Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018/12/12 - Minutes PC-HPC DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 1 of 8 A. 7:00 P.M. – CALL TO ORDER 7:00 PM Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call: Chairman Guglielmo ___X__ Vice Chairman (Vacant) ______ Commissioner Dopp ___X__ Commissioner Munoz ___X__ Commissioner Oaxaca ___X__ Commissioner Wimberly ___X__ Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, City Planner; Nick Ghirelli, Assistant City Attorney; Matt Burris, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development; Tom Grahn, Associate Planner; Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer; Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner; Susan Shaker, Acting Executive Assistant II; Mike Smith, Senior Planner B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The 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 individual 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. Stanton Lewis spoke in opposition to the Etiwanda Heights Plan and asked for additional information and clarification about changes to the General Plan, equestrian access, newly revised flood control issues in the area, the proposed addition of 3000 residential units, and increased traffic around Los Osos High School. DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 2 of 8 JoAnn Henkel, resident, spoke against the Etiwanda Heights Plan citing other projects in the City that she feels have violated the General Plan and zoning such as the development on Foothill and Hermosa. She stated that a group called “Concerned Residents of Rancho Cucamonga” is requesting live video of Planning Commission meetings. Hazel Wilkinson, resident, concurred with Ms. Henkel and spoke against the Etiwanda Heights Plan stating she fears it will become a high-density project and is concerned with the availability of the water supply for the new development. C. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Commission at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed for discussion. C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of November 28, 2018. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Wimberly; carried 5-0 to adopt the Consent Calendar. D. DIRECTOR’S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chairman may open the meeting for public input. D1. Proposed Standards and Land Use Regulations for Car Wash and Mobile Automotive- Related Uses Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Overall, the Commission supported staff’s recommendations for the proposed standards and land use regulations for car washes. Commissioner Oaxaca stated his primary concern was to protect any nearby residential uses from noise impacts, specifically from vacuuming, and that staff should consider increasing the proposed setback requirement from 100-feet to 300-500 feet to mitigate the potential noise impacts. DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 3 of 8 Ms. Nakamura asked if the Commission would consider as an alternative to increasing the setback requirement, limiting the number of vacuum stations or having them semi-enclosed as an acceptable form of mitigation. Commissioner Oaxaca agreed that could be a possible solution. Commissioner Dopp concurred with Commissioner Oaxaca about the noise concern. He also asked if the proposed standards for hours of operation would apply to new car washes only or existing car washes and if a change of service to an existing car wash would require a Conditional Use Permit. Ms. Nakamura replied that the new standards would apply to new car washes, but staff could look at previous car wash approvals and analyze impacts on neighboring businesses. She also stated that changes in service would require the modification of a Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Guglielmo asked how the 100-foot setback standard was determined and asked for some real- world examples of the differences in noise when using new technology. Ms. Nakamura replied that the 100-foot setback was a starting point that staff felt would reduce the potential for noise impacts, especially with the new technology available, but it could be modified if the Commission recommended the change. Commissioner Munoz asked if staff has reached out to businesses regarding the setback requirements. Ms. Nakamura replied that the new requirements would not apply to existing businesses but would apply to new car washes, any conversions of existing car washes and reiterated that the set-back requirement only applied to areas with adjacent residential uses or zones nearby. E. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION 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 or less as determined by the Chairman. Please sign in after speaking. E1. PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00749, ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION PLAN PROJECT DRC2015-00751, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 4 of 8 DRC2015-00752, ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00750, AND ETIWANDA HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD AND CONSERVATION PLAN ANNEXATION DRC2015-00732 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – An opportunity for the public to give testimony pertaining to the environmental issues to be addressed in the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for approximately 4,388 acres (including 4,088 acres to be annexed into the City), which proposes to maintain the northerly 3,176 acres as a “conservation priority area” with limited rural development, and to allow development in the southerly 1,212 acre “neighborhood priority area” with land uses to include conservation, residential, commercial, and civic for a project area extending from Haven Avenue, easterly to the City’s boundary with Fontana, and from the northerly City limits to the San Bernardino National Forest boundary in the City’s Sphere-of-Influence – APN’s: 0201-033-32, -35 through -40, -43, and -44, 0201-191-27 and -28, 0201-272-14 through -18, 0201-281-02, -04 through -10, -13, -14, -16 through -22, 0225-091-03, 05, and -06, 225-092-01, 0225-101-32, 0225- 152-06 through -11, and -17, 0225-161-42, 0226-061-03, -07, -16, -20, -26, -27, -28, -33, -47, -56, -57, -61 through -71, -73 through -78, 0226-082-08, -19, -20, -21, and -30, 1074-351-01, -04, -05, and -06, 1087-051-02 through -14, -16 through -27, 1087-061-01 through -21, and 1087-071-01 through -14, and -16 through -21. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, and Tony Locacciato, with Meridian Consultants, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Mr. Locacciato spoke about the purposes of the public scoping meeting, the process required by CEQA, and identified the items to be considered for the EIR and the proposed EIR Scope of Study. Nick Ghirelli, Assistant City Attorney, stated for the record that no action on any approvals would occur at this meeting and the purpose of the meeting was to solicit feedback on items to be considered for the EIR process. Chairman Guglielmo opened the public hearing. Ron Fakhoury, resident of the Deer Creek Community, adjacent to project, spoke against the project stating that the current General Plan Zoning for the area is flood control, open space, and resource conservation and therefore would like the Commission to consider keeping it a conservation area versus developing it for residential and commercial uses. He also cited a letter from Sargent Town Planning to the City that stated the impacts on biological resources on the project site could not be mitigated, referencing the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat, the Coastal California Knat Catcher and the Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) as affected species and vegetation. DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 5 of 8 Anthony Marsick, owner of property in the project area, spoke against the project because of the potential loss of property value for the northern portion of the project site since it is proposed to be a conservation area while the lower portion will have most of the development. He further stated that the environmental testing is not comprehensive because the entire project site can’t be accessed due to the private roads in that area and that public safety would be an issue if the retention basin would be removed. Patrick Kaemerle from Inland Real Estate Group and owner of 4.37 acres on the eastern edge of conservation area, concurred with Mr. Marsick about the loss of property value and also suggested that testing was occurring on private property without permission. Stanton Lewis, who also spoke under Public Communications, asked for clarification on the following items: the definition of “Conservation Priority Area”; County development options; alternative options for the recreation area including a potential equestrian area or soccer fields; specific acreages that will be used for the various improvements such as the roads, green belts areas, schools, and setbacks. Additionally, he stated his concerns with the location of the proposed school next to the brush area due to potential fire and flood events, increased traffic, and relocation of the fire station. Kevin Hernandez, owner of property adjacent to the proposed residential and commercial area, spoke against the project citing concerns with the placement of the school and impacts to traffic and public safety from the proposed commercial uses. He asked the Commission to listen to the residents. Amy Hamilton, resident from Compass Rose, spoke against the project citing that it doesn’t conform or add value to the area and will cause increased traffic and noise. She feels that the City is not listening to the residents. Karen Gruby, resident of Deer Creek Estates, concurred with Ms. Hamilton about the City not listening to the residents. She said that the surveys given to residents did not have an option for no development and would like to know the percentage of people who were pro-development versus no development. Chairman Guglielmo closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz and Wimberly thanked the public for their comments and encouraged residents to give feedback to staff and the Commission until the public comment deadline. Commissioner Oaxaca said he would like the following addressed in the EIR: a broad spectrum of potential alternatives for development, the concerns addressed of the property owners in the north, the potential fire danger, and the historical context of the hydrology and drainage issues in that area and if those concerns still apply. DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 6 of 8 Commissioner Dopp noted the public comments will be part of the public record and encouraged the residents to keep talking to neighbors and officials. He requested more information on the following: the alternative for the residents if the annexation doesn’t take place, traffic patterns, impacts from commercial development, the impact of the Wilson extension, potential wildlife and wildfire issues, flooding concerns, issues with water resources (ground water reserves, water table replenishment, and water capture), and the impact of any potential development in the conservation area, specifically to the Etiwanda Preserve. Chairman Guglielmo requested more clarification on what the potential development would be if the annexation did not take place, if there is a feasible option to conserve all of the land, the potential effects of the project on traffic, public services, school impacts, and noise. E2. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2018-00956 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – A request to amend Title 17 (Development Code) of the Municipal Code to expand limits on animal keeping for educational uses in the Industrial Park (IP) Zone. 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). This item will be forwarded to City Council for final action. Mike Smith, Senior Planner, gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Commissioner Dopp asked if United Christian Academy would be required to apply for a Conditional Use Permit that would be heard by the Planning Commission. Mr. Smith replied that CUPs are handled administratively so it would not be a public hearing, but staff would evaluate the application, notice adjacent property owners accordingly, and apply any conditions of approval. Commissioner Oaxaca asked if there are any other current schools in the IP district that meet the 10 acre requirement for this Municipal Code Amendment other than Abundant Living Church and United Christian Academy. Mr. Smith replied that other schools were not surveyed, but there are a limited number of schools that are 10 acres or more. Chairman Guglielmo (after seeing and hearing no one), closed the public hearing. Commissioner Dopp spoke in favor of project-based education such as animal husbandry. Moved by Oaxaca, seconded by Dopp, carried 5-0 to adopt the Resolution recommending the item be forwarded to the City Council for final approval as presented by staff. DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 7 of 8 F. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER-AGENCY UPDATES: Commissioner Munoz shared the 2019 goals set by the League of California Cities as follows: 1. Provide cities additional funding and tools and preserve local authority to address housing production, affordability, and homelessness. 2. Improve disaster preparedness, recovery, and climate resilience. 3. Promote sustainability of public pension and retirement and health benefits. 4. Addressing public safety concerns such as reforms in criminal justice laws and protecting existing city authority to deliver local emergency services. Additionally, a key concern for most cities is Governor Newsome’s goal to quadruple homebuilding by 2025. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: There will be no meeting on December 26, 2018 and the Commission wished everyone a happy holiday season. G. ADJOURNMENT 8:57 PM I, Susan Shaker, Acting Executive Assistant II of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Thursday, December 06, 2018, seventy two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. Susan Shaker 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 Susan Shaker Acting Executive Assistant II City of Rancho Cucamonga DECEMBER 12, 2018 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Page 8 of 8 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 and must be accompanied by a fee of $2,793 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us.