Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-10-12 - Minutes - HPC-PC Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission Agenda October 12, 2022 FINAL MINUTES Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 7:00 p.m. The regular meeting of the Historic Presentation Commission and Planning Commission was held on October 12, 2022. The meeting was called to order by Chair Dopp 7:00 p.m. A. Roll Call Planning Commission present: Chair Dopp, Vice Chair Williams, Commissioner Morales, Commissioner Boling, and Commissioner Daniels. Staff Present: Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning; Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development; Mike Smith, Principal Planner; Brian Sandona, Senior Civil Engineer; Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant. B. Public Communications Chair Dopp opened public communications and hearing no one, closed public communications. C. Consent Calendar C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of September 14, 2022. Motion to adopt the minutes by Vice Chair Williams, second by Commissioner Daniels; Motion carried unanimously 5-0. D. Public Hearings D1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION -STOR'EM SELF STORAGE - A request to modify an existing Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor recreational vehicle and indoor personal storage at an existing 123,577 square foot recreational vehicle storage facility located within the Neo-Industrial (NI) Zone at 8530 Hellman Avenue and 9292 9th Street: APNs—0209-012-07 and 0209-012-06. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15301—Existing Facilities Mena Abdul-Ahad, Assistant Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and presentation (copy on file). Mena Abdul-Ahad mentioned the applicant is requesting to add personal self-storage to the exiting Conditional Use Permit and has also secured a lease agreement with the adjacent property to store RVs and Boats. Revised Resolution with minor changes and Conditions of Approval requiring the adjacent property have been placed on the dais for review. Chair Dopp opened Public Hearing. Applicant was present and available for questions. HPC/PC MINUTES – October 12, 2022 Page 2 of 6 FINAL No comments from the Public, Chair Dopp closed Public Hearing. Commissioner Boling asked for clarification in the special conditions stating there is nothing that identifies the expanded use to include the leased space. Asked is it sufficient to have it only referenced in the Resolution that is being proposing tonight. Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney, stated for clarity it will be added to the initial condition. Commissioner Boling wanted to confirm and said from a public safety perspective (Fire and PD), any standard conditions from those entities that would apply to any new applicant for a similar situated outdoor storage facility also applies to the expanded use area. For the record, those standard conditions would be used for this expanded use, so there is no disparity on how we are treating this additional use as opposed to a new application to do the same type of business. Jennifer Nakamura, Deputy Director of Planning, assured him that any and all regulations are met as part of the Fire Prevention Departments regular inspection process. Commissioner Daniels asked would Fire and PD typically look at the site when a new business license is issued. Jennifer Nakamura replied that yes and said it would typically generate a fire inspection but when we confirmed with Fire that they did not have an inspection on record, that is why we added this condition to assure it would take place in a reasonable timeframe to make sure there are no issues. Commissioners Daniels stated for the record. he does have a recreational vehicle at this storage facility and indicated he does not have any financial conflict of interest. Chair Dopp asking for a motion to modify special condition #1 to update and add the additional leased space storage area to the approval. Motion to adopt Resolution 22-27 by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Morales. Motion carried unanimously 5-0 vote. In addition to staff’s recommended changes. D2. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2020-00004 AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2022- 00315 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA – Consideration of a proposal to amend Title 17 of the Municipal Code to incorporate new development standards related to, for example, structure height, modifications to existing topographical conditions, and the City’s application processing requirements applicable to thirty-eight (38) properties that are located on the north and south sides of Camino Predera and all properties that have street frontage along Predera Court, a residential neighborhood generally located north of Foothill Boulevard/Pacific Electric (PE) Trail and west of Carnelian Avenue/Cucamonga Creek, in the Low Residential (L) Zone and amend the Zoning Map to establish an overlay zoning district (“Camino Predera Overlay”) that identifies which properties are subject to the new development standards; APNs: 0207-631-01 through -11 and -14 through -25, and 0207-641-01 through -15. These amendments are exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15161(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. These items will be forwarded to City Council for final action —A request to modify Michael Smith, Principal Planner, presented Commissioners with a Staff Report and presentation (copy on file). HPC/PC MINUTES – October 12, 2022 Page 3 of 6 FINAL Chair Dopp opened Public Hearing. The following residents of Camino Predera expressed structure height concerns: • Satia Vega • Catherine Weber • Eric Weber • Suzanne Buquet • Tom Snedeker • Christopher Nosrad • Renee Massey, stated for the record, City Council recommended that the proposed house be reduced by approx. 10%, and side yard setback to be increased to reduce the overall massing of the house. • Jay Adams stated the 14 ft. height is doable, and the setbacks make sense. Jennifer Nakamura stressed the goal and direction from Council from the beginning was to find some common ground to get property owners along both sides of Camino Predera to find standards they can agree to. She mentioned staff spent over 2000 hours, as well as an estimated $15,000 in consultant time to try and see if we can come to some census with the community, was the primary focus. Once it was recognized we were never going to get to a consensus, staff had to use our recommendations to the Commission. The State of California has made housing production the priority in the State forcing local jurisdictions to accommodate. SB330 is one of those laws. As we were reviewing the standards, we recognized it was going to apply. Mike Smith reviewed the side yard setbacks requirements with the Commissioners. Commissioner Daniels asked were there CC&Rs for this tract when it was first developed. Mike Smith answered yes, but it was binding between the property owners. Not something we enforced. Commissioner Daniels stated it was mentioned there are 11 lots on the south side. He asked are those all-different property owners. Mike Smith replied that he does know multiple properties are owned by the same family. Commissioner Boling asked when did the current standards in the Hillside Overlay for the 30 ft. height maximum and the minimum 5/10 ft. side setbacks come into existence. Mike