Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996/02/14 - Agenda Packet" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ; PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY FEBRUARY 14, 1996 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMONGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA I. Pledge of Allegiance II. Roll Call Chairman Barker Commissioner Melther Vice Chairman McNiel __ Commissioner Tolstoy __ Commissioner Lumpp III. Announcements IV. Approval of Minutes November 29, 1995, Adjoumed Meeting December 19, 1995, Adjourned Meeting January 10, 1996 January 31, 1996, Adjourned Meeting V. Public Hearings The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman tout address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. A. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 93-03 - FINAL SCORE - A request to conduct entertainment consisting of live bands, disc jockeys, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, in the Community Commercial District within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 8411 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 207-571-75. (Continued from January 24, 1996) VL Director's Reports - B. CUCAMONGA CORNERPOINTE LLC - A request to consider initiation of text changes to add small lot subdivision standards in conjunction with General Plan Amendment 95-03A, Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 95-04, and Development District Amendment 95-02. VII. Old Business C. COMMERCIAL LAND STUDY DISCUSSION - (Oral Report) (Continued from January 24, 1996) VIII. Old Business D. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW 96-01 - Mark/Taylor - The review of 264 condominiums on 19 acres of land in the Medium Residential zone (8-14 dwelling units per acre), located in the Victoria Planned Community, on the north side of Baseline, one block west of Victoria Park Lane. IX. Public Comments This is the time andplace for the general public to address the Commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. X. Commission Business XI. Adjournment The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. The Planning Commission will adjourn to a workshop immediately following in the Rains Room regarding Modification No. 2 to Conditional Use Permit 93-49. I, Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certi.62 that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on February 8, 1996, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. / VICINITY MAP CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA B. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 93-03 - FINAL SCORE - A request to conduct entertainment consisting of live bands, disc jockeys, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, in the Community Commercial District within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 8411 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 207-571-75. Brad Buller, City Planner, presented the staff report and indicated two additional letters and one telephone call had been received in opposition to the project. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Garry Rausa, Manager, Final Score, 8411 Foothill Boulevard, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he represents his parents, Charles and Dorothy, who own the business. He stated they h~ve a 10-year lease on the building wi~ a Z-year option. He gave a brief history of the project, stating that since taking over the bar a little over three years ago they had improved the property and upgraded the clientele. He stated that when they took over the bar, they had introduced live entertainment, but stopped the entertainment upon receiving notice from Code Enforcement that an Entertainment Permit was necessary. He said they made some improvements based upon recommendations of the noise study and then did a follow up study indicating that noise emitting from the building and parking lot had been reduced by 50 percent to a level below the City's requirements. He commented there have been complaints about the railroad tracks and said that his patrons do not go onto the tracks. He showed pictures of the graffiti on the fence behind the house behind the railroad tracks. He showed a picture of a pathway along the tracks which he said is used by children on their way to and from school and by undesirables at night. He showed a picture of the chain link fence blocking the pathway from his property and felt the railroad company should be responsible for putting up a fence to cut down on the graffiti. He said the City regularly paints over the graffiti. He proposed a chain link fence be installed to block the pathway. He said his patrons do not wander up on the railroad tracks but it is frequented by gangs and he calls the police when he sees illegal activity along the tracks. He commented his wants and needs have changed since he first submitted the application three years ago. Me ~aid he would like to be able to offer live entertainment five nights a week even though it would only average three nights per week. He indicated he wants to be able to offer live entertainment on holidays that may fall on nights of the week other than when he would normally have entertainment. He proposed that the hours of entertainment be from 8:00 p.m. to midnight Monday through Thursday, 8:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday, and 2:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. on Sunday. He stated that Peppers, Skippers, and Shelleys have live entertainment with no security guards required by the City. He wanted to use his own doormen with three stationed on the doors and one in the parking lot. He stated he would not exceed the maximum occupancy levels of 49 people on the upper level and 27 people on the lower level. He proposed adding larger lights on the building exterior that would not cause a glare on Foothill Boulevard and a chain link fence along the walkway from the existing business to keep people out. He said they made some of the suggested sound attenuation improvements and acquired a temporary use permit from the City for live entertainment on New Year's Eve. He stated no one Planning Commission Minutes -2- January 24, 1996 wandered in the parking lot on that night and they operated at full capacity. He noted their occupancy was monitored by the Fire Department and there were no complaints from the local residents. He felt they had fixed the problems that occurred in the past and said he was willing to work with the City and the nearby residents. He read a letter from the Firefighter's Association in appreciation