Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-01-14-Agenda Packet-PC-HPC r' O THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA gCHOWORKSHOP OF MAMMA THE PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 14, 2015 - 7:00 PM* Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center ***RAINS ROOM*** 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 7F-7 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Wimberly_ Vice Chairman Oaxaca_ Munoz_ Howdyshell_ Fletcher_ II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to rive minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker,making loud noises,or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. FF�-���111�-71TEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-01052 - JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. - The request to subdivide 5(gross)acres into 11 lots in the Low(L)Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan on the east side of East Avenue, south of the 210 freeway, Olocated at 6563 East Avenue; APN: 022707117 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP JANUARY 14, 2015 P0N"R Page 2 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 January 8,2015,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 speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public Comments." . Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. ® PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP JANUARY 14, 2015 j�►rrcHo Page 3 UCAMON 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 O • VicinityMap Planning Commission Worksholf JANUARY 14, 2015 I U � < C V E 2 o ' a � m t C � e • 19th St Base Line Base Line J Church Church Foothill s Foothill N 0 L ! Arrow IS o ®l 11 Arrow J rsey r 8th 00 OC W 1 C 6th W C7 6th t � ; M U 4t A 4th h Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Dri+, Item A: PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-01052 e a. STAFF REPORT - PL.-�NNING DEP.kRTMENT DATE: January 14, 2015 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CiUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director BY: Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: PRE-APPLICATION WORKSHOP FOR DRC2014-01052 - JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. - The request to subdivide 5 (gross).acres into 11 lots in the Low (L) Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan on the east side of East Avenue, south of the 210 freeway, located at 6563 East Avenue; APN: 022707117. 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 direction. The focus of the meeting is a discussion by the Planning Commission 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 will prepare general minutes of the meeting, which are provided to the applicant. Request: The applicant, JEC Enterprises, Inc. is requesting to subdivide a 5-acre property into 11 lots for development of single-family residences. The project site is currently zoned Low (L) residential and is within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. • Background: The property is owned by the Bishop Protestant Episcopal Church. There is an existing single-family residence on the property called the Ernst Mueller House, which was designated as a local historic landmark on June 1, 1994. There is also a temporary modular for the church that was approved with Conditional Use Permit 94-07. This temporary modular is planned to be removed from the project site as part of the subdivision. Design Issues and/or Recommendations: The proposed lots and single-family residences would face a new public street (Brownstone Place), as well as gain access through this new interior street. The new street would connect two streets, Brownstone Place and .Whitestone Place, to create a connection between the existing and proposed streets within the subdivision. Since driveway access from the lots onto East Avenue is restricted, all lots would take access from the new, interior street rather than from East Avenue. The applicant intends to keep the historic house as part of this project. However, given the driveway access restriction on East Avenue, the retention .of the historic house creates some challenges. Currently, the historic house faces west, towards East Avenue. This property has gained access from East Avenue since its construction in 1914. Since the new homes will be gaining access and fronting to the new interior street, the historic house's original orientation towards East Avenue needs to be addressed. Staff has evaluated 4 alternatives.and will describe the pros and cons for each alternative. Alternative 1: Retain the historic house on site with its original orientation to East Avenue (facing west), but driveway access will be gained from Brownstone Place. Residences on Lots 4 and 6 will orient to the new street (facing east) and gain driveway access from Brownstone Place. • Item A-1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2014-01052 - JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. January 14, 2015 Page 2 Pros: a) Retains the historic character and integrity of the landmark structure. b) No costs associated with moving/relocating structure. Cons: a) Creates a lack of continuity of residences facing Brownstone Place, with one historic house that faces East Avenue. b) Creates an awkward wall situation with Lots 4 and 6. All lots except Lot 5 will have rear yard walls along East Avenue. An example of a similar situation exists at. 9611 Hillside Road. This historic house orients towards the south while the newer single-family residences orient towards the north. A 6-foot wall for the rear yard of the historic house is adjacent to the newer single-family residences which have front yards along Hillside Road. Alternative 2: Retain the historic house on site with its original