The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2019-08-14 Supplementals - PC-HPC 2019 Utility Undergrounding Program Update Planning Commission Presentation Jason C. Welday Director of Engineering Services/City Engineer August 14, 2019 Program Purpose [To address] public necessity, health, safety, [and] welfare. — Ordinance No. 11 [To] remove unsightly existing overhead utility lines in order to promote a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within the City. — P.C. Resolution No. 87-96 Program History 1978 1986 Ord. No. 11 Resolution No. RCMC 13.04 PC 86-77 0 1981 1987 Ord. No. 28-B Resolution No. RCMC PC 87-96 16.36.090 In- Lieu Fee History 1986 1988 Resolution No. Resolution No. 86-143 88-180 0 • 0 0 1987 2006 Resolution No. Resolution No. 87-245 06-032 Reasons to Update Program • Clarify Program Requirements • Update and Codify Program _ Requirements & Processes • Update In-Lieu Fees to Adequately Provide for Anticipated Costs Prepare draft Prepare Fee Planning City Council Ordinance & Study for In- Commission Consideration Resolutions Lieu Fees Consideration ��, �� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r Stay of Time DRC2019-00374 August 14, 2019 Project Overview • Applicant: Golden Meadowland, LLC and Ranch Haven, LLC • Project Description: Review of proposed litigation stay to exclude 392 days from the initial approval period of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 • Project Location: Northeast corner of Wilson Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue • Project Site Size: 150.79 acres • General Plan Designation: Low Residential/Very Low Residential • Zoning: Low Residential (L) District/Very Low (VL) Residential CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • _�.�_.�•_ `� :�„�.,.,� .,,� a,�f� � t fT •,.,; .E istir eSER�p&' North . ' d .4 .: . ti -,ram- Approved 'Ho bby;�.a�?'�.�� Etiwanda -. �'`.• �� ` C Preserve TTM 14749 (269 Lots) _ c--W _ '..2K'ri'€t q ;►' `�,�fir' ti �.� I _ , PROJECT SITE In Review irgL €xistirig:SFft' r.{ - TTM 19992 - . (113 Lots) San Bernardino County Flood Control 4,� x 4 TTM 18908 . AL ��"-- � ExMing 5FR , Homes ti ,. " (U" f "`ExEsting`SFR�-- {a`�`* f .-4 dii, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA rt� r � rr� Project Background J • The Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT16072 on June 16, 2004 for an initial period of three years. • On July 16, 2004, the Spirit of the Sage Council filed a petition for writ of mandate in court, challenging approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. • On August 12, 2005, Spirit of the Sage Council settled with the applicant and filed for a dismissal of the petition. The total period between filing and settlement was 392 days. Project Background (Cont.) • SUBTT16072 expired in June 2007 and has subsequently been granted five (5) 1 -year time extensions by the City, and received seven (7) years of automatic time extensions per State Senate and Assembly bills. • The last time extension extended the map to June 16, 2019. The proposed SUBTT16072 has not been finalized. • No modifications have been made to the map since the original approval. rT-A Ln -" mg w Ila . 929 1 NOT A IE r, i PART L- "WILSON AVENUE F�' �'� �� rr,1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r r Project Description • The subdivision is for 358 single-family residential lots. • Average density of 2.3 dwelling units. • Access is provided off Etiwanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue and East Avenue. • The site generally slopes from north to south at approximately 6 percent gradient. Project Analysis � • Government Code section 66452.6(c) permits the City to exclude ("stay") the number of days in which a project is subject to a legal challenge pending in a court of law from the approval period . • The applicant requests the 392 days between the filing date (July 16, 2004) of the court petition by the Spirit of the Sage Council and the settlement date (August 12, 2005) to be stayed from the approval period . • The 392 days stayed by this action is added to the overall approval period, extending the approval period for the map from June 16, 2019 to July 12, 2020. Project