of the work done on the Spark of Love Toy Campaign. He said he also supports other charities. He commented he has four surveillance camera, two outdoors in the parking lot and two indoors. He said they would like to do the landscaping and lighting, but they are a small business and cannot afford those improvements at this time. He indicated they want to build a fenced outdoor patio area for people to eat and drink. He said the Alcohol Beverage Control Board has approved serving alcohol Outdoors in that area, but he realized that was a different issue. He said he had a petition signed by over 500 of his patrons requesting live entertainment. Commissioner Melcher asked if the applicant was requesting approvals for different conditions from what staff had recommended. Mr. Rausa said that was correct. He felt that it would not matter what night entertainment is offered because the building has been soundproofed, he would have good people manning the door, and it would not attract extra people to his establishment. He said they currently operate at capacity almost every week because of the showing of sporting events and they have not had complaints from the residents or the City. Chairman Barker noted Mr. Rausa was requesting entertainment five nights a week and asked what Other changes the applicant was proposing. Mr. Rausa said he wanted to use his own doormen rather than licensed security guards. He said his insurance company has never had any claims against his establishment. He said they cannot afford outside security and stated that other establishments in town which offer live entertainment do not have licensed security guards. Commissioner Lumpp asked what Mr. Rausa would do if the permit were granted and the residents complain to the City because they are impacted by noise. Mr. Rausa said they had a live band on New Year's Eve and there were no complaints. He stated he would go with Planning's recommendation to have bands on Friday and Saturday only in order to prove to the residents and the City that they can have live bands without complaints. He asked that the number of nights be expanded to five if there are no complaints. He said he was worried that the residents may make invalid complaints even if they don't hear the noise just because they want to shut him down. He commented that a car had backfired while driving down Cedarwood Lane and residents called the police reporting that shots had been fired at the Final Score. He stated there is gang activity on the railroad tracks and the residents have called the police to say that patrons from the bar are on the railroad track. He felt he had been treated unfairly by the residents. He said he had improved the situation because he has made improvements and also educates his customers to leave the parking lot in a quiet manner by not playing loud radios, not loitering, and pushing bikes toward the driveway on Foothill Boulevard before starting them up. He said he asks that his patrons respect the neighbors. Planning Commission Minutes -3- January 24, 1996 Chairman Barker thought he had heard Mr. Rausa say he does not expect to increase the number of customers by offering live entertainment. Mr. Rausa said that was correct because he would cut off at capacity. He said he currently operates at capacity for sporting events. Chairman Barker asked why he would offer live entertainment if he were not going to attract more patrons. Mr. Rausa said he wants to offer an alternative to his customers in addition to sporting events, good food, and pool tables. Shirley Kovar, 8438 Cedarwood Lane, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she did not recognize the rear of her home on the picture Mr. Rausa showed. She said she had called the police and reported that Mr. Rausa had made verbal threats to her over the telephone. She stated she had been verbally abused when she called the bar to complain about the noise. She questioned why he~Quld offer entertainment if he does not hope to increase business. She did not feel he had proved he is a good neighbor. She said he had been on top of the railroad track and made nasty comments to her and her husband when they were sitting on their patio. She felt the bar is too small of a building to do all that he says he wants to do. She noted he had mentioned other establishments which have live music and have not had complaints and said those other establishments are not as close to residences. She thought that the noise reverberates toward them because of the hill on the other side of the street. She said their home shakes from vibrations. She said she has sent letters and she and her neighbors signed a petition a long time ago to ban live entertainment. She agreed the applicant had a right to have a business but she felt it is not in the proper place. She also felt patrons pose a traffic hazard for her neighbors. Commissioner Lumpp asked Mrs. Kovar the last time she had experienced a nuisance in terms of the noise. Mrs. Kovar said she hadn't kept track because she felt her calls were not being taken seriously. Commissioner Lumpp asked if she had called within the last three to four ~onths. Mrs. Kovar responded negatively. She said she was out of state on New Year's Eve so she had not heard the band then. She feared the situation will become bad again if live entertainment is permitted. Linette Nelander, 8459 Lemon Grove Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she is a resident of the town homes. She said she has patronized the bar for quite some time because it is a safe place to go and she likes the closeness to her home. She acknowledged she does not live as close as some of the other residents, but said she has not heard a lot of noise from the bar. She said she had not noticed patrons wandering around outside and Mr. Rausa takes care of his customers. She stated Mr. Rausa had made modifications so that the music would not bother nearby residents and she thought he should have a chance to offer live music. Planning Commission Minutes -4- January 24, 1996 George Leighton, Acoustical Consultant, 1307-A South Euclid Avenue, Anaheim, noted that Mrs. Kovar had mentioned noise that disturbed her over four months ago. He acknowledged there may have been a problem at that time because it was before the acoustical upgrades were made to the building. He said that following the acoustical improvements, noise measurements made at the top of the wall indicate that the band music will be inaudible at the residences so long as the doors are closed. He noted the noise measurements were made at 6 a.m. on a sunday morning so the readings would