Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-11-09 - Supplemental A44111111 IN i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Project Description • Applicant: Infinity Design UA • Entitlements: Design Review (DRC2016-00295) and Minor Exception (DRC2016-00296) • Project Description: Design Review of a 108-room, 5-story hotel to replace an existing Carrows restaurant • Project Size: 1.41 Acres of Land • General Plan Designation: Industrial Park • Zoning: Industrial Park • Floor Area Ratio: 98 Percent (100 Percent Permitted) t/ONOWvDnD OHDNda JO Ally 1. d Project Design • Contemporary Design • Extensive use of tile, simulated wood siding, metal panels and raised metal cantilevered window frames • Cantilevered metal canopies over the entrances • Tuck -under covered/open air swimming pool • Complies with Development Code except for parking • Parking — 92 spaces (110 required)(17 percent deficit) • Route 66 visual improvements • New bus shelter FOOTHILL BOULEVARD El & �.... mommummommal a7f:t tmwmo� .-1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA &Sri saw! oil ■If 00.,'.,. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Minor Exception (Parking) • A request to reduce the required parking by 17 percent, or 18 parking spaces • Parking study reviewed parking utilization of similar hotels in surrounding area • Country Inn (Ontario) - 51 percent utilization • Courtyard (Rancho Cucamonga) — 55 percent utilization • Hyatt Place (Ontario) - 87 percent utilization • Project provides a parking ratio of 0.85 parking spaces per room • Project includes Condition of Approval driver to pick up and deliver guests to Airport and other local destinations demand to provide a vehicle and the Ontario International to reduce the parking Communications • Letters dated June 15t" and August 23rd of 2016 • Property owner to the south concerned about reduced parking • Parking spaces at the end of the drive aisle not covered shared parking agreement • Property to the south includes 1 1 /2 parking spaces that were originally counted toward available parking • Parking count adjusted to not count 2 parking spaces . 1 I"'Vd T--f,rW---WW--T-T I E1, f 213'• RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: • Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and • Approve Design Review DRC2016-00295 and Minor Exception DRC2016-00296 through the adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions. _ CITY OF RAN Project Description • Applicant: City of Rancho Cucamonga • Entitlement: Design Review (DRC2016-00170) • Project Description: Site plan and architectural review of Rancho Cucamonga Sports Center • Project Size: 4.63 Acres of Land • General Plan Designation: Industrial Park • Zoning: Industrial Park(IP) and General Industrial (GI) Districts • Floor Area Ratio: 28 Percent (40 - 60 percent permitted) • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA VE)NOwvDn3 OH3NVH JO Ally E� .1\ Project Overview • Single -story, 34,994 square foot recreation facility with 3 indoor, high school regulation basketball courts • Concession and common areas with seating for up to 40 people, a party room and administrative office space with storage and restroom/facilities • 3 outdoor basketball courts with a 20,536 square foot overhead open shade structure that is designed so that it can be enclosed in the future �I r f Srmm�dary Entrance y d t V I 1, I � Primary EMrence '.- Fern, Monument m Way Ij� PARCEL 2 1 1. 