/or generally not visible from the ground due to the height of the buildings. The one-story restaurant is a placeholder and the details of it are subject to change depending on the tenant, the architecture that defines their brand, and their operating requirements. At this time, its location will be at the southwest corner of the project site in the general vicinity of the entry monument sign. The floor area of the restaurant is 8,340 square (including an outdoor dining area Item B —2 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00626 — THERALDSON HOSPITALITY DEVELOPMENT December 14, 2016 Page 3 of 2,000 square feet). The outdoor dining area will be between the restaurant and the monument sign. Three (3) points of vehicle access from the public streets are proposed: one via a driveway on Haven Avenue and two (2) via driveways on 4t' Street. The driveway at the southeast corner of the project site will be shared with the proposed industrial development to the east. At the north side and northeast corner of the project site are two (2) proposed drive aisle connections. These will facilitate access for any future development on the northwest 'quadrant' of the overall property to the north. The parking area will be generally located behind the buildings. Per Section 17.64 of the Development Code, the parking requirements for the project are as follows: Type of Use Floor Area (SF) Parking Ratio Number of Spaces Required Hotel 1 n/a 1 per room + 2 117 Hotel 2 n/a 1 per room + 2 117 Restaurant 6,340* 10 per 1,000SF 64* Outdoor Dining Area 2,000* 10 per 1,OOOSF 20* Total Required 318* Total Provided 324 *sub'ect to change Public right-of-way improvements associated with the proposed project include the following: all standard street improvements such as curb, gutter, sidewalk, etc. on Haven Avenue and 4t" Street; an additional northbound traffic lane and a right turn lane on the east side of Haven Avenue; and a bus bay lane for the existing Omnitrans bus stop near the southwest corner of the project site. A privately maintained bus shelter and associated improvements at the bus stop will be required. There are power lines and poles at the south perimeter of the overall property, along the north side of 4'" Street — the 66 kilovolt (kv) power lines will remain in place while the lower voltage lines will be relocated underground. Staff Comments: The overall site layout and the plotting of the hotels is consistent with the intent of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The site layout presented at this Workshop is the result of several months of discussion with the applicant (Exhibit A). The buildings will be highly visible from both Haven Avenue and 411 Street and provide a prominent entry statement at this gateway. The mass of Hotel 1 will "frame" the east side of Haven Avenue and will complement the existing office building on the west side of the street. A secondary, desirable outcome of having the buildings plotted close to the streets is the reduced visibility of the parking area. Both hotel buildings are plotted at the building setback line (which is measured from the curb). However, a new northbound lane on Haven Avenue is required to be constructed for this project. To prevent Hotel 1 from encroaching into the setback it will need to be shifted slightly eastward. Both buildings will exceed the height limit of 35 feet that applies at the building setback. The Development Code specifies that for every 1 foot that the overall height of a building exceeds this limit, the setback must be increased by 1 foot. As both buildings are up to 65 feet in height, they would have to be setback from the street by 75 feet. Staff believes this requirement is contrary to the intent of the General Plan. To address this, Staff will be proposing an amendment to the Code that would exempt this requirement for buildings within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. This IR]77 1c1 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00626 — THERALDSON HOSPITALITY DEVELOPMENT December 14, 2016 Page 4 amendment will be forwarded to both the Planning Commission and City Council for their consideration. The architecture of the proposed hotels is "a work in progress." The applicant is aware that there will be further enhancements and refinements required in order to achieve the design goals and objectives specified in the General Plan and the overall vision for Haven Avenue. Staff will coordinate with the applicant on finalizing the development of the architecture to accomplish this. Staff acknowledges that their overall form and massing of both buildings are constrained by the interior layout typical of hotels. The articulation of the footprint and wall planes of the buildings are dictated by the size of the rooms, and the locations of the stairwells, elevators, and hallways. Therefore, the revisions to the architecture will primarily consist of the creative use of materials, colors, trim, and aesthetic features. Revisions could include, but not be limited to, incorporating the following: • Decorative veneer on the full height of some of the projecting "tower" elements on all elevations; • Increased amount of glazing, decorative glass, and glass accents on all elevations (especially in areas that have limited embellishments); • Metal