not include traffic noise. commissioner Lumpp asked if the noise readings would be the loudest at the highest peak of the railroad crossing and would then decline when going down the other side of the embankment. Mr. Leighton said that was correct. He said they calculated the noise levels at the second floor and also at the first floor or back yard of the residences. He stated the back yard is much quieter because the railroad embankment acts as a noise barrier. He said the noise levels were calculated at 27 dB with simulated band noise ley~ls of 100 dB, which would be typical. of a bar. Commissioner Lumpp noted the applicant has requested food service outside and stated that noise will escape from the inside each time the door is opened to bring out food or for patrons to arrive or leave. He asked if there is anything that can be done to assist in buffering that area. Mr. Leighton said it would be possible to erect noise barrier walls around the area, but it may be economically impractical. Commissioner McNiel asked what was used as the sound when making the study. Mr. Leighton said they used the typical type of music which would be played there, country western and rock with heavy bass. Phil Weinberger, 8459 Lemon Grove Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, said he heard the music on New Year's Eve because either the soundproofing does not work or they left the doors open. He indicated he lives farthest away from the bar, but right next to the wall. He stated they were standing outside when they heard the music but his doors and windows will be open in the summertime and he hoped h~ would : not have to put up with hearing the music. Bob Fleming, 8434 Cedarwood Lane, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was surprised when he heard a live band on New Year's Eve. He said he was watching television with the doors and windows closed and his sliding glass door was vibrating from the bass of the music. He said he called to the bar about 11:30 p.m. when he got home and was told they would be stopping the music at midnight. He said he had attended the last Planning Commission meeting when the matter was discussed and Mr. Rausa had indicated at that time that the doors are never left open. He commented that when he drove home that night he drove by the bar and the doors were wide open and he has seen them open on many times since then. He acknowledged that Mr. Rausa has cleaned up the place from when it was the Cub but he did not feel it compares to the other establishments that had been mentioned. Helen DeFina, 8426 Cedarwood Lane, Rancho Cucamonga, said she has heard the noise in the past and would not care to have to go through the experience of their Planning Commission Minutes -5- January 24, 1996 having live entertainment again. She said she had called the police many times because the live entertainment was too loud. Chairman Barker asked if she had any complaints over the last three months. Ms. DeFina said she did not. Tim Atherton, 8475 Lemon Grove Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he lives furthest away from the bar and does not hear the noise but has seen the results of some of the patrons; i.e., gunshots through windows of houses backing up to the railroad tracks and rocks thrown from the railroad tracks. He said nearby residents have indicated the vandalism happens around closing time of the bar. He stated the residents complain about the noise and activity at the bar at Homeowner's Association Meetings and ask the Association what they will do. He said there are 84 members in the Homeowner's Association and he did not think any of them are in favor of the application. He acknowledged that one resident had spoken in favor of permitting live entertainment but said he did not think that resident is ~ homeowner. He said several homeowners had cgmplained about the noise from New Year's Eve. He feared that property values are lowered. Mr. Leighton commented that obviously if the doors are open, noise will escape the building. He thought that excessive noise should not escape if the doors are opened for only a brief time as people enter and exit the building because the doors are shielded. He said that it would be possible to put a canopy with a roof and wall at the entrance so that patrons would exit at a right angle and that would create a sound trap. He suggested that such a canopy could be required if it is found that too much noise escapes. Ms. Nelander said she does not own but she does pay rent and is a resident of the neighborhood. She observed that the bar had been in place long before the condominiums were built and said she thought the residents should have taken into account that the business may wish to expand before they decided to purchase their homes. Dan Wadis, 1841 Orange, Ontario, said he is a frequent patron and said he would like to have live entertainment because he does not go there for the sports entertainment. He stated that it was extremely windy on New Year's Eve w~en the live entertainment was there and he did not feel anyone could have heard the band over the wind. He believed that people may be making false complaints. Mr. Rausa said they keep the doors open during the daytime but close the doors by 10:00 p.m. or 11:00 p.m. during the cooler months and never have the doors open when they have live entertainment. He did not feel there should be a problem when the front doors are opened for patrons entering and exiting because he felt the noise would go straight. He stated they have not received any complaints for two years and said the incidents brought up, such as gunshots being fired and rocks thrown, occurred before he owned the restaurant. He said he did not receive any complaint calls on New Year's Eve and he felt the residents would have called either him or the City to complain if they had heard any noise. He stated he had last talked to Mrs. Kovar three years ago and he had not been rude to her. He said he had asked to attend a Homeowner's Association meeting and was told he could not. He reported he measured the noise level on New Year's Eve from the railroad tracks and the levels were below the City's Planning Commission Minutes -6- January 24, 1996 noise abatement requirements. He said he has many different customer bases and he wanted to be able to offer them live entertainment. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Chairman Barker asked if there have been any recent police reports. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, replied that the police have not supplied that information. Commissioner McNiel stated it is an awkward and difficult issue wherein the business owner wants to expand his business to make it work. He noted there is a history of conflict at the location and those memories do not fade easily. He felt the issue before the Commission was to determine what is fair for the business operator and the residents and in the interest of the common good. He said it sounded as if the business does well on the nights that sporting events are televised but the applicant would like to provide entertainment on the nights there are no_sporting events because business is.pQt as good on those nights. He said it is disconcerting to sit in your house and hear loud music. He stated he would like to assist the applicant in his goals for growth and success but he had difficulty doing so because he felt the opportunity for problems is too great. Commissioner Melcher noted that when the application was first brought before the Commission in July 1994, the Commission requested further information. He said the test results seem to prove that the noise can be lessened. He stated that staff had professionally reviewed the request and acoustical study and suggested some conditions to restrict the activity to allow some experience before approving it to the extent that the applicant has requested. He favored the application. Commissioner Lumpp stated that when the application first came before the Planning Commission, he wanted to see a noise study related to the use and its relationship to the existing residential area. He noted that the noise study had been made and mitigation measures had already been implemented. He understood Commissioner McNiel's concerns because the Commission had recently denied an application where the applicant admitted he had made a mistake in the p~st but wanted to try again. He said that denial had been made based on the appl~cant's past history in terms of providing the mitigations necessary to control the noise experienced by the adjacent residents. He said that applicant had not exhibited the same level of activity to try to address the noise. He felt this applicant deserved an opportunity to be given a chance to succeed. He suggested that a condition be added to require sound attenuation be provided adjacent to the doors. He thought the applicant had gone beyond what requirements call for and met all the conditions called for in the acoustical study and should be given a chance. He noted that the City has recourse if it does not work. Chairman Barker noted that the bar Commissioner Lumpp referenced had originally been opened as a restaurant and later became an entertainment center. He observed the residents in that neighborhood complained to the City several times and sound attenuation techniques were tried. He said a special door was installed which was periodically left open. He noted that the walls were provided with sound proofing materials and very tall sound attenuation walls were Planning Commission Minutes -7- January 24, 1996 built around the property. Be said there had been complaints at that location about activities in the parking lot. He stated that particular owner runs a tight ship within the bar but observed that it is more difficult to control the parking lot. He thought that was why staff had requested a uniformed security guard rather than using doormen. He said that there was a disruption in the neighborhood when the door was left open. He acknowledged that Mr. Rausa is trying. He observed that the consultant indicated a canopy could be installed by the door but the applicant had stated the he is a small business owner and cannot afford to spend a lot of money. He was concerned it will not work. He complemented Mr. Rausa in making a good faith attempt but felt that if the application were approved, there would be complaints from the neighbors. He noted that the applicant had stated he would like to have outdoor eating and drinking and he felt that would also be disruptive. Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by Melcher, to adopt the resolution approving Entertainment Permit 93-03 with modification to require additional sound attenuation around the existing exit doors to mitigate the escape of noise as people enter_a~d exit. Commissioner Melcher felt that this is not a neighborhood bar, but rather a bar on a major thoroughfare and a different case from the other bar which was referenced by the Commissioners. He suggested the design of the proposed canopy modification be submitted to staff along with a commentary by the acoustical engineer prior to installation. The motion failed to carry by the following vote: AYES: LUMPP, MELCHER NOES: BARKER, MCNIEL ABSENT: TOLSTOY - failed Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the effect of a tie vote is that the motion is null and the floor is open to another motion. He suggested the matter be continued to a future date when Commissioner Tolstoy would be present. Chairman Barker reopened the public hearing. He stated that a copy of the minutes would be made available to Commissioner Tolstoy. ~ Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by McNiel, to continue Entertainment Permit 93-03 to February 14, 1996. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 24, 1996 RECEIVED FEg 3 1996 Planning Division City ot Rancho Cucamonga City of Rancho eucamonga Planning Divisiol] P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 February 12, 1996 This letter is in regard to the Entertainment Permit 93-03 requested by the owners of the Final Score bar located at 8411 Foothill Blvd., Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Since 1993, my neighbors and I have been voicing our opionion~ regarding the disturbances coming from this location and later our concerns against granting an Entertainment Permit for the above named bar; and to this date we all still feel the ~ame way. Perhaps, as Garry Rausa states, he has made changes in the physi- cal building to attenuate noises; and perhaps they will work. But, we still have the matter of additional patrons leaving the bar on their roaring motorcycles and in their cars. At the January 24, 19996 Planning Com~ssion meeting, Mr. Raus~_implied that there would not be additional patrons in large numbers on the nights of live entertainment. He is requesting the live entertainment permit for his present customers. Who is he kidding. Of course he wants additional business. This makes good sense, especially after spending money to modify his building. I would appreciate your reviewin9 all the past letters sent to you by myself and my neighbors regarding this matter, rather than my going over