35 ACRES _ __ __------ (LOTLINE;WM-69T`9ENn i �LJ Proposed Twnvinrmer Fire I�ne IU Fucl Swt)on Service Yaid Existing Cell Ttmrr 6'Tulsular Su,f Gate Tmh - Encfasnm it n 4 ATutsWar )feel Frrxx- PARCEL 1 111 1 9.499 ACRE5 Prdranan Walk (Trp.) W PROJECT LOB Parking DKG ECT SITE` 1 r Gmundcow, Planting (Typ.1 Planter Wand(Typ) Concrete Scat Wall (Typ) Arnval ('nun w/ lislorvd P. ong J(/ T Turn An1urN- -... F.vent Ama 1 <11116 16narte Terraced SeAting Urtduur Full Coun 6'Tulwlar Stec) Fenrc Wskethall(Coremdl- Ow Rmnnon gasm (Typ I - Maximum Ig" Ih•ptk Pedntrtan Wilk (1pp i 6'Tuhular STes•Ifate CAMPY ShTmen(Typ ade .) - ExistingF'ence+nJ— Ilm urc Project Design • Contemporary Design • Constructed of a pre-engineered steel framing system • Clad in shot blasted concrete block, painted acrylic plaster, insulated multi -colored metal panels and large expanses of green tinted insulated glass • Drought tolerant landscaping • Project conforms to all related criteria of the Development Code for the Industrial Park (IP) District • Project will share access and parking with the existing overflow parking for Quakes Stadium • Parking — 475 Spaces (278 Required) _ - MNFpYOVYNiMOGa.�n — i'M4..Tv (LN/I. NYAW — INT,tlT`KNtdrli!' Y:� i` T�. MIf19MtM - 'dCJ"M rS:MNp QM9Y1'rl r.Yliyl ' . MN[DYCIIN7YYY vvest tievation b:4+IIN C� , W. ft� =NNl�bO1NNMC�NTT East Elevation .I ... mm CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA � �.Sur'RIaYf. a[t.i s�tr rrn South Elevation (W\O Shade Cover) _r h= . 1 � "Masi •Y p.�se K y .. ;�®q1 • � ��� I • `�1i; •^ n I�� ma's„_ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA n D O ,6 i 4� - M f r '. �Yil�lf�l SAY RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: • Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and • Approve Design Review DRC2016-00170 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions. DRC2016-00345 A Modification to DRC2007-00951 Conditions of Approval Biane Family Properties Planning Commission November 9, 2016 w Location Map DRC2007=00951 • On January 22, 2014 the Planning Commission approved DRC2007-00951: • Provided for a partial -build option for the western 6.51 acre portion of the site. • Permitted the demolition of non-contributing buildings to allow for development of a 122,304 square foot industrial warehouse building. • Non-contributing buildings include the bottling plant/warehouse, dry wine bottling room, cooperage shop, restroom, lunch shelter, and foreman's residence. • Two residential buildings, the wine maker's residence and the caretaker residence, were determined to be Contributors and were conditioned to be relocated off -site with a plaque affixed to each residence identifying its original location and significance to the Winery. Impacts Assessment L 5 A 1 W1V"w\'nInIMMf. S nn+rm uARnNPIlC 9 fIP m fAwmm nF90 13 nmWALRW%l H6OWL' Pw.�nrr uximAwr rnmunrtrr 2 AOmlli�an ❑ 91PurRWV WWAAF31WSt 8 10 RPSIwOJV 14 LVA[II f1i11FR \'PCP. 1111BlIrOn rowarus.hn wr.sm 3 .alAfr cwammcwtnit+c 7 owr wrzsmmnn 11 touw'lua slwn A M1DIiMRfilr TOBPUAttnILFII fro..0 Arvunwl _ 4 wmunc um slwrs 8 xTxF R� RsamtE 12 Pwauvs rrslocrP DRC2016=00345 • Following Planning Commission approval, the applicant researched the feasibility of relocating the wine maker's residence and the caretaker residence and determined • Unable to find appropriate lots for the relocation; and • The structural condition of the houses would make moving them difficult; and • Possible recipients of the structures (Northtown Housing Development Corporation and Habitat for Humanity)declined the houses. D RC2016-00345 • The applicant has requested deleting the applicable Conditions from Planning Commission Resolution No. 14-08, which state: • Planning Department Condition No. 7: The costs to relocate the two contributing residences shall be borne by the owner. The owner shall notify the City in writing once the relocation plan has been finalized. • Planning Department Condition No. 8: Prepare and affix identifying plaques to the relocated residences. This would consist of at a minimum an 8-inch by 10-inch durable plaque for both of the relocated residences to identify their original locations and historical association with the Biane Winery. The plaques would be affixed to the residences in a publicly viewable location. D RC2016-00345 • LSA Associates prepared a memorandum that further reviews the Biane Winery Impacts Assessment regarding the wine makers residence and the caretaker residence. • The two residences derive their