features such as trellises and canopies; • Metal trim, banding, and/or accents; and • Bolder, high contrast colors to emphasize different areas of the buildings. The architecture, and specific plotting, of the restaurant will be reviewed separately. If necessary, proposals for the restaurant will be presented to the Planning Commission during a pre -application workshop. Discussion Outline: • Architecture — any development at this location must have high aesthetic value with architecture that incorporates high quality materials and interesting design elements/features; • Development Code Amendment — the proposed project requires an amendment to the Code in order to achieve the desired effect where the buildings have a dominant position along the street. Required Entitlements: The proposed project will require the following entitlements (minor applications are not listed): 1. Development Code Amendment - $6,712; 2. Design Review - $11,187; 3. Environmental Assessment, Initial Study - $2,853 4. Uniform Sign Program - $2,186 NOTE: Fees are subject to change by Council Resolution and are revised annually on July 1st. Item B —4 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT PRE -APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2016-00626 — THERALDSON HOSPITALITY DEVELOPMENT December 14, 2016 Page 5 Special Studies: The following special studies will be required at the time of formal submittal: 1. Air quality study (including an analysis of greenhouse gas emissions, the local significance thresholds, and a health risk assessment); 2. Biological resources study; 3. Focused biological survey (for the Delhi Sands Flower -loving Fly); 4. Cultural resources and archeological study per AB52; 5. Noise study; 6. Photometric study; 7. Traffic study; 8. Airport compatibility analysis to identify impacts, if any, to the Ontario International Airport; 9. Water Quality Management Plan NOTE: Additional special studies may be required following the formal submittal of the required applications. Respectful) submi�tted, Candyce Burnett City Planner CB:DP/Is Attachments: Exhibit A —Applicant Letters with prior site plan designs Exhibit B — Full-sized Plans —Distributed under separate cover Exhibit C — Example Architectural Renderings of the Hotels Exhibit D — Combined Site Plan (of the Project Site and the adjacent Industrial Project) Exhibit E — Pre -Application Review Department Comments Item B —5 tharaldsonhospitality July 25, 2016 Mr. Mike Smith Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2750 ext. 4317 michael. smith@cityofrc.us Re: NEC Haven/41h St. Hotel/Retail Pre -Application Dear Mr. Smith, Tharaldson Hospitality is pleased to present for the review to City Planning, Building and Public Works Departments our proposed Hilton Home 2 Suites Hotel, IHG Staybridge Suites, and Retail/Restaurant pads at the NEC of Haven and 41h Street. We believe a hospitality land use in conjunction with all the new shops and restaurants will provide exceptional amenities supporting not only the Community but creating a regional attraction as well. General Description Tharaldson Hospitality will design, develop and operate of a first class, top -tier limited service Hotels with approximately 100-120 rooms each. In addition, two Retail/Restaurant pads are planned. The Hotel brands are built on style and space for enthusiastic business travelers who love to treat themselves to a fresh and lively take on mixing business and pleasure. The Hotel guest is a frequent business traveler highly -focused on success, but isn't afraid to enjoy small indulgences in their time off and the amenities in Rancho Cucamonga afford the guest these options and experiences. These proposed Hotels harnesses the power of the Hospitality industry leading sales, marketing, and loyalty engines. Architecture The Hotel building design will employ a rich palette of contemporary, colors, materials, textures and finishes. The building exterior will feature metal accent elements, plaster walls with simulated wood accent treatments, contemporary light fixtures and systems with necessary building efficiencies. The Hotels will conform to the existing theme of the area but will have its own architectural interest and distinctive identity. The Hotels will include signage on all building elevations providing visibility and brand identification. EXHIBIT A ( 42�� Dean %Lenin Dricr,, Suite J Lu \) gas, I�i\' 89 103 Phone: 7 _') i8i-+Itern B E6Lv (7�' 383-4973 Grading and Drainage: The proposed hotel site will be graded consistent with an approved grading plan, relative to pad and finish floor elevations. Water Quality: Elements will be incorporated within the final site plan and W QMP, consistent with projects of this nature. Water Utilities: Water systems will be designed in conformance with the system provider standards. Sewer Utilities: Water systems will be designed in conformance with the system provider standards. Parking Parking is proposed as shown on the Plan. Technical Studies We have engaged 1-SA Associates to review the project in detail with the Planning staff and based on the fact the Hotel site is located within an existing, developed commercial shopping center, it is our preliminary opinion that implementation of the project would not result in any significant impact on the following environmental issues under CEQA: • Aesthetics • Mineral Resources • Biological Resources • Public Services • Land Use/Planning • Utilities/Service Systems • Population/Housing • Geology/Soils • Agricultural and Forestry Resources • Hydrology/Water Quality • Cultural Resources • Recreation • Hazards & Hazardous Materials It is our intent we submit the following technical studies to support the findings that no significant impacts would occur for other environmental issues under CEQA as well: • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Transportation/Traffic (including Parking Study) • Air Quality • Noise Sincerely, Q�.