all our views again at this time. We are still concerned that our property values will be lowered. We still have the worry that the doors of the bar will be opened during the day time hours when the weather is warmer, but not warm enough to have the air conditioning turned on, and the volumn of the recorded music reaches us at extreme loudness. This last com- plaint has nothing to do with the request for live entertainment, but should give you some indication of the lack of cooperation we have gotten from the bar owners to be good neighbors. They have been called in the past during the day time hours and have been asked to close the doors to lessen the volumn of music and the reply has been rude and the music would even be turned up louder. Only once when I called over there with this complaint was I given an apology and the volumn lessened. Thank you for taking the time to review this mstter which is a very serious matter to the home owners of Rancho Villas. Shirley Kovar 8438 Cedarwood Lane Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 HECEIVED Board of Directors Planning Division, City ofRancho Cucamonga FEB ~ B 1996 P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Chy of f~ancho Cucamonga P~anning Division Dear Planning Commission, .. I do not wish to have an establishment with live music so close to my home. I do not care for the noise or the traffic it will bring. I am affraid that the value of the home will be adversly affected by noise pollution. This establishment is surrounded by homes and ~milies ~vhich will be disturbed. I do not wish to bring up my children in this type of atmosphere. Again, please do not allow live enterainment this close to homes. Thank y C ' 'he On behalf of the Board of Directors Villa Gabriel Homeo~vners Association RECEIVED Planning Division FEB ! 4 1996 · '."" , ",/~,/- ~;~'. ;.: '~ r0u~ ~i~'a~,' ~' a,~: .:'~,"~'.~:n~: ', = ::.:~':~'d.:,';~;..'. ~e tU~ silent, ~siGle' :'scie~'~ ~ :,~:'==~,?=' ~m, an~'~· is extin~iShed. '. t0~es2~ '~'~4 French'Govern(? ":,'%~:"=q.;'~z~ve~ ahd small branch~s~' ment)'l ~cat~ at 31 Ch~' ' - '~='~:7:' :sh0~r do~ from the shatz [ ~: Joseph~ier, 13 Mars~5-: . .eZ~i,~,' t~r~' ~. Annals, birdS~'~79e, Fr~ce. '~e"bther me~ ~ ~.?~ j' reptn~ and men writhe .~', Z. ben d ~e ~oa~'0f · :'~' :' brief agony and di~ ~ere ~Z;Z-'Z and enk~ :h~ded by ~:' ;~;~i~ ;.~' hide ~e weapon is upable~-~Z'+Mr M. Miane, Mr H Sa~:: , :'~%""'~ "~ of anla~ng entffe cities~:~: Mr. R. ~n~t:~d · "'5 ' ~: .57' of Mp~i. out aries to ~d~7',' Lavav~fir. ' "~~ ' '~. .... ' _.. ~...,.~ , .~ ~, , · , . ,;~ '~::,: - ..~. , ':'-.. ~,jV ':. ., .· ....~ ~a ' ' = :'o "French sci~t~~'C ' concenffa~:b~. ~" . t~'.c~n"d~stroy' '. %-'.~.'.ffa sold h~en~:~.~.:. . ,. ~-~by ..,,,.. ' · c'- :'~ ..... v , :., - '~so~d . .~Y;'-~',' ... ~;d~:=~..' .... .. '.U:i*.'. )"~ :'a favo~te,~,~t ·': ..' ?:A'~f~en~-fiction ..~ ' ~n s~ce:~':-Cycles "~'. H We~s. ~ a .i. at No I ~ ~; - · all. '::4': '5: .... · :.;- '..- . ;.~..~' ... '. 7 X,' . ...;~ '~ U~ ~a"~-a_ g~;;' used - Mistral the ngt~o~ Wind LL[ ~d~ to themTit is si~i~:t~ y~f:~ indm~' fo}%m :~.ti~e'in .~ of southern F/ace. Infra'~';;mat the':Mis~al is tradii[gn 'pr~uction .~f ~ emUl-. ~ounds may ~so ~ found in j..j~ny ~ociated in nuro ith: 4.'?~y~;~]~i~n~ ana, 4or t~'~ cl~'aing of ~,.large ~dustrial cities where~ ne~ous disorders, depf~ion ~e' '~etat pa~. Infra'.~ey are generated by anti- and illness in general.?~is .. """:Yi:."~o~hais'f~s wen2~own and~'~quat~d ventilators or diesel corresponds with ~.fh~.f~'0~'~R](egarded ~?equipment with ~ low num~ (,reau's' ~d~gs that an.-i~ra ~s a/~forbidden field" of re-. be~ of revolutions per rain- sounds are dangerous an'd-'in ~?:'~sea~ch 'dog" ~o ~e' dangers ute. . ' ' certain frequencies deadly/~? .,~'~7.:'¢0nnect~;Wim2 m~.'produc- In the c~e oe earthquakes In fact, the impuls~:,W'~ich ~-"':tion and' .~h~ °(;PDwerful or volcanic eruptions the du- led the 6avreau grouper9 ':~L~fra sound .e~U~rs~ Infra ration of' the infra sound is, gin experiment~)~ith'~er- '~;k'~]~7~ounds ~u~ in n~mre dur~ naturally, sho~, but infra ful infra-sonic gen~rhtors ~g ear~qua[~ andS'volcanic sounds produced by faulty stemmed from just such an e~ptions. Mr. 6a~eau has industrial equipment or the experience. An industriak also measured an infra sound wind may continue long ventilator located in a 'neigh~f of great intensi& and very enough to pr~uce dangerous boring building suddenly be:" .' low wave length in the effects on those persons ex- gan to produce an intense .:in~.. - · .~..'.::2, ~%'i~ i i$~ !( This oversi~ed~Whistle is very #at to reduce outtn, t.'Still; it made the laboratory watts vibrate; .:'" % :. · ";L ~' SCIENCE & MECH~ICS JANU - ~ .'-: .;,: -. ,... ·, ..:~ , .. · ;' Below .': ~ )'electrical radition-. ' fra sold of 120-decibe~ -~o~k M. This able and~ing completely turn, {r. Gay- inaudible~ad the incident all inira ~c~ed in' a~y o~er b~d- ~ and in ing, it. mi~t well 'have ~- of :adly suited ~. ~fious inju~ ~e ,w~]ch ~ih. t6 t~ present. ~ ~ ~; .-" w~' prbm~y reco ~n~r~mrs 9 the El .~Acoustic ,, .X~Zr~on of :- t h Sucfi',~aa ,: )0~ ad ~en engagfl';h"the 'du~tria; , ~oducfion of suchSilbw-fre- - ;'i~ls a' quency sounds sia~' 1950{i;,2~d;iade lenly and ~e effects were well: ~own..' Eve~one '~e,ur whi~tleS ::~: :a sounl m-one is incre~ised " iiiiking" it~s'uitable for 'us~,asi,a ~':0rdihar-j/1/i~iiC6 whistle is ho[n op a ship.?i!nce patssengers 'i¢0h~ddiameter ali'a)emits a sound of · be disturbed b~.' the i[6rward directedit is:':iii~r~.l~{r).~Cessary tbinc re$ id.' It WaS chrisffened' the "Linle,Mon-ei~':Z.ii~F~:g~mately:'285 incheS' '-and.'hai~ an diitput of 300 acousticala fr~qiji31~/:sdl~?Se~'en'~/e~:' '~ ' s. ';.~,~ suffidilntly strong to make the .:...&~l~lidi:~i,'~lie hiii~? hb~;ei)er, ,ou h. i~4i ~'td persons standing with- '6i~'o'ne~;'attieal wail and; since.'ou (~ ~!i ;i 'The eyes'and o.ther iaarts increases by¢ihe squa~ of the diameter. : ~.. thebody begin to vibrate. .!~' .. ~whisde of this size w6uld have an output Of !.~.',.~', A-*larglr Lavavasseur whistle with a"fre- 170 acoustical watts. quite sufficient to kill q. ~ncy Of 196 cycles was then produced. everyone wlthin range~ The'output can, 6f !The sound was still 2:;ilf course, a i:lible 'td · course, be reduced by making'~he whistl~.i) 5t!ihuman ear bu~t~'effeets were~dltatZ flat, but ~ven made aS':flht is possible, th '~. "' :ifi'g. After onlyj2i'few minutes of i~g,. output can?~circely b~'Brou~ht down to les~; .~'~Gavreau was.forced to break ff~'ork. than.ten a'~ ilstical'~atts well above the' '~"; ~or. the su~ce' ing 24 houm sUl~'/~d the ' fatal int~si~.~' ~'~ ~., ~;~ ?