orientation to the west; but driveway access will be gained from Brownstone Place. Residences on.Lots 4 and 6 would also orient to the west, but gain driveway access from Brownstone Place. The applicant prefers this alternative since the adjacent homes would create a compatible context for the historic house that is facing East Avenue. Pros: a) Retains the historic character and integrity of the landmark structure. b) No costs associated with moving/relocating structure. Cons: a) The rear yards of lots 4, 5 and 6 would need to accommodate a driveway onto the new interior street. Where the driveway is located, privacy will be limited. b) Creates an awkward wall situation with Lots 3 and 7. Lots 3 and 7 will have rear yard walls along East Avenue and front yards adjacent to rear yard walls on lots 4, 5 and 6. An example of a similar situation exists at 9611 Hillside Road as noted above. Alternative 3: Re-orient the historic house towards Brownstone Place. All residences would orient towards Brownstone Place and gain access from this interior street. Pros: a) Retains the original location of the Ernst Mueller House. b) All residences within the subdivision will be able to have rear yards. c) Access will be consistent with all of the residences within the subdivision and surrounding neighborhood. Cons: a) Diminishes the historic integrity of the Ernst Mueller House which was originally oriented towards East Avenue. b) Costs associated with relocating the structure and re-orienting it towards Brownstone Place. Alternative 4: Relocate the historic.house to another location within the subdivision, such as on Lots 8,. 9, 10, or 11, so that it can continue to face west. Item A-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2014-01052 - JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. January 14, 2015 ® Page 3 Pros: a) Retains the original orientation of the Ernst Mueller House (facing west). b) All residences within the subdivision will front onto the new, interior street.. c) Access will be consistent with all of the residences within the subdivision and surrounding neighborhood. Cons: a) Diminishes the historic context of the Ernst Mueller House being at its original location. b) Most expensive alternative due to physically moving the structure. Staff Comments: The pros and cons of each alternative will be discussed at the meeting. Additional Department Comments: Planning Department 1. The corner of East Avenue and Fisher Drive is identified in the Etiwanda Specific Plan as a "Neighborhood Entry" that requires special landscaping per Figure 5-12 (Exhibit B). 2. Per the Etiwanda Specific Plan, 10 single-family dwellings are required to provide a minimum of 3 different footprints with a minimum of 2 elevations per footprint. No plans have been submitted. Any future designs should complement the style of the historic home. In addition, the massing of • the new homes should be broken up to be within scale of existing nearby residences. 3. Existing eucalyptus windrows located along or within public street rights-of-way are required to be preserved. Where existing eucalyptus windrows are to be removed, they need to be replaced with Eucalyptus macu/ata (spotted gum), Eucalyptus nicholii, or other eucalyptus species as approved by the Planning Director along- the established grid pattern in fifteen (15) gallon size minimum spaced at eight feet (8') on center and properly staked, unless otherwise specified by a Specific Plan or Community Plan or the Fire Code. 4. East Avenue is identified as a "Special Boulevard" setback. Street side (building) setback of 20 percent of depth of lot; need not exceed 45 feet, nor be less than 25 feet as measured from face of curb (page 5-32). Walls and fences less than 4 feet in height may be permitted. 5. This project will require the preparation of an Initial Study and most likely will result in a Mitigated Negative Declaration under the California Environmental Quality Act. Required environmental studies will include the following (additional studies may be required based upon formal submittal of the application package): • A cultural/historic resource assessment analyzing the impacts of the proposed project to the historic resource; and • Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis; and • Biological Resources Analysis; and • Arborist Report. Item A-3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2014-01052 -JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. January 14,2015 Page 4 6. Additional comments will be provided when a formal application is submitted for review. Engineering Services Department 1. Existing driveway on East Avenue for the historical residence will need to be removed. The driveway for proposed Lot 5 will need to take access from the interior street. 2. Perimeter wall setbacks, 5- and 10-foot wall jogs back of the sidewalk, and publicly-maintained landscaping along East Avenue will need to be consistent with Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan (Exhibit D). Sidewalk will need to be 5 feet wide, since portions are adjacent to the low rock wall planter boxes in front of the 10-foot wall jogs. - 3. Although the Fisher Drive frontage improvements will need to be protected in place, the curb return at the southeast corner of East Avenue and Fisher Drive will be relocated to accommodate a 19-foot widening on East Avenue. The access ramp will need to be brought up to current standards with on -site grading revised accordingly. 