- 4 ' Don Cape / 4255 Dean Martin Drive, Suite JJ I Las Vegas, NV 89103 Phone: (702) 385-1te8m B —Fax: (702) 385-4975 x City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 November 28. 2016 To Whom It May Concern, We would like to take this opportunity to summarize the progress we have made to date for the development of the North East corner of Haven Avenue and 41h Street. This corner of Haven Avenue and 4'1 Street is the South West corner of parcel with APN# 0210-081-21- 0000. This portion of the parcel consists of 7.16 Acres and is currently being proposed for development of 2 hotels and future restaurant building. Both hotels are proposed to be 5 stories and 115 guestrooms. Hotel #1 currently indicated as an "L' shaped building is proposed to be 98,875 GSF with outdoor pool and exterior garden/ landscaped area. Hotel #2 is proposed to be 66,775 GSF also with an outdoor pool and landscaped area surrounding the building. The Future restaurant is a single story building with 6,340 GSF and outdoor seating. As this design process began, we worked closely with senior planner Mike Smith who has provided us feedback from informal reviews of the site plan by different planning members. Several versions of the site plan were examined with different building configurations and different locations of the buildings on the lot as a response to the feedback received. Site Plan Dated 05/20/2016 Originally, half of the site was proposed for Initial development with 2 hotels towards the center of the site and 7 smaller buildings surrounding the perimeter of the site which included restaurant buildings. retail, pharmacy, and an office building. Site Plan Dated 06/28/2016 Shortly after, based on feedback from planning, the development was consolidated to initially develop only the SW corner of the lot consisting of 7.18 Acres. This included 2 hotel buildings positioned more towards the interior of the lot and 2 restaurant buildings were proposed on the comer of Haven Avenue and 0 street backing up to the existing monument sign. Entrances to the site were provided from both Haven Avenue and 40 Street. Site Plan Dated 09127/2016 8,10/1412016 An additional version of this site plan was provided pushing the 2 hotel buildings closer to the main streets. However, as a response to discussion with planning members, it was requested that the hotel buildings would be positioned with as much frontage as possible along Haven Avenue and 41" street. and Porte- cocheres for both hotels would face the interior of the parking area. This new proposed plan showed Hotel #1 along Haven Ave. and Hotel #2 along 40 street with Porte-cocheres facing in as discussed. Future restaurant buildings with slightly revised configurations were still placed in the corner of the lot near the monument sign. Site Plan Dated 11108/2016 A final configuration of this site was just recently completed showing the hotel buildings in the same configuration and the future restaurant building as a single building, still atthe corner, with seating backing up to the monument sign. Entrances to the site are still proposed from both Haven Avenue and 4" Street. In addition, as requested by planning. we have added an additional car lane along Haven Ave which has been incorporated into the latest site plan. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, - Kastytis Cechavicius 1725 VILLAGE CENTER CIRCLE SUITE 110, LAS VEGAS. NV 89134 I P: 702 403 1575 I W W W.DESIGN-CELL.COM Item B —8 6 j 4TH & HAVEN o g DEVELOPMENT N MASTERPLAN design ..........ty 7 4THSTREFT �� SRN__—_ _-.. � � � . � � .. . i � � : i : vao✓EawaaAar L. IFCj. •.• iA: •v:. L i+i.. �. j. >Irewxxanv .f I�[ wxaixoeaEAs •s• .1 T. P4aItMG CALCYLPfI0N5 .F• •1. •Yl ra �Fl ...... ,.. •Lre '" L1 � � LEGA4 aEitPlPipM Z uTIlxIE9 C : (A N •l�J SITEPlANISITE - - ... DATA N DR-03 Item B -11 m HAVEN AVE & 4TH ST design b g DEVELOPMENT ty w r „ ^ srJ Pi"" — .-. WRC1aryaMY I are awadllr BBllplludN4i C a W vnlns -- N W W r_. Q 0 Wl i o WEPL ISITE DATA DR-1.3 Item B -13 FULL SIZE PLANS DISTRIBUTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER EXHIBIT B Item B —14 'All I kit, tit T Home2 Suites Ix,vl3�'. N9'ad.i desi nce9 9.a.