~. ': i, ' . ..... : ' '; ' ,: ' _ ..... ., ~' - ' ', . ire d~'vice~bver the ears du~ing the test.. 'protect the-opera, tor..~.. even the labor~ory~. "Betti~i i~roteCt~:ve devices for the ~ars were. ' itsel/from 'jh.e effe~f. ~.The largest df: thd solve the problem. Lava~;asseur whisfiei constructed in th~ lab=. ?i~-.fd~ ;:..setiinga ~':' owni~ oratory, had bnly measui'ed 60 inches' in': .... produced frictiori' within the inti~rnal organs vibr~ilon in the-walls '.~..the building that it " su~:h as ~he heart, stomai:l~ ahd lungs: M..' was ii/:ver'operati:d. at ~ power. This five- Gaweau and M. Saul, iXvllo had been aisist. foot- ~iohble. police whi~d Was Synchronized · ~: in the measurem'i:nts,'~ere afflicted with .' .by an.infra-sonic sire~a generated a still'~; :.~V, :i:e int, real pains~and'Were ilniibl~'t9'i~9 i5 :aUdible sourid 'of 37 c~ii~. Operated at .fidi2c:' ~:ilim d.work for se~;e~al hours. "'.:-, .i:?-; '):"'i.),:.;':;power. )it ~V0iild half i'equired an iir flow; ~ 1 I..~timiaa~ed'. bi~ ::t~+. dangers; ih4 ' 15~;i~', ?~.f-8~z.~. ~l~ic ~ee.t. pa~;~i~ .;..~!~:~':..,.:.:: )5:..::~ ~{a,, ';i~ilm~ continUed,::~oWever, tb b,ild and ' :.'mCo t ctio, :';i .~ii, s~ indre~singl~, Ja, i-g~i~<infra2-s6~d.j'genera- qee..d':m:g .i~n. !,.a, '.fi !. _~.._~-.~.~nic..:~r.g_'an,..-pi.~ :C~tors. Mu~h had been learned .abOut the of- cated':. outsider' thef la..b~,~:atory:;.:'Thm. p~pe:: is :=*;ica of inf~:i sourld i~n-th~h/iman' body 'and.: '7~Skfqet 10i~g and wei~ ,over 2,00O. ~.~d~. i~had been determined ~'iC~. fr~iiienCy of . ~'.,~ can be ~ctuated by:~..a large 19ud ~er ~.~y'en c:;,cles was,, abiol~(eii? :.fatal. SeVen :. ': .?~.aphrag~ :..an~ air !~e~.!pr a 'n~c~.ca~y~... m an a~id dan-', The result · ~e- 7:. A": ib' in a. ~; They are ~.o~/sisted.of of applicatioiii in ;, ispaced distantCar ane ,a~liust sounds of~i..i. ll freqi~iii~.~es.) .~. the wax;e h. This.= eiperi- ':wiil~ ~e four per tubc~ ·'misSing. ::' ~bii is tipped wit~,a sound emitter 'and~:!: ii 'Oiher'ends lea~ tof :"' '~air. sour~i::' '~ iihe**~Ub_tea~bomb rnight'hlive been re S ,":"' - :' ' ;' ~ ~n bf iound or infrl ':bund which :iS per- . ~iliy';dlltii, e ~nd"c~ed Within a' spe- ,-~,,~:.; .' ' ---,- i: i[ ~.;ai~ea. By pliaihlg 'nveral of these.bat-"lhi~'-,hl!anese Beetle That's Buggill 5i."..:ie~eS'of-soniC'lalrS it ~i ssible to "focus" :ilia'an; it in i ";: · !~'.'-'by the' curvature of the"learth. ' , · ~ '-~ , - · "'~' Small 'modeEs of such a sy~chronized n~t- ' ' On sale at newsstands December'21,. '-;);,~nd ,his ~eam and tested with suC,~s, The '!' '~' '- models 'are'only sligh~y larger tha~a ship's,- ':! siren' and' ~eir range is,' of cours6, limited. ' "As M. GaWeau points out, howeV~i: ,it':. :" would be a ~elatively simple matter tcl b61~-- :.o struct a much larger ma_chine t~ be mdiinted~' ";'-"On a truck, .tank or v,~pons carrier. An i.'!infra-sonlc laser 6f this size would have an . ' effective range of over' five miles and. its concentrated, tight beam could be;played · over ar~ area in much the same manner as 'a fire hose; · The experlm,~e~;Lal models of the acoustical laser have b.eSe~,.:placod' at the disposal 'of the 'weapons t~cliniciaus of the French Army for further testing. Militarily, it has the ad- · ~ irantage of .be'_mg not ~ only al extremely :'~ efficient and deadly weation, but also a rela- : ! lively cheap one to produce. ~: :' - ~. ~; Fomi2fiately for the:: .p.eaCe of. mind~ of that M. Gaweau did nOt.,,susp~hd. his:efforts l! "~'with the.cOmpletion of tb~ .a. coustical Weap- :" ' :on. He continued on l~:.'i~rovide the pr0tec-. ;':- ,.tion from it. · J-' ~' ' ~ .2 ':'; "': :~2 On JurieS20, 1967~-~French paten/num- ' : ~r: P.V. 1 f122i~ 'was~iisued to Co~er what ' ':LI~: Gavreatt has nain~ia~a "structure." Stru~- ' · .I ..:.!. !.......,(~ ,;, 76r.; '~. -. - .;I: ' 1;..' ;.. ~.~.~ .~ ~, , .,, · ... · ':: ,..:j::>:::~What-have-you may bother the ya a~ '~';~:' postman, but it sure has had ~ ~ ~d ~;::::,' of unfortunate effeC{~ on t~ ~a. be ~ :' I'~ . ., ...-..~ yZ e'nO~re than an unhappy mere: . a rb. ': :i,"~ Air conditioning is one ~Ame~iCa's fastest-gro~ng '~'~ "adverse roa~'~f~i sZ vin ~r~ondiUoned: The need for,~lned men IS iraroe- '= ..... g One " " = ' ' ""~'~: '~ ' ' ' ' "~'~"Y~ur'Training~er -- L~r~ by · '- And these remarkable' Gevices may Well s ~ts oJ'tools ~nd parts to Y~u 'troth- Since the CTI = ~ ~y reputing .~its soon after en- ....... · ..... ... ...... -.. , eration. ~d heating Held is beSt for you ~ the easiest ,; ' :'" ' .. ~ · 'L': ::.. · 7' · rcial Trades InstHule;~hicag0, Ill. 60626 .... I Chicago. IHinois 60626 Dep~. ~' 8 'J' (Pl~a~e Print) ,n' City Count/ Store J Address D' Check for facts on GI Bill City Slate & Zip ~, ' DECEMBER I 995 RE,u TED POWE, FOR . . ELECTROCHEMISTRy i .~ NOtlfV(,j This power SUpply iS perfect for ~ Hugo Gemsback (1884-t967) founder experimenting with small scale electroplating and electrolysis. ~ LARRY ST~CKLE., EHF. CET. -- Edward Barrow ditor-in-chief and publisher VERSATILE POWER SUPPLY EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT No electronics workbench is complete without a reliable M~c SPEAK, associate editor source Of power. This supply provides five different output HElL ~R, associate ~itor TERI SCAD~O~ assistant editor vo]tages~- Carl J. Bergquist JEF~ K. HOL~ Computer editor EXPERIMENTER~S VIDEO RECENER ROBE~ GBoss~, Circuits editor Use this project as the basis of descrambling experiments and O~o ~CHENBRUCH tO learn about video signals. -- Steve Bo~s contributing ~itor ~ntributing editor VIDEO NEWS PRODUCTION DEPARTMENT What's new in this fast-changing RusY M. YEs, produ~ion dir~tor field. -- David Lachenbruch ~e S. B,o~ adve~ising production EQUIPMENT REPO~ ~. ~m R. C~ Data Depot's PC Clinic SB. ~ CO,EN HARDWARE HACKER CIRCUiTION DEPARTMENT Pseudoscience strikes again. JACOU~NE R CNE~SORO -- Don Lancaster circulation dire~or Auom UPOATe Dance SPL and medical music. MICHETORRI~O -- Lar~ K/ein e reprint boo~tore COMPUTER CONNECTIONS p,.L~ TY~OraPhYbYMatesGrapni~ ~ Cover design by David Loe~ Random thoughts on ~ ....... misceilaneous makers. Electronics New is indexed ~n Applied -- Jeff Hollzman ~en~ & T~hnol~y Index, and Reade~ Guide to Periodical Literature, A~demic A~$tracts, and Maga~ne Article Sum- marleE. Microfilm & Micmfiche editions are avail- A N ~ M O R E tars. Adve~ising Sales Offices listed on Electroni~ Now Executive and WHAT'S NEWS 24 N~ LITE~TURE Administrative ~ices Subscriber Customer Se~ice: OFFICES Order Ent~ for New Subscribers: NEw P.ODUCTS gq ADWm~S... INDEX ~ k~infrasonic~ 109 -- sonic~__~___~_~ ~ultrasonic 107 __ ~ 10~ -~ 101 __ "10_1 10`3 Fig. 