4. Preliminary Conditions of Approval will be provided .upon submittal of a tentative tract map application. Fire Prevention /.New Construction Unit 1. Annexation to the Community Facility District is required; please contact Chris Bopko at(909)477- 2700 x2580. The application will not. be deemed complete by Fire until a clearance is received from the Special District Department regarding annexation. Gradin 1. The.Building and Safety Services Department will review the Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan for technical issues when such plan is submitted for review. Respectfully submitted, Candyc urnett Planning Director CB:MN/Is Attachments: Exhibit A - Full-sized Plans (distributed under separate cover) Exhibit B Reduced Site Plan Exhibit C - Figure 5-12 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan Exhibit D - Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan Item A-4 • JANUARY 14, 2014 PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-01052 EXHIBIT A - FULL-SIZED PLANS DISTRIBUTED UNDER SEPARATE COVER Item A-5 N/STDR 1 {�flN1E - a nanm nnr 9nN�N 9. II�bY.G91�6 a2'. es EXHIBIT B Item A-6 57 rr.. I Z + t tree d � e GE... + + (aw�rcu�amu.neap ®=Z4'f3ox rn I h. v cg ® +=is gallon rncn. } + f 61 re-, �r I ZO -°JLE COMMUNITY ENTRY Typical Concept 5 ' 11 s�reei �"ees multi-hunk spe�it'�'i�1 �Ize 12' Bo,C min. ( randa) ,N .s�ree t 7p• 1 J A NEIGHBORHOOD ENTRY 0 F0 Typical Concept 5 1 EXHIBIT C Item A-7 11 �1'� fir, 1►, .��.• .��.u:�,i•....,"�i..+r..'.'�.•i.ii.......... r' � � .��, ►• � S� ys,._ 141 .,. �l►1 / /,I.,• �;,.,,......•,�...,,.. ....�..• ..,....,,.,. ...,..........,.,:.......;:..•,.,.;:•�.,.. � � 71 i � 4l ��� 1' it �. •it1�. �•r• ,r.r ..••�•• ,.�./ • . /.::�•, •:� .• •. .� ��, � ��. . .`_L '...•. •.rrr..••.•tll•.rr. •../trrr,. ••r•• ..1•..•••il•/Ir...•.•••Ilt.r•. ..rr.11�U.••..••Ittr - � A Kim - - 1001. PLAN VIEW STOW WASTERS Wl S71LIMO-WAN" AND INVER MWIPLANTEM 7 EAST AVENUE PARKWAY FIG 5�28A REVISED 917/68 0 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF C%xCHO ONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 14, 2015 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER U Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Wimberly_ Vice Chairman Oaxaca Munoz_ Howdyshell_ Fletcher_ II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA W JANUARY 14, 2015 Page 2 E III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION. COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated December 10, 2014 B. VACATION V-227 TREE RANCHO, LLC—A request to vacate vehicular access rights for two existing driveways on the north side of 41'Street, east of Hermosa Avenue along Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 5239—APN: 210-371-02 IV. -------PUBLIC HEARINGS/HiSTORIC-PRESERVATION` .` - :. COMMISSIOl .. : The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project Please sign in after speaking. C. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789-ROUTE 66 IECA-A request to preserve the historic Cucamonga Service Station including review of the"Richfield"signage and paint scheme for the front building (Phase 1), restoration of the front building and related site improvements(Phase 2)and to reconstruct the rear 2,391 square foot service garage(Phase 3)within the Foothill Boulevard Specialty Commercial(SC)District, located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard; APN: 020815305. This review includes Phase 1 only. V, COMMISSION.BUSINESS/HISTORIC*PRESERVATION AND PLANNING.COMMISSION D. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES E. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS VI-." 'ADJOURNMENT THE COMMISSION WILL IMMEDIATELY ADJOURN TO A WORKSHOP HELD IN THE RAINS ROOM TO DISCUSS PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-01052 — JEC ENTERPRISES, INC. 1, Lois J. Schrader,Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on January 8,2015, 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 speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speakers 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$2,486 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 THIS HIGHLIGHTED SECTION MAY BE REMOVED WHEN PREPARING THE ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES. • VicinityMap Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting January 14, 2® 15 L_..: i i _ . i_; i �..J� � B C • C C 'a 0 •-•--• i � E m A 0 � 0 V Q Z 2 a 4 a I i, N 1A Base Line Base Line e Church Church La Foothill Foothill N Arnow C Arrow 8th oC w i m � ao 0 C 6th W C7 6th LizME .4th g 4th * Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Dri•, Item A: Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes dated Month 00, 2014 Item B: VACATION V-227 Item C: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF cHO (, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 2014 m 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center ®rive Rancho Cucamonga, California a.. '4F.;.t r ;Na'ty»a.:t, iia ri.• cin' :,.P,. w.e ® It is noted that the meeting was moved to the Tri-Communities room to accommodate the continued renovations in the Council Chambers. Notices regarding the location change were posted on the glass doors of the Chambers 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Wimberly x Vice Chairman Oaxaca x Munoz x Howdyshell x Fletcher x Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development,Steven Flower,Assistant City Attorney; Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary j'.:a.:o;,r:_ .. 'c4f.. 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 rive minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain Item A-1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DECEMBER 10, 2014 Page 2 from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None A. Approval of minutes dated November 12, 2014 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Munoz, carried 3-0-2 (Munoz, Howdyshell abstain) to adopt the Consent Calendar as presented. The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. ' B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-00493 — CONSOLIDATED CONSULTING—A request to develop a 16,260 square foot warehouse and a 12,600 squarefoot canopy at an existing 252,193 square foot fabricated steel manufacturing facility within the General Industrial(GI)Development District, located on the north side of Arrow Route at 11200 Arrow Route; APN: 0208-961-26. Related File: Sign Permit Notice of Filing DRC2014-00599. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and a brief PowerPoint presentation.' He noted a correction on the PowerPoint regarding the size of the warehouse addition. Chairman Wimberly asked if the administrative action for the tree removal will include replacement. Mr. Grahn indicated it would. Candyce Burnett, Planning Director said the condition will be at least a replacement ratio of 1-1 depending on the species and size of the trees. Charlie Buquet of Consolidated Consulting reported on the off-site storage currently being used. He noted the application would correct that and that the rail spur is preserved and the traffic flow is similar to what it is now. He said the additional parking space will be provided on the southeast corner of the property. He said they concur with the conditions of approval Item A-2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CCA IHO DECEMBER 10, 2014 ON Page 3 and he thanked staff for their help. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and hearing none, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fletcher noted the improvements will increase the efficiency of the site. Commissioner Howdyshell complimented staff and the applicant and noted the staff report was thorough and helpful and answered many of her questions. Commissioner Munoz expressed support and said the request is straightforward. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution #14-53 approving Development Review DRC2014-00493. C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2013-00992-MIG HOGLE-IRELAND- A request to modify CUP DRC2008-00512 to include: 1) replacing a proposed 16,781 • square foot Baghouse air filtering system with a 11,853 square foot Baghouse air filtering system, 2) replacing a proposed 11,778 square foot electrical substation building with a 4,000 square foot electrical substation building, 3)enclosing the existing Melt Shop cupola within a proposed 6,375 square foot Melt Shop canopy, and 4)constructing a 6,090 square foot addition to the Melt Shop building, on 80 acres at the existing Gerdau Steel Plant in the Heavy Industrial (HI)District located at 12459-B Arrow Route; APN: 022913119. Staff has found the proposed project to be within the scope of a project covered by a previously approved Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by the Planning Commission on January 14, 2009. Staff has prepared an addendum prepared per CEQA Section 15164 which does not identify any new environmental impacts not already considered in that Mitigated Negative Declaration. Related Files: CEQA Review CEQA2014-00020. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and a brief PowerPoint presentation. Commissioner Howdyshell asked about the justification for the reduction of the size of the substation and Chairman Wimberly asked how the reduction of emissions with the smaller filtration and baghouse system would occur. Mr. Grahn deferred the questions to the applicant. Pam Steele of Hoge-Ireland said they concur with the conditions of approval. She thanked staff for their many visits to the site and for giving them an opportunity to demonstrate their • process. She noted that on Page C-2 of the agenda packet, the electrical substation is existing and will remain. The addition will be 4,000 square feet. She said 12 members of the project team are in attendance tonight and.Jeff Danbrum and Hugo Lopez will give a PowerPoint presentation. Item A-3 ti .gHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANM! DECEMBER 10, 2014 Page 4 Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. No comments were made. Mr. Danbrum and Mr. Lopez then gave the presentation. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Commissioner Howdyshell thanked staff and noted the great report and presentation. She said they provided good insight, that the facility is generating jobs and materials. She said she appreciates the information about their level of corporate responsibility and social responsibility. She said they are a valuable corporate partner. Commissioner Munoz echoed her comments and said it was an excellent presentation and answered many questions. He said appreciated the before and after graphics. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said he appreciated all the additional details and visible support of the Gerdau staff. He said he appreciates their monetary commitment and the focus on safety and environmental stewardship. Chairman Wimberly thanked the applicant for the presentation. Commissioner Fletcher thanked staff here and at the DRC encouraged.that_industrial_ businesses are doing improvements; an indicator of a recovering economy. He said he appreciated the visual improvements, and is glad for social the responsibility. He said he hopes for their increase in revenues and additional employees. Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution#14-54 approving Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2013-00992. D. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT19932 - ANDRESEN ENGINEERING -A request to subdivide a parcel of about 82,328 square feet(1.89 acres)that is currently developed with one (1) commercial building with a floor area of about 32,000 square feet into twenty-one (21) units for condominium purposes in the Industrial Park(IP) District and Haven Avenue Overlay District(HAOD), on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of Sixth Street,located at 9220 Haven Avenue-APN: 020926219. Related files: Conditional Use Permit CUP 99-53. On July 12, 2000, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was adopted by the Planning Commission for Conditional Use Permit 99-53. Per the California Environmental Quality Act Section 15162, no further environmental review is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and a brief PowerPoint presentation. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing: _. Item A-4 Or HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES �0 DECEMBER 1092014 ONGA Page 5 Eric Andresen, Andresen Engineering said they are currently rental units. He noted there has been some interest in ownership and that is the motivation for the request. Cynthia Howack, said there more interest from professional users for ownership rather than rental units. She said they believe this will generate more activity for the building. Chairman Wimberly asked what the current occupancy rate is. Ms. Howack said about 40%. Chairman Wimberly closed the public hearing. Commissioner Fletcher said he generally supports business condos as they offer a better product and are generally more stable. Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution #14-55 approving Tentative Tract Map SUBTT19932. -al .i}' •4.''-^.ss�!;tsPw4: •rd+' C�'+no• •C!&v TM _ _ •"x`: ..r.^"r -y.."•.,,..,Iie: �,�n -i},�#.� �f�:�';a /J e• :'•,;�}'��''f .� l '1(t�J`�i�Q O; C' ~� �'�1-q:_�'I �J: -Y�.i` .�` :5a.:,?Y.�? ?•^p�:�.:,Xt�:y,`,'3::W 4?`F.7i3r—`''•`.-.*e,�ter. .'` r' d'• e+. ..y..,r:<.: FM��. :� � .c _•::a=•�4� °��"a:TW:Y�. � � 'ir. .^o � ` • ��\ +`'2+:c•:-at�".���13",..:�;,.��. _ ^s.. .'.�'r1 iux.l. .'a'ti'..�s.'+..., i•.' .�s.'u•.'�`..:. �" _ -,F �.`. .'••s'RSSxak".Y�aa'a'£•rv.i aWt....•mvi' •.F,, E. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Fletcher thanked City staff for the wonderful Holiday Dinner Dance and said it was the best prime rib around. Commissioner Howdyshell-commented that it was nice td see how many employees were recognized for their service. The Commission and staff joined in congratulatory applause for Commissioner Munoz' 15 year service award. F. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Munoz said he recently attended the League of California Cities Leaders Conference and that he would bring a report regarding the updated goals to the next ® meeting. Item A-5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Ho DECEMBER 10, 2014 Page 6 V�M HIM511.10 LOW=0"�. ..�a'rR! p i •S r 'i: „ F. '^F yltiy.Ir 8:05 PM If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak,given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position,you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others,the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m.to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office Item A-6 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RmcH DECEMBER 10, 2014 oxan Page 7 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 THIS HIGHLIGHTED SECTION MAY BE REMOVED WHEN PREPARING THE ACTION AGENDA AND MINUTES. • Item A=7 r STAFF REPORT _ ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Date: January 14, 2015 RANCHO CUCAMONGA To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer By: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer Subject: VACATION V-227 TREE RANCHO LLC — A request to vacate vehicular access rights for two existing driveways on the north side of 41 Street, east of Hermosa Avenue along Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 5239 — APN: 210-371-02 Related File: DRC2014-00566 BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In conjunction with the processing of DRC2014-00566, two vehicular access points were proposed on the north side of 4' Street, east of Hermosa Avenue, by the Developer, Tree Rancho, LLC. The drive approaches will be used as the new access for the proposed development. The locations along Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 5239 have been approved by City departments. The vacation of the vehicular access rights dedicated on Parcel Map 5239 will allow for the addition of said drive approaches. The • proposed locations are consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding, through minute action, that the proposed vacation is in conformance with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for further processing and final approval. Respectfully submitted, Dan Jame v���� Senior Civil Engineer DJ:WV:alrw Attachments: Vicinity Map Legal Description (Exhibit "A") Plat (Exhibit"B") Item B-1 City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Division 6th STREET Z Q SITE TRADEMARK o U W Z Z .4th STREET Qk/ 'T CONCOU S - STREET w Q Or. EM Z p1RE BLVD. INLAND 10 N Title: VICI)VIre IVAP - Item B-2 SHEET 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION VACATION OF ACCESS RESTRICTION THAT CERTAIN RIGHT OF VEHICULAR INGRESS TO OR ACCESS FROM PARCEL No. 1 TO ADJACENT STREET (4T" STREET), AS SHOWN, DEDICATED AND ACCEPTED ON PARCEL MAP No. 5239, FILED IN BOOK 52, PAGE 10, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. DATED THIS D Y OF 2014. L USELTON, S. 5347 % X191 -51 I i \4:',..Mapping`:3555\08'�:Legals',,ACCESS RESTRICTION VACATION\3555.008 ACCESS REST VAC Exh A(legal).doc Item B-3 i N89'34'49"W 414.41' I � l o I 1 0' I o EL NO- 5 oa _. .__ 50' 50' 0 _ Q� a N V N � O � 3 zo oa 6239 co Map I o pAR(CEL o Ia pIJ L%IJ I 1 1" = 100' OPN N85`02'11"W M in LO o Lp (Rad) �a ` N89'34'12"W 418.74' 30' 258.74' I O co CO 4th STREET LEGEND: NOTE: BEARINGS AND DISTANCES AREAS OF ACCESS RIGHTS SHOWN HERON ARE RECORD PER RESTRICTION PER PARCEL P.M. No. 5239,'P.M.B. 52/10 MAP NO. 5239. P.M.B. 52! 