Smith responded he cannot say when it was adopted but it has been in existence for at least 20 years. Commissioner Boling asked what is the average height of a single-story family house. Mike Smith stated it would vary depending on the roof line but a typical height is 14 ft. Commissioner Morales asked for explanation if it went down to 10 ft. vs. 14 ft. HPC/PC MINUTES – October 12, 2022 Page 4 of 6 FINAL Mike Smith replied if we were a single-story house, as they are generally designed, we would have to excavate deeper into the existing grade. He said 14 ft. is a reasonable height to a typical single- story home. It is possible it could be 10 ft. but keep in mind these are optional standards because of SB330, we cannot make it go below the limit that is now in place. Jennifer Nakamura mentioned the 14 ft. limit is measured from the highest level. Also, to be considered is the type of slope. She said in our professional opinion, 14 ft. is an appropriate overall height. Vice Chair Williams mentioned this is assuming the applicant will chose to take the options. She did express how pleased she is with this and getting a standard in place was a goal 8 years ago. However, her concern is they will not choose the option that was set forth and will go with the old standards and if they do that, the appeal process is alive and well. Jennifer Nakamura explained the applicant can choose to use the existing standard that are in place, 30 ft. maximum height limit. It would go through a discretionary entitlement hillside design review process. Required will be a neighborhood meeting, noticing, public hearing, and appeal process is an option. We can encourage them to bypass the discretionary review process and go straight to a ministerial review if they do this saving time and money. She said the Planning staff will still do a full thorough review on that project, absorbing the costs. Commissioner Williams confirmed and stated if they choose the options we put forward, there is no appeal process available to the neighborhood. It becomes a ministerial decision. Chair Dopp asked Serita Young, can somebody make a reasonable argument that reducing the height by a couple feet and increasing the setbacks by 5 ft., does it really create a less intensive argument. Can somebody make that argument? Serita Young replied according to SB330, no. Commissioner Daniels asked if there were any consensus from the property owners on the south side what they would like to see. Mike Smith answered that his impression from workshops from property owners on the south side wanted the standards to stay the same. Chair Dopp stated he understands the passion on both sides. He has been the only individual up here who has been at all the hearings since where things got intense starting from 2019. This is nothing against anybody in the room, but each side is cherry picking lots as an example of what the development of Camino Predera can be. As a Planning Commissioner and start to sort things out in terms of setting strong standard for the neighborhood. It has always been his concern that one size fits all approach is going to make some people happy or unhappy under certain circumstances. As a Commission from his standpoint, we almost want all developers on the south side of the street to pick the optional standards. If you use the requirements it is going to be so much worse. Those are some of his initial thoughts. To be fair, do we really want Camino Predera to look like every other neighborhood in the city because it is unique. There is a lot of opportunity for a real community on Red Hill Country. Commissioner Daniels stated that staff has been put in a difficult position to satisfy both parties. What they are proposing is a good solution to the SB330. The existing residents have to realize without these options anybody can come in and propose a 30 ft. height building. He does believe what will HPC/PC MINUTES – October 12, 2022 Page 5 of 6 FINAL be built there will be very nice. He indicated staff has done a good job coming up with a solution to this dilemma. Commissioner Boling stated the City Council and the Planning Commission directed staff to bring the community together, communicate issues and concerns, identify common ground, compromise where appropriate, and attempt to reach consensus and after a number of years, after several community engagement meetings, it appears there are, but a few outstanding issues remain. Unfortunately, a true agreement is highly unlikely. Staff’s approach is a novel way to encourage new houses to be built, not required but encouraged to be built with greater difference to the north neighbors and include some of what they want on the north side without giving up everything that the south side already has. He is struggling to see the gives on the north side from the current existing standards that apply to the hillside overlay that exists throughout a good portion of the city. Staff has done it’s best in navigating a very emotionally charged and heartfelt issue of the effective property owners and he approves staff’s recommendation. Commissioner Morales stated there are a lot of strong feeling on both sides after 20 years. That is why it took 5 workshops to try and align everyone’s interests as much as possible. The 30 ft. height above the street was reduced down to 14 ft. and that was a big improvement. The 10 ft. height would make a future developer turn away and go with the 30 ft. height they could get. It also creates standard development guidelines for future developers, what City Council asked for that started all this. The 14 ft. height maximum above the street level would be best for the neighborhood character feeling for both sides of the street and make it look better. Vice Chair Williams concurs with her colleagues. The optional method is attractive enough to encourage people to use that. She hates to think there is a chance for more appeals. She does like having the optional set of standards and hopes staff will encourage people to take the option and help them along the way as much as they can. Chair Dopp expressed he is not happy with Sacramento telling us and putting our hands behind our back on this one to a large extent. He would like to have seen a foot or two on the setback and the height. It is what it is at this point. Motion to adopt Resolution 22-28 recommending approval to the City Council by Commissioner Boling, second by Commissioner Daniels. Motion carried unanimously 5-0 vote. E. Director Announcements Matt Marquez, Director of Planning and Economic Development, announced the following: • The City received APA award for the General Plan Update for PlanRC. Jennifer Nakamura and Matt Burris accepted the award on behalf of the City. Great work done by the community. • The City Council recently approved professional services agreement with Lisa Wise Consulting. Last time it was done was 2015. Focus on business attraction and help retain businesses. • He would like to hear feedback from the Commissioners on what they would like to hear on a regular basis and what would be useful to them. F. Commission Announcements - None G. Adjournment HPC/PC MINUTES – October 12, 2022 Page 6 of 6 FINAL Motion by Vice Chair Williams, second by Commissioner Boling to adjourn the meeting. Hearing no objections, Chair Dopp adjourned the meeting at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Elizabeth Thornhill Executive Assistant, Planning Department Approved: November 9, 2022 HPC/PC meeting.