1. Spectrum of sound. , locate the jntensit~ and I ~ l~ I02 1~ 1~ 105 106 107 untrasonic phenomena. frequency, Hz (ARer G. E. HenS, Sci. Amer.. 190(5)5~3, 1954) of sound frequencies and pressures of interest in hu- differentiated twice with respect to x and t, the result man exUdenee and to the acoustical scientist and en- is the second-order p~ial differential e%uation, Eq. gineer. Acoustical scientists have devised methods of (4), which is called the wave equation for the propa- producing sounds over an extended range of pressures and frequencies. SEE PITCH,' SOUND PRESSURE. ~is ~icle descfi~s the physica nature of sound 81: ' ,c _&r2 (4) and its propagation t~ough ~ate~al media, as well gallon of excess pressure p in the x direction with as methods for its production and detection, velocity c. ~e first-order equation obtained by dif- Nature 0i sound propagation. Sound is propagated ferentiating Eq. (1) once with respect to x' and t will through a medium such as air by means of wave rod- not uniquely define the wave velocity independendy lion. In wave propagation the medium as a whole of the direction of the wave. Hence a second-order does not move, but only the disturbance, for example. equation is necess~- (~d mathematically sufficient). the hump on the water surface in the case of a water The descfiotion df sound propagation through ma- wave. For a sound wave in a fluid like air. the terial media is essend~ly the study of the solutions of "hump" is the excess pressure p in the medium con- Eq. (4). when ~enemlized to three space dimensions. stirurine the disturbance. Such an excess pressure S8$ W~ve ~nrsTcsL' W~vz.ttorto,v. (which for ordina~ audible sound may be less than Harmonic waves. The most imponam type of O. 1 Pa: Fig. 1) proauced at one point does not remain sound wave in practice is that called hgonic. For there but moves through the fluid with velocity c. such a wave in ~e x dkection with the veloci v c. the which is called the velocity of sound; in the case of excess pressure is eiven by Eq. (5). The quantity Po air at 68°F (200C) this is 1128 f~s (344 n~s). To descfbe sound-wave motion effectively. i~ is the discussion will be rest~cted to a sound wave propagated in one direction, which is l~en to be the is called the ~plimde of ~e wave; it is the m~ximum ity c. The excess pressure p in the medium due [o the aiong. The minimum v~ue is of course 'Po- The wave motion can then be represented by Eq. (1). That quanmy v is hhe ~quency of the wave. At any ~iven p = ~x - ct) (1) Nint ~e v~ue of ~e excess pressure re~ats 'itself v times a second or is. p is a function of the variable x - ct, which de- ~d~ of ~e wave. designated by T. Another impor- pends on both space and time through the combinn- t~t qu~ti~- conn~ ~ with ~e wave is the wave- lion x - ct. This does indeed represem a wave. since length. dcsi~mated by X. AI ~y given time the excess Eq, (2), which says that the disturbance p at the point pressu~ ~a~ iuelf ~er a space inte~al given by ~x~ - ctO = ~x2 - ct~) (2) Eq. (61. ~is rehdon hm'een wave length, velocity, xz at time t~ moves to point x, at time 12, is valid. X = c/v = cT (6) provided that Eq. (3) is tree; an~ Eq. (3) says that the ~d r~quency hol& for h~onic waves of all kinds (x~ - xO = c(t2 - t~) (3) ~d in ~1 ma:e~ m~a. Low frequencies ~e always L~s~iated x~ long waveleng~s, and vice ve~a. For distance (.ra - x0 is traversed in time (t, -- fi) with ~ audible ~,~ wave ~ ~ wi~ frequency 103 Hz, velocity c. ' · e waveleng~ is a~ut 24 cm (13.5 in.). On the In order to pursue the subject further, it is neces- o~er h~d. f~y ~ ~onic wave of frequency 106 sa~ to set up the differential equation satisfied by Hz. ~e waveleD5~ is abut 3.4 x 10~2 cm (1.35 x wave motion. If the expression for p in Eq. (I) is 10': in.). 10 Sound velocity) given by Eq. (47), where co is the mean source of sound. SEE ACOUSTIC NOISE,' MUSICAL/,vSTRU- U = co - Xo (47) More sophisticated sound sources depend on the o ability to produce mechanical vibrations by means of magnetic and electrical effects. The ordinary telephone phase velocity and Xo is the wavelength of the com- receiverandtheradioloudspeakerareillustradons. Still ponent of maximum amplitude in the group. The de- more elaborate and valuable for many applications are fivative in Eq. (47) is to be taken at the value X = piezoelectfic and magnetostrictive oscillators. These Xo. Wave groups in acoustics are of importance electroacoustic transducers have found wide use as mainly at very high frequencies and very low pres- both sources and receivers, for example, in underwa- sures in gases. SEe GROUP VELOCIT)'; PHASE VELOCITY. tel sound, in sound recording and reproduction, in ra- Iransducers. Sound sources are referred Io as dio and television, and in the industrial applications transducers. since they transfer energy of '.'adous of sound. SEE DISK RECORDING; EARPHONES; LOUD- forms into sound. The most important source of SPEAKER,' MAGNETIC RECORDING; MAGNETOSTRICTION; Mr- sound in human experience is the human voice, which CROPHONE; PIEZOELECTRIC CRYSTAL; PIEZOELECTRICITY,' in ordinary conversation and singing produces power SONAR,' SOUND RECORDING; SOUND-REpRODUCING SySTE.~15; OUtpUtS Of from 30 to 60 microwatts (Fig. I). Other Sre~EoPno,wcsou,~'o,' TELEPHO,X'E,' TR.~.,,'DUCER. important sources are mechanically vibrating solids, Radianon lrom sources. The ideal point source has liquids, and gases. Solid vibrators include strings, ' already been discussed. The sound intensity produced rods, plates, and membranes (zs in musical instrd- at a point distant from a practical sound transducer is ments). The organ pipe is an example of a sound determined by the total power output of the trans- source based on vibrating air. The turbulent flow of ducer, and by the type of source. which in turn con- air in the exhaust of a jet plane produces intense trols its directional characteristics. Other factors are sound. The break of the surf on the shore is a liquid the location of the source with respect to the ground 0° 0o X/2 01dB ~X/4 --]0 o 270° 270' , 90 90° I 180~ I X/4:Dl=O,3d8 180° Fig. 2. OlreetivlW paUerns 270, length d. The boxes 9ire the directlvlty index IW index is also indicated by the arrow for each length. (a) d=M4 indl- M2 Indicated by solid line. (b) d=X. (e) a=aM2. (~ 180° 180~ 178 Infrasound 500~ ,. are the ubiquitous microbeToms, originating .face waves on the seas and oceans. When the blows, turbulent pressure fluctuations in the ~ t'00 sphere occur at amplitudes up to tens of pascals, ~ _=" infrasonic frequencies. People are unawase of .