�... L 9 m vvo:Fcr P,�vPm: o Ili f1 _,;•� •n TV/ V .:PNpN4.GLCUl1�ld:. LFGLLGEiCPPIIGM umn¢s N U, W Q O i zo v_.... .. ,.. � .. SI c PL N 51TE DAT4 DR-1.3 EXHIBIT D Item B -16 Preliminary Engineering comments include: 1. Easements must be vacated prior to building on an easement. if the easement cannot be vacated, a building may not be built within its limits. Provide details of the existing drainage easement on the southwest corner of the site. 2. Reciprocal access agreements and easements must be made with the property owners at the shared driveway locations. Coordinate the shared driveway with the development directly to the east one plan shows shared access and another does not. 3. The City of Ontario will need to approve all direct connections to the 4th Street storm drain (if any). All drainage studies that impact their downstream facilities will be routed to the City of Ontario for review. I suggest talking with the City of Ontario as part of the preliminary review phase to get a better understanding of their requirements. 4. Corner cut-offs and curb radii shall be per City standard 100 5. Fiber conduit per City standards is required along the frontage of the entire project on Haven and 4th. 8. If the existing condition of the pavement on Haven and 4th Street requires replacement or overlay. The limits of pavement rehabilitation will be determined during the formal submittal process. 9. Undergrounding shall take place along Haven and 4th Street per the undergrounding policy. 10. A reimbursement shall be paid to the developer on the west side of Haven for undergrounding per Underground Reimbursement Agreement (URA) 24 11. Development impact fees will be collected upon issuance of the building permit per the engineering fee schedule. Note that fees are subject to change annually. 12. Protect monument sign and easement in place. If modifications are required, work with the city to approve any changes. 13. Provide information regarding the improvements or vacation of Trademark Parkway South and Winston Avenue. Note: the vacation of Trademark and Winston are in review. 14. Provide a scoping agreement for a Traffic Impact Analysis in accordance with SANBAG CMP guidelines that includes, but is not limited to, a trip generation and a trip distribution analysis for the master planned development of the entire site. Preliminary Traffic Comments Include: 1. Haven Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Highway' standards as required and including: A. Provide curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and signing & striping as required. Half street width shall be 14' median, 1-13' through lanes, 3-11' through lanes, a 5' bike lane, and a 7' parkway. B. Provide a bus bay/right turn lane per City Standard Plan 119 C. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. D. Modify and relocate traffic signal equipment as required. E. Modify curb ramps to the latest ADA standards. 2. 4th Street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Divided Arterial" standards as required and including: A. Provide curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and signing & striping as required. Half street width shall be 14' median, 3-11' through lanes, a 4' bike lane, a 12' right turn lane and a 10' parkway. B. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. C. Modify and relocate traffic signal equipment as required. 3. Should Trademark Parkway North continue as a loop per the Assessor's Parcel Map indicates, the following conditions shall be met: A. Trademark Parkway South frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Collector" standards as required and including: a. Provide curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and signing & striping as required. Dedicate right of way to accommodate a full street width for a 13' sidewalk easement, 5' parkway, 26' through lane from curb to median, 20' median, 26' through lane from median to curb, and a 5' parkway. b. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. B. Should Winston Ave not be vacated, Winston Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Modified Collector" standards as required and including: a. Provide curb & gutter, sidewalk, street lights, and signing & striping as required. Full street width shall be 19' parkway, 44' through lane from curb to curb, and a 19' parkway. b. Driveways shall be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. EXHIBIT E Item B —17 4. Coordinate with development to the east as they are proposing a shared driveway on the east property line. 5. Update the site plan to reflect the correct dedication and frontage improvements. See Haven Avenue and 4th Street requirements. 6. Coordinate with development to the east as they are proposing a shared driveway on the east property line. Preliminary Grading Comments include: 1. A site plan was submitted for a pre -application review. At this pre -application review neither a conceptual grading and drainage plan, nor a preliminary water quality management site and drainage plan were available for review. When these documents are submitted, the Building and Safety Department, Grading Services, will provide comments. Please note that all proposed areas of construction and impervious surfaces outside of the property boundaries shall be shown on both the conceptual grading and drainage plan and the preliminary water quality management site and drainage plan. Preliminary B&S and Fire Pre Comments include: 1. Provide a fire flow letter from CVW D. 2. Provide a Fire Department Access plan including aerial ladder points per RCFPD Ordinance FD 54, chapter 5. 3. Provide building data such as: Type of Construction, Building occupancy, Total square footage, etc. 4. Provide an allowable area calculation per the 2016 CBC. Item B —18