Analysis • The applicant has until the expiration date to complete all remaining conditions of approval, prior to recordation of the final map. • If map conditions are not satisfied in time to final and record the map, the subject tentative map will expire. Environmental Assessment • The City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on June 16, 2004 in connection with the City's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072. • Substantial changes to the project have not occurred which would create new or more severe impacts than those evaluated in the original EIR. • ESA, an environmental science and planning firm, submitted a memorandum on April 29, 2019. The memorandum stated that the site conditions in 2019 are consistent with conditions documented in the original EIR. Public Correspondence • Notices were sent to all properties within 660 feet of the project site. • Staff did not receive any correspondence in response to these notices. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: • Approve Stay of Time for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072 Based on Prior Litigation, DRC2019- 00374 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions. Staff has found the project to be within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report certified by City Council in June 16, 2004 by Resolution 04-206 and does not raise or create new environmental impacts not already considered in the Environmental Impact Report. Thornhill, Elizabeth From: Tran, Dat Sent: Monday, August 12, 2019 10:26 AM To: Smith, Michael Cc: Thornhill, Elizabeth Subject: PowerPoint for Richland 8.14 Mike, See Powerpoint for Richland tract for Wednesday's PC Meeting. 1: PLANNING Dat DRC2019-00374 Richland Tract 16072 Power pint v Dat Tran Assistant Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 909-774-4326 dat.tran@cityofrc.us 1 t Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018-00028 August 14, 2019 ZA Project Background • Temporary use permits JUIP) allow for short-term activities for unique uses (e.g. festivals, seasonal sales lot). • The proposed Amendment comprehensively updates the temporary uses regulations in order to: • Streamline the ways that TUPs are processed. • Modernize regulations to address new types of temporary uses. • Incorporate planning best practices. Proposed Revisions to Review Process • No application submittal deadline for TUP Applications. • Applications are often submitted a day or two before the activity is to take place. • Amend to require applicants to submit a TUP application 15 days prior to an event. Proposed Revisions to Include Revocation Process • A procedure for revoking a TUP is not currently included in the Municipal Code. • Amend to include revocation procedure for the following situations: • Misrepresentation or fraud. • Conditions of approval have not been met. • Activity violates of any statute, ordinance, law, or regulation. • Detrimental to the public welfare or constitutes a nuisance. Proposed Additions to Exempt Events • A list of event are automatically exempt from the temporary use permit process. • Amend to exempt new events from the temporary use permit process: • Bingo games. • Children's stands, such as a lemonade stand. • Parades and assemblies with fewer than 75 people. • Private weddings, parties, or festivities conducted on private residential property. Proposed Revisions to Exempt Events • Amend two existing exempt events under Section 17. 104.020(B) are proposed: • Events on city property are currently exempt. Amend provision to require temporary use permits for events held in the public rights-of-way. • Permit storage containers and dumpsters to be on residential property up to 5 days. Proposed Revisions to General Development Standards • All temporary uses are required to conform to general development standards (e.g. height, setbacks, parking). • Amend the existing general development standards with new requirements relating to: • Food Sales. • Alcohol Sales. • Traffic and Circulation. • Business License. • Property Owners. Proposed Revisions to Specific Development Standards (Cont. ) • In addition to the general development standards, specific development standards