10 EXHIBIT 'B' DATE:DEC.08,2014 ��11m= FUSCO E SCALE: SKETCH TO ACCOMPANY LEGAL DESCRIPTION JN:3555.008/R050 11 IV VACATION OF ACCESS RESTRICTION N E E R I N G 16795 Van Korman,Suile 100,Irvine,Caliiomia 92606 PARCEL 1,PARCEL MAP No.5239 SHEET 1 OF 1 tel 949.474.1960 *11=90A74.5315 o vnrw.5ucaLcom CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA M:\Mapping\3555\08\Legals\ACCESS RESTRICTION VACATION\3555.008 ACCESS REST VAC.dwg Item B-4 s STAFF REPoRT • PLANNING DEPARTMENT , DATE: January 14, 2015 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Historic Preservation Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director BY: Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - ROUTE 66 IECA - A request to approve the first phase of improvements to the historic Cucamonga Service Station, including the installation of a "Richfield" signage and painting of the existing building, within the Foothill Boulevard Specialty Commercial (SC) District located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard; APN: 020815305. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: Project Site - Specialty Commercial (SC) North - Specialty Commercial (SC) South - Specialty Commercial (SC) East - Specialty Commercial (SC) West - Specialty Commercial (SC) • B. General Plan Designations: Project Site Mixed Use (MU) (0.25-1.0 FAR) North - Mixed Use (MU) (0.25-1.0 FAR) South - General Commercial (GC) (0.25-0.35 FAR) East - Mixed Use (MU) (0.25-1.0 FAR) West - Mixed Use (MU) (0.25-1.0 FAR) C. Site Characteristics: The project site (Exhibit A) is approximately 9,490 square feet and is Zoned Specialty Commercial (SC) within the Foothill Boulevard Overlay Zoning District. The goal of the SC district is intended to accommodate `specialty uses, which promote a special landmark quality or create a special ambience that is unique to a particular subarea.' To the east are small stores (key shop, florist) and a public alley; to the north is single-family residential; to the west is vacant land, which currently is pending a new commercial development, and to the south are existing commercial uses. The property previously included two buildings: the front and rear building. The exact construction date is unknown, but is estimated to be around 1915 for both buildings. The rear service station building suffered deterioration and collapsed in 2011 after a heavy rain. The front gas station building still exists and is a one-story Mission style structure. Architectural features include flat roofing with arched parapet and coping, red tile roof, smooth-stucco wall surface, and a porte-cochere supported by square piers. D. Proiect Description/Phasing: The applicant, Route 66 Inland Empire California (IECA), is a non-profit group that acquired the property in February 2013 and is restoring the property as • funds become available. Funds are accrued through their fundraising events and donations. Item C-1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789- ROUTE 66 IECA January 14, 2015 Page 2 As such, they are proposing to finish the restoration project in three (3) phases. Each phase is summarized below. • Phase 1 includes sandblasting and re-painting the existing building as well as installing a new"Richfield" sign (described in more detail below); • Phase 2 includes improvements that will allow the front building to be open to the public, including interior improvements, parking lot improvements, and installation of temporary exterior restrooms; and, • Phase 3 includes the reconstruction of the rear 2,391 square foot service garage that will include permanent, public restrooms. At this time, staff is awaiting the submittal of detailed plans that show the phasing of all of the Phase 2 and 3 improvements. Once these plans are submitted, they will be reviewed by staff and submitted to the Design Review Committee and Historic Preservation Commission for consideration and action. ACTION REQUESTED/ANALYSIS: The action requested is the approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Phase 1 improvements only. Approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness is necessary before the applicant can begin the restoration process. Section 17.18.040 (B) of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code states"no person shall carry out or cause to be carried out any alteration, restoration, rehabilitation, construction, removal, relocation, or demolition of any Historic Landmark or Contributing Resource unless the City has first issued a Certificate of Appropriateness in accordance with the requirements of this Chapter." As noted above, Phase 1 includes two components: 1) sandblasting and re-painting the structure; and 2) installing a new "Richfield" sign. An interesting discovery was made while sandblasting the structure. The original paint scheme underneath the white stucco was actually a yellow, blue, and red (Exhibit B). The property owners conducted research of other Richfield stations and found that this color scheme was quite common for these types of stations during this era. The paint colors they propose to use to mimic the historic color scheme are: "Scarlet Past," "Station Blue," and. "Station Yellow." Exhibit B also shows a photograph of the swatch against the structure that depicts- the proposed colors in bands on the wainscot around the building. The upper portion of the building, trim and doors will be white. The paint scheme was presented to the Design Review Committee on August 5, 2014. The Committee recommended approval and forwarded the project to the Historic Preservation Commission for review and action. The "Richfield" sign was donated from a company in Boron that specializes in vintage gas station materials (Exhibit C). This sign is approximately 16 feet long by 2.8 feet in height with a metal frame that provides support for the