significance solely from their association with the winery. • They are not individually significant and are typical examples of small, wood -framed houses and if they are relocated off -site, would be out of context and their significance as contributing resources would be lost. • Without the wine maker's residence and the caretaker residence, the Winery would retain its National Re ister eligibility, and therefore the demolition of these structures would not be a significant impact to the historic property. • Both buildin s should be documented similar to the Historic Build-ing Survey (NABS) Ill. DRC2016-00345 Conditions of Approval • Delete in their entirety Planning Department Conditions of Approval Nos. 7 & 8 from PC Resolution 14-08. • Following appropriate HABS Level III documentation, the wine maker's residence and the caretaker residence may be demolished with other previously determined non-contributing structures. • Removal of the non -permitted sidewalk and curb cut on the north side of the winery building. Environmental Review • Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration on January 225 2014, in connection with the City's approval of Development Review DRC2007-00951. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project. Recommendation • Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve DRC2016-003451 thereby approving a modification to the conditions of approval for DRC2007-00951. DRC2016-00519 Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17663 Time Extension Request Planning Commission November 9, 2016 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Prior Approvals • On July 26, 2006 the Planning Commission approved SUBTPM17663: • Provided for the subdivision of one 0.39 acre parcel into two parcels. • Both parcels exceed minimum parcel dimension and area requirements. • Parcel 1 is the northerly parcel. Currently vacant. • Parcel 2 is the southerly parcel. Contains existing SFR. SUBTPM17663 .�. —u1>a+l aM ------------------, -------------- - 9457 S.E. GROS51 9990S.F. NET I ..411ort vl Ymf i 8: i7 I II �71 It lrin , �• I w"r T R il1Dbap+Kia.^1JI ♦ /.ru __ fig+ I I t�vc ax 1 ------- `------------ I '' M I e, 2 e. 77955f. GRpS.yNfl O �• I t I m —_— r_-1 PROEEm�urE 1 aM (I<'Mf. P: s?:.1:E I I,II •�Q Ou1. 1� M1 9lD I EI�IMgG INRyS I &ttl .uil 00 Jff W) ! , �`� �— ibrA"ItMM I 1G lE 1 1 6 1 111 v `— x -- ` QCw-w _ _ _ _--�__—___— --• 1 11 — Q sw 171> �ac arm♦\♦ .\ �a70'1 II 2�= `� EFFEN STREET �ala».rc ' 1 I --1 � a l I Nw uE s��04 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Prior Approval/Extensions • SUBTPM17663 Time Line: • July 26, 2006 — 3-year approval to expire on July 26, 2009. • SB 1185 — 1-year automatic extension to July 26, 2010. • AB 333 — 2-year automatic extension to July 26, 2012. • AB 208 — 2-year automatic extension to July 26, 2014. • AB 116 — 2-year automatic extension to July 26, 2016. • Current request 1-year time extension to July 26, 2017. • 4 additional 1-year time extension requests are possible. Time Extension Request • Application to extend SUBTPM17663 was submitted on June 21, 2016. • RCMC (Chapter 16.20) requires TE applications to be submitted 60 days prior to expiration. • Staff accepted the TE application because none of he characteristics of the project site or the development standards applicable to the Low (L) Residential District had changed since the original approval. Environmental Review • The project qualifies as a Class 15 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15315 — Minor Land Divisions - as the project consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential use into four or fewer parcels, is in conformance with the General Plan and zoning, no variances or exceptions are required, all services and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, the parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous 2 years, and the parcel does not have an average slope greater than 20 percent. Recommendation • Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve DRC2016-00519, thereby approving a 1-year time extension request for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17663. Trail Easement Vacation DRC2016-00780 Applicant: Danny Morel A request to vacate a portion of an existing equestrian easement located along the southern edge of the property within the Estate Residential (ER) District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and within the Equestrian Overlay District at 5820 Rolling Pastures. Phil lyDr e fD LQ ? »2'.