exist for categories of temporary uses. • The Amendment reorganizes these standards to be more logically consistent. • The Amendment includes new temporary use categories and new regulations for those uses. Summary of Revision to Specific Development Standards • The following are examples of changes to the specific temporary use development standards: • Haunted houses. • Permits required from the city and fire district, ensuring safety of all participants. • Residential haunted houses are limited to specific days and hours and cannot collect a fee or sell products. • Concerts and live outdoor entertainment. Events are limited to 5 days in any 180-day period and required to maintain distance from residential areas. Summary of Revision to Specific Development Standards (Cont. ) • Parades, assemblies, fundraisers, and parties. New temporary uses specifying large gathering events of 75 people or less. • Temporary entertainment events. Allows for businesses to host occasional entertainment events. Limited to 12 days per calendar years. • Master temporary use permits. Combines individual, identical events within a calendar year into a single permit. Allows for businesses to host events multiple times in a year without having to reapply for individual event permits. Public Correspondence/CEQA • This item was advertised as a public hearing on July 31 , 2019 with a large 1 /8th page legal advertisement in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. • This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA guidelines under CEQA section 15061 (b)(3). Revision to Proposed Ordinance • Remove Section 17. 104.040.K - Temporary or mobile food facility (e.g., food trucks), from draft Ordinance. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: • Recommend approval of Municipal Code Amendment DRC2018-00028 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. The recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Lewis Phase 1 (A) Apartments Pre-Application Review DRC2019-00127 August 14, 2019 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA � _c, Pc, wervskor tk� Cl Specific Plan Vision • The Empire Lakes Specific Plan is envisioned as a walkable mixed-use community in close proximity to the Metrolink Rancho Cucamonga Station. • High-density homes within walking or biking distance to transit, existing local job centers, mixed use areas, commercial services, and recreation amenities. • The Specific Plan is a manifestation of one of the City's Economic Development strategies, which is to attract a millennial workforce by facilitating the development of walkable and bike-friendly places. CITY OF RANCHO . . I 1f 40 04 s ri yt f -�t ac V I Wrl 14 r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r r� � ,err 17 Project Proposal . . ... ..... . . Development of 867 for-rent apartments :h lei ilk. • One to three-bedroom units • 6 Residential building types 22 DU/ACAr + , - ■ ! - 4hL RANCHOCITY OF SpanishPaired Homes • - ff - .�,.*� r 1� r �r�� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r ContemporaryLinear Townhomes Main Street t, rr�r� CITY 01= RANCHO CUCAMONGA r rr r rr�r ,r 6m ■ lex Stacked Flats Spanish • • . . • r�'r� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r r �r 10= ■ lex Stacked Flats Spanish Contemporary y � vow �r�,.r�� C1TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA rt� r r r 21 =Plex Stacked Flats Industrial Contemporary kJ t� �r�r� CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r � Live-Work Contemporary CITY . RANCHO 1 • A s xi slfiYPT Circulation 3 X • Two driveways from Resort _ Y 5....; Parkway • from 6t" Street _ ._ Two driveways . , • /pF'M1! 