frame. The sign would be placed over the canopy of the gas station and would extend approximately two (2)feet over the front and back of the canopy, which is consistent with how the sign appeared in the past (Exhibit D). The sign replicates the sign that was previously present on the site during the 1920s through at least 1961 as shown in Exhibit D. The sign is considered an architectural feature rather than a business identification sign since it does not advertise a current business.on the site. Item C-2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789- ROUTE 66 IECA January 14, 2015 • Page 2 FACTS FOR FINDING: The proposed Certificate of Appropriateness meets the following criteria established in Section 17.18.040 (E) of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. A. The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Historic Resource within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. The painting and installation of the sign as an architectural feature are considered cosmetic improvements and will not disrupt the integrity of the historic resource. B. The project is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 17.18. The proposal meets requirements of Section 17.18.040 because the proposed paint colors and vintage sign style are .compatible with the historic representation of the structure; they will not harm any important features of the original building, and will enhance the value of the structure and property. C. The project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, in that the paint colors and sign style and placement are appropriate to the era of significance of the structure and replicate improvements that have previously existed on the site. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The proposed improvements to the Cucamonga Gas Station are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section 15331 — Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission adopt a resolution approving Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2013-00789 for the first phase of proposed improvements, subject to conditions of approval within the resolution. Respectful) submitted, Candyce eft Planning Director CB:MN/Is Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Photograph of proposed color Exhibit C - Photograph of proposed signage and construction details Exhibit D - Historic photographs showing Richfield sign Draft Resolution of Approval for Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2013-00789 • Item C-3 4 14 to zi RM-1 -, o. _ f � I FFii + �= t epi.:, T .. a ! ` ap ! i r r Now V Evidence of color scheme after sandblasting . r• EXHIBIT B Proposed color C-5- '1 RI-CHFIELDI r. Proposed signage Nt Coalinga, California: Restored 1934 Richfield Gas Station -=' r t A s r 1 111{11111111 EXHIBIT I Ad ARAGE 1 _ _ - aor'.xtwiPv �'ATf9l'�"T'f"�J�I�T1131i�°-=`id^b-`+t _ Cucamonga Gas Station — 1961 sGAa — .!'.'..y TATiOIy #=' \GARAGE _ .f _ 44PEW RERYICC alfil'1/.L HNAKE T s+ stat' AIL M, >. . .'_ .. :'.::>wi'3aF'�-.}'YJ Ri«'t'R'�•RZ�-. �- ��W�..a.. fir,T-y:...�..t .�'.. . •�.m!',.Y�'�.—T'IT1.^[�N�vh!' q'.� I1wMr... .:yfll.w mow.: Cucamonga Gas Station — Early photo when Foothill Boulevard was unpaved EXHIBIT D 01 H }yy11 4r •'^.•r M.a � 1 • 017, IL` 4'�••` ,. '� vi ( o+al.r •li 1 '�4' ' � .ry ,� it 1 • f �• w oz,O e� T�r-�t AS . 2 dw d T J v to � S/6.✓ � \ rr wCz r4 1, M s.�, a'n.t G v•i.,✓�r�+..s /Jscm i F� QO L if45 —� x I...Ac.Lao V ow N ,� o :'� ��U/vOS L'-a ..$/6i✓ •S T/1- ✓GTl//LtT 3 ' W G-3 r • RESOLUTION NO. 15-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789, FOR PHASE 1 IMPROVEMENTS AT THE CUCAMONGA GAS STATION LOCATED AT 9670 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 0208-153-05. A. Recitals. 1. Route 66 Inland Empire California (IECA), applicant and property owner, filed an application for the approval of Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2013-00789 for Phase 1 improvements to the Cucamonga Gas Station, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Certificate of Appropriateness request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of January, 2015, the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. • B. Resolution. NOW,THEREFORE, it is hereby found,determined,and resolved by the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. . This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on January 14,2015,including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, and pursuant to Section 17.18.040 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard, presently developed with the Cucamonga Gas Station.Route 66 IECA acquired the property in February 2013 and is proposing to restore the property in phases. b. The Cucamonga Gas Station was designated as a Historic Landmark by the City Council on April 15, 2009. Route 66 IECA proposes to restore the property in three (3) phases: Phase 1 improvements include sandblasting and re-painting the existing building as well as installing a new"Richfield"sign. Phase 2 includes improvements that will allow the front building to be open to the public,including interior improvements, parking lot improvements,and installation of temporary exterior restrooms. Phase 3 includes the reconstruction of the rear 2,391 square foot service garage that will include permanent, public restrooms; and Item C-10 HPC RESOLUTION NO. 15-01 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789- ROUTE 66 IECA January 14, 2015 Page 2 C. The properties to the north are developed with single-family residences,to the east are commercial uses and a public alley,to the south are existing commercial uses,and to the west is vacant land, which currently is pending a new commercial development; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Historic