\c:»■© / , .>Ln >a. ■IT■ % . \ (D - ��»§ < <Hu& Club »� <: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TRACT15802 LOCALFEEDER TRAIL PRIVATE EOUESTRIAN EASEMENT I I to I� �? Is Parcel 4 W W PROJECT a SITE � Ib Ip li I N45'10'22'W ..., N 89'25'08' E 150.95' 3 Parcel Map 15802 3, N,VA+e mess eA4ege-Tn STREET (FUTURE) N 89'25.08' E 418.55' 1 I N IrIS'03' E 0.53' -� y 1 1 d I N 8725'05' E 270.89' 2G PP,Vhm A4cc55 Pa5e41 -N 00'13'00' E 15.t N 8723'00' E 205.02' t IT�A5,50 E _j58yc N.B9'25'Oe'E. 127.52' g N.89'25'08'E. 124.28' 17.59 C _ \_. 5 _ 4,7g''�'�-�'''E - - ' _ 1 i- - - 6' PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENT N e9'25'08' E 103.80' ' A I 1 44' DEDICATION TO tNE CITY OF RANCHO � N 2516'23' E 5.00' 9v .- 15.00 RELATED FOR STPST, MIGNWAY AND 1� g 1 TTED EO PURPOSES PURPOSES = Parcel 3 Lb Am `I Pnrrrl 1 ^ Parcel 2 o ^, ; o C.L. EASEMENT TO SOUTHERN ZI 'O COMPANY (WIDTH UNDISCLOSED) UNDISCLOSED) n PER 1274/221 O.R. PER S ---T- I 5' PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT N.41'2e'00'C. 6.66, - _'E. 49D.52' N.89'I5'O8----- ---------------N.4P1e'00'L 6 __---___-__---N.21TWOB'E. N 89'25'08' E 187.72' 481.08'____ ________-- ______ N 89'25'08" E 194.26' IN 89'25'08- E 711.10') N.89'25'08'E.. 2.94' 15' PRIVATE EQUESTRIAN EASEMENT 5' PRIVATE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IV PRIVATE EQUESTRIAN EASEMENT ---- r__ ,N.55'48'32'W. x s 26.30' N.89'25'08'E. 178.75' 1 - - - N-W?Sb8' L N8- - R' PE. 1' I,P TAGGED L.S. 4452 4 b4�: Rs Y�R((/� (v OMBROM ^� - - - - - - - 1,�; y� \ wo a 1 Adjacent Trail/Wall Map r SINGLE-FAMILY ` y x'tiF . RESIDENCES ;, ii,.a"„. LOCA�F�EEDER PROPERTY ^s 19 4O C, y r A>,+ €: :, r *e iv , s_ :.! EXISTING LOCALFEEDER TRAIL Trails Advisory Committee • Met on October 12, 2016, to discuss this project. • Several questions/comments brought up, including: • Connectivity to future development to south • Gate to provide rear yard access from trail • How will this effect existing trails • Alta Loma Riding Club: • Trail functions efficiently when in a loop • Opposes vacation • Committee unanimously voted to recommend approval to the Planning Commission/City Council of the proposal to vacate the easement. 8 � I I 1 I I I I I I Trail Vacation Exhibit N8925087 41&35' CURVE 1 1 DELTA A 38*15*48" ADIUS R=45.00' LENGTH L-30.05' ALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHONN HEREON ARE RECORD OR CALCULATED DATA PER INST. NO. 2015-00426350.R, PARCEL "A' OF INST. NO. 2015-0042635 O.R. 147.2s I_ } _ 157.45 } f ZPCIB N8925'081 172.45' I sttraw PARM I' PAGE 2 OF 2 1" Vacation Proposal G8'E 250.39' SCALE 1"_ 40' N89'25'08'E 418.35' CURVE 1 DELTA A=38'15'48" RADIUS[ R-45.00 LENGTH L-in .05' - LINE BEARING DISTANCE 1 500'14'08-W 1 15.00' 545'10 21 E 1 14.04' ALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHONN HEREON ARE RECORD OR CALCULATED DATA PER INST. NO. 2015-00426350.R. PARCEL "A" OF INST. NO. 2015-0042635 O.R. a T aqa < yFy��Z \ Rau 9250B�W 147.23' P e 0 0 m N Z R 147.45' } MMY N8925'08"E 17245' I � IPERM 'A PARca �• PACE 2 OF 2 2"d Vacation Proposal L WE 250.39' RQ U,M PASnMS SCALE 1"= 40' Recommendation • Trails Implementation Plan • Property owners consent required for trail vacation • Exempt from the requirements of CEQA • Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) • Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending the City Council approve the subject Trail Easement Vacation DRC2016- 00780