1i • Pedestrian paseo connections IEHP (west of ro•ect site to project ) r I CITY OF • • GA Parking Number of Parking Requirement Units or Square Unit Type Footage Parking Spaces Required 438 units 1.5 spaceslunit* 1 Bedroom 657 438 covered 2 Bedroom 389 units 2 spaces/unit' 778(389 covered) 3 Bedroom 40 units 2 spaces/unit' 80(80 covered) Guess NIA 1 per 3 units 289 Commercial 5,000 sq.ft. 4 per 1000 sq.fit. 20 TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED 1824(907 covered) TOTAL SPACES PROVIDED 1844(1056 covered) SURPLUS 20 *With 1 in garage or carport **With 2 in garage or carport Note: Development Code Amendment is required to allow for shorter parallel parking stall length RANCHOCITY OF Open Space and Recreation • 150 square-feet of private or common open space required per unit • 130,050 square-feet of private or common open space required for entire project • Currently not clear how much private or common open space provided • The Specific Plan area will include common recreational amenities including pools, fitness centers, and parks in addition to project-specific amenities 4 N Staff Comments/Discussion Outline • Street and Network Connections • Building Plotting • Architecture and Floor Plans • Parking • Healthy Development Checklist 4N Street and Network Connections - Objective • To create a high level of pedestrian access and maintain efficient vehicle circulation by designing roadways as a grid or bent-grid to the greatest extent feasible. Street and Network Connections = Proposed • Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? YES ✓ Streets are designed J in a grid pattern _ — ? Ensure ungated ✓ Easy to navigate for LAP 0� or connection to IEHP residents and first _ _ t x Need stronger connection responders from Resort Parkway to IL ✓ Blocks are 400-feet break up 1000-long block long or less, helping u x Create connection to southern parcel break up streetscape � ' a .�� and encourage oil a walkability � ✓ Excellent pedestrian and auto circulation f � 4 40 Building Plotting - Objective • To establish a dynamic built environment with people- places, fostering an active lifestyle and providing access to transportation solutions. Building Plotting - Proposed • Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? Y_ -vw�av�a ✓ Buildings are plotted _T N I.-^ - - � x Rotate 10-plex buildings to frame streets on westernmost north- Garages placed _ south street within block interior '6'9 C,a av� �Q . Setbacks along Resort ✓ Visually interesting, -- -�� _ Parkway uninterrupted 4° ? Window placement streetscape �;. _ distance to sidewalk ✓ Attractive and vibrant public realm for pedestrian and ..- l drivers 1 41 -Y �� `► 4 to Ground Floor Privacy 10' to 15' 15' to 201 � WINDOW (-4C---W1ND0VW 1 t SIDEWALK EDGE SIDEWALK EDGE Window at eye level with sidewalk Window at higher grade from sidewalk OF • • • • Architecture and Floor Plans - Objective • To foster an integrated environment that responds to evolving market conditions and combines progressive development patterns with environmental stewardship to create active residential neighborhoods designed at a human scale. Architecture and Floor Plans - Proposed (PAIRED HOMES) Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? YES ✓ Variations in wall x Relocate first floor movement and bedroom on Unit C1 to details provide second floor to allow for human scale and actively-inhabited space visual interest on first floor ✓ High quality ? Provide direct and visible architectural design access from front doors to ✓ Provides active sidewalks private spaces fronting sidewalks to activate the street Architecture and Floor Plans = Proposed (LINEAR TOWNHOMES) Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? YES ✓ Variations in wall x Relocate laundry room for movement and Unit Al to second or third details provide story human scale and ? Conceptual commercial visual interest signage placement ✓ High quality architectural design ✓ Provides active private spaces fronting sidewalks to activate the street (-L r 40 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Architecture and Floor Plans = Proposed (6-PLEX STACKED FLATS) Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? YES ✓ Variations in wall x None movement and details provide human scale and visual interest ✓ High quality architectural design ✓ Provides active private spaces fronting sidewalks to activate the street RANCHO-OCITY OF Architecture and Floor Plans = Proposed ( 10-PLEX STACKED FLATS) Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? YES ✓ Variations in wall x None movement and details provide human scale and visual interest ✓ High quality architectural design ✓ Provides active private spaces fronting sidewalks to activate the street Architecture and