Resource within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act.The painting and installation of the sign as an architectural feature are considered cosmetic improvements and will not disrupt the integrity of the historic resource.As such,the activity is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15331 (Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation)of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines; and - b. The project is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 17.18. The proposal meets requirements of Section .17.18.040 because the proposed paint colors and vintage sign style are compatible with the historic representation of the structure;they will not harm any important features of the original building, and will enhance the value of the structure and property; and c. The project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, in that the paint colors and sign style and placement are appropriate to the era of significance of the structure and replicate improvements that have previously existed on the site. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set fort in-paragraphs 1,2, and 3 above,This Commission hereby approves Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2013-00789 for Phase 1 improvements to the Cucamonga Gas Station including 1)sandblasting,and repainting the existing buildings and 2) installing a "Richfield" sign, subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) The Phase 1 improvements shall be done in accordance with the plans and materials received by the Planning Department. 2) The applicant shall obtain a building permit for the sign prior to installation. 3) Phases 2 and 3 will be subject to separate review and consideration by the Historic Preservation Commission. 4) The front building shall not be open to the public until approval of Phase 2. 5) Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 1 year from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. Item C-11 HPC RESOLUTION NO. 15-01 CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789- ROUTE 66 IECA January 14, 2015 Page 3 • 6 Thea applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense an action PP 9 P Y brought against the City,its agents,officers,or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval.The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents,officers,or employees, for any Court costs and attomey's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 7) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshall's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2015. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • BY: Ravenel Wimberly, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Bumett, Secretary I, Candyce Bumett, Secretary of the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,and adopted by the Historic Preservation Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission held on the 14th day of January, 2015, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Item C-12 Ls. SIGN-IN SHEET RANCHO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CUCAMONGA JANUARY 14, 2015 NAME COMPANY ADDRESS/EMAIL C /L WORKSHOP � 77 , � CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - i ROUTE 66 IECA CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - ROUTE 66 IECA - A request to approve the first phase of improvements to the historic Cucamonga Service Station , including the installation of a "Richfield" sign and painting the existing building , located within the Foothill Boulevard Specialty Commercial (SC) DistrictI located at 9670 Foothill Boulevard ; APN : 020815305. ' i Location La Project Estacia St s acia_ St o 0 0 Foothi - 66Simi Akk Fill BI -�•P'+ 66 Footh i I I � B-Iwd _ CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2013-00789 - ROUTE 66 IECA ti Id i y - r Project Description/Phasing Phase 1 - Sandblast and re-paint the existing building . Install a new "Richfield" sign. Phase 2 - Improvements that will allow the front building to be open to the public, including interior improvements, parking lot improvements, and installation of temporary exterior restrooms. Phase 3 - Reconstruction of the rear 2,391 square foot service garage that will include permanent, public restrooms. LZ Phase 1 Details �Y � I Phase 1 Details p Coalinga, California: Restored 1934 Richfield Gas Station F ' r i � i .s" . fi 5 P i f a F. I � i S. i i +;+ *� I - MR" 0 Historic • • • a - TATION iI 1. • J ,Y Facts for Finding A. The project will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Historic Resource within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. The painting and installation of the sign as an architectural feature are considered cosmetic improvements and will not disrupt the integrity of the historic resource. S. The project is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 17.18. The proposal meets requirements of Section 17. 18.040 because the proposed paint colors and vintage sign style are compatible with the historic representation of the structure. they will not harm any important features of the original building, and will enhance the value of thestructure and property. C. The project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, in that the paint colors and sign style and placement are appropriate to the era of significance of the structure and replicate improvements that have previously existed on the site. ------- -------------._- _ _ - -- - -- - -- - - =-------- --- - - - -- _ _. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Historic Preservation Commission adopt a resolution approving Certificate of Appropriateness DRC2013-00789 for the first phase of proposed improvements, subject to conditions of approval within the resolution .