Floor Plans = Proposed (21 -PLEX STACKED FLATS) Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? YES ✓ Variations in wall x None movement and details provide human scale and visual interest ✓ High quality architectural design ✓ Provides active private spaces fronting sidewalks to activate the street Architecture and Floor Plans w Proposed (LIVE-WORK BUILDINGS) Does the project meet the Specific Plan's objectives? YES ✓ Variations in wall x None movement and details provide human scale and visual interest ✓ High quality architectural design ✓ Provides active private spaces fronting sidewalks to activate the street Parking • Required = 1824; Provided = 1844 • Specific PIan requires parallel parking spaces to be 8x24. Proposed parallel parking dimension is 8x22 • Proposed parallel parking dimension will require a Specific Plan Amendment, and the review and approval of the Engineering Department • Driveway parking spaces require landscape or other treatment to soften appearance 1 �3 . i CITY t . • . CUCAMONGA Driveway Parking a- kA Xl Eli r Healthy Development Checklist • Developed by the Riverside University's Health System to help communities across the Inland Empire incorporate health in new development Proposed Checklist Item Does the project encourage physical activity by providing a complete YES; Sidewalks provided on both sides of network of sidewalks? proposed street. YES; Based on the site of the project site, the Does the project enhance walkability by providing a highly connected street ideal number of intersections is 8-9. Project network? provides 9,which suggests that block lengths are ideal to allow for connectivity. • Project meets what constitutes a "healthy development," per the Healthy Development checklist. Required Entitlements • The proposed project will require the following entitlements (minor applications are not listed): 1 . Design Review - $34,079 2. Tentative Tract Map - $15,000 (deposit) 3. Specific Plan Amendment - $10,000 (deposit) 4. Environmental Review — City Administrative Processing Fee - $2,000 (deposit) 5. Environmental Review — City Attorney Fee — Actual Cost 6. Environmental/CEQA Review — Exemption - $106 7. Notice of Filing Sign - $971 per sign 8. Public Noticing, Staff Time - $212 9. Public Noticing, Advertising - $651 RANCHOCITY OF CUCAMONGA The Resort 06 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission Workshop August 14, 2019 i r. v { t� oil — w.e Quo e —- t. Za � Us dim vit -VW le _ + V oe .0 i TM c ,. � L 44 J � •'J — .- ,�y yauer M-w�,,.r.u. t.......... I c�ariw ruW r I f t � Y Outdoor f •rt—Outdoor Event Space • • The Resort IMRPR!� The Resort—Townhomes Along The Resort Parkway r� +Ile `:cis` "�. - , •. � �� . 5 +1 f {J ' L { + * � •+vim• � � _ � iY3'� a� - , it i J . The Resort—Internal Street Intersection .. 4 � }��.r� � •Y T f F'rr '4?t - _ `� -* •" °X'v ;..•. qkbr hoft llP { } i �, � .� ��rl l � z+,�� /� �� __ � � r' „�f V� �� .�� I• +��r.r��i�� '}�I!�` '��•l��{+}�}If }��ti.:�,-� The Resort— � ' � S4j �df •P"'tT� +I �a71.�* + 4i { r��, .��, fv. 1 ��• 7..11 �. - i I 'x.. � � -, T Contemporary 3 . - f � - � . [-. The Resort—Industrial 21 plex Street View a . - �\� / ■�` _ _ � > � s . � - . `d�I �w: The Resort— . .. 10 plex Street i'.' • fie' rM ' a•. _ �t r ems..• <, �� r � - �_ ..�� :. ,�- --j" .r.+ __ yam, � �� I• J I f E .�44 The Resort—Contemporary a a Shop Space . § . - ). ! - � � � � • � . - � « • v - �� - 1�� ilillill �.. - =��,:� �-mac--• -- - t.� � _ •� -- .—_— - Yam{ �.'�'�! �'4F"- -rt ResortThe F F Flats �'•�*�r,:r 1 3l�.'��`� �. 1 jar, .f Y. �,- �� - - y cs� >®m , i►t � ��-_ ter.-' �--�--e-�--'� .. .:�F ±��• - — rf ='�� • 15 �' Thp ■rt—Contemporary Paired Honies, •• •• rryy4�t x. 1 I II4 _ I F _ a f 1��iwF� * fy r 4 •ji7L'I� kk j 4 5 `• yam;. �� r �I I �, I -!-'� — � I�� '— I� I � •1L k F Z 'f r�iL^•r r k� x' jj( e, f'� \fir # �y I r � ` .�/ x � -� L tikr�� 1' � � '' + '+•• 'i, r�� ,�4.=^�'�^= j S f, ��7 ii'C r,. �..'w��II r • � � Vx ' .r S� F �h*irwrc _ LL _ y' 'r�.1'61� �f. r �#1 , \it��y�� ;+_��"?' �/ f/ ; ' , �' r_ b1R'.�'Y'y _ 'y dt��'# � �4�t � ; � • � �� - �*i�:.��?��•--ram \ � --� ` ~_ �� M1�� ■rt—Contemporary Paired Homi?::, •o - / « ` z . , �&\�y - � ` \ lit | ;■ - ' �\ \y