~ 300 pressures via the sensation of hearing. It can be ~ jectured that humans have become adapted ,., rally occurring infrasound and motions at low '-' 200 quencies, and that those have no detrimental ~, With the advent of civilization and particularl ,~ modern times, people have been subjected ~ 100 ins amounts of infrasound and vibrations in the of frequencies 1-20 Hz. The equipment and chincry of modern technology can expose people tc 200 300 400 500 600 700 infrasound which is much stronger and occurs often than in the natural environment. For oscillation period (T), s substantial pressure oscillations at a frequency of a propagation direction and the horizontal plane. (After R.K. Sufficiently stron~ infrasound is "audible." c Atmospheric Probing, rot. 2, pp. 633-669, Committee on pressure level (the least ntensitv for audibiliLy)' Atmospheric Sciences, National Academy of Sciencesl about 92 dB at 16 Hz, and increases 12 to about 140 dB at 1.0 Hz. However, there is no ' ' sation'bf tone. Listeners variously describe infrasound as pumping, popping effect. or chuggin Favity then becomes comparable to the usual poten- There may be some parallels between the effects on tial energy of elastic compression and rarefaction in a people of loud audible sounds and of strong sound ;va,.e. Such waves are called acoustic-Favity sound. Both temporary.' and permanent hearing loss' v.'aves (Fig. 2). The approximately exponential de- and speech interference are '.ve!l-known auditory crease of a mospheric densit>' with altilude: abo;'e the problems connected v.'ith excessi,.'elv loud sounds. all frequencies. For an isothermal atmosphere with a strong infrasound causes physiological damage sound velocity c. equal to 1092 ft.'s or 333 m.'s. the heating system. densit>' ,.till decrease as exp (-z'H'). where H i~ the Research suggests that for people scale height of the atmosphere, approximately 5.0 mi try there are significant secondas2..' I . (8.1 kin). Theor).' shov,'s that the combined effect of fects caused by continuous exposure to loud sure for a plane ;vave of sound sent vertically upward tension and other cazdiovascular changes occur more to decrease as exp ( - z/2H), whereas the particle ve- often among workers exposed to loud sounds for long locity will increase as exp (z/2~. so that the sound in- periods of time than among workers in a low-nois~ tensit>' remains constant. If the frequency of oscilla- environment. SEE ACOUSTIC NO~SE,' INDC'SrnML lion is decreased until the period TR equals 4:;c/?g or a.'.o SAFETY. 305 S (where ',/is the ratio of specific heats, equal to With respect to the effects of strong I.~0, and g is the acceleration of gravit;, equal to laboratory studies in the frequency range 1-20 Fa 32.2 fUs: or 9.8 mls;), then the phi. so ve ocity of the suggest several secondary. effects. different from up,.,~ard tra,.'eling wave becomes in~%ite (Fig. 2). T,,¢ is those for loud sounds. Subjects the resonant period for vertical oscillations of the at- noyance, drowsiness, and lethargy. mosphere. But for waves of period less than about 100 ~~ive beei"thi~"oi' s (with frequencies Feeler than about 10'2 Hz). gray- sound pressure levels at 120 dB, /'7-' ity effects on sound speed are not significagt. hearing. These showed that the _//. Effects 0f infras0und on people. Pressure fluetun- gaphie alpha waves of the waking state were ~ lions at L~ffrasonic frequencies arising from unsteady placed by he a waves, accompanied bv air flog,' are included as r,jrasound, even though they pulse rate and blood pressure, all indicating reducd do not result in significant radiated sound energy. At wakefulness. But available data do not a normal walking speed--two steps per second, for direct effect on a subject's reaction time instance--a person experiences body motions at a fie- fealty, and visual acuity. quency of 2 Hz and is aware of these motions through The effects of infrasound in a bus the kinesthetic and touch sensations. A running per- ment have been studied in the laboratory. The s/mu' son has body motions at appreciably higher frequen- lated environment included ambient inffasound, cies, perhaps 4-6 Hz. 'When a person's head moves dible noise, and vibration, while the bus driver was vertically over a range of 1.2 in. (3 cm) while walk- required to steer straight at a constant speed. ing, the head is subjected to atmospheric pressure clusion was that infrasound has fluctuations of about a 0.4-pascal amplitude (g6 dB on driver performance, probably due to a fatigue above 2 x 10's pascal) at infrasonic frequencies. drowsiness effect after 1-2 h of exposure. This These arise from the vertical pressure gradient of the be important with respect to traffic safety. atmosphere caused by gravity. Often there is infra- For vibration at very low frequencies, of about 80-85 dB. in the range 0.10-0.20 Hz. These eai-liest noticeable effects. The human body is ~don. and mul tiphoton absorption processes. SEE AD- = 80 SORPTION,' CATALYSTS; CHE,*4ICAL DYNAMICS,' HYDROGEN ~_ddO ~ ' BO~D; [.WKRMOLECUL{R FORCES,' SEMICONDUCTOR; SPEC- ~ '~ Robin S. McDowell m 40 Bibliography. L. J. Bellamy, The ln~a-Red Spec~a of Complex Molecules, vol. 1, 3d ed. 1975, vol. 2, ~ ed., 1982; N. B. Col~up, L. H. Duly, ~d S.E. 20 .. ~ Wi~rley, ln~oduction to Inpared aM Rain Spec- iescopy, 2d ed., 1975; J. R. D~g (ed.), Chemical, O, ';~ '-~ ' Biological a~ lMustrial Applicatio~ of lnfiared 100 200 300 400 500 Spectroscopy, 1985; P. R. Griffins ~d J. A. de Has- sound velocity, m/s ~, Fourier Tranfform Infrared Speciescopy, 1986; Fig. 1. Lo~l sound veloeJ~ In the 1 ~2 U.S. Standard G. Hemberg, ln~ared and Rain Spec~a of Polv- Almosphere. ~lls of the real atmosphere va~ with aOmic Molecules, 1945; A. L. S~, Applied ln- the year. (l~er ~. g. C~R, A~pherlc sound pared Spectroscopy. 1979; J. I. Stei~eld, Molecules propagation, In ~r~tn9s of ~e Scientific Meetings aM Radiation: An Introduction to Modern Molecular the Penal on Remote Atmospheric Probing, vol. Spectroscopy, 2d ed., 1985; H. A. Willis, J. H. v~ ~69, CommiffH on Atm~pherlc Sciences, National Academy ot Sclencesl~atlonal Research Council, Janueq der Ma~, ~d R. G. J. MHler (eds.), LaborateO· ,Me hods in Vibratio~l Spec~oscopy, 3d ed., 1987. mospheric jet stream, with periods over 300 s and a sound pressure level (SPL) of about 115 dB above a · Sound waves, particularly in the atmosphere, whose reference pressure of 2 x 10's pascals; (2/~uctua- .iffer ;i frequencies of pressure variation and of vibration are lions in pressde on a windy day at sound pressure below the audible range, that is, lower than about 20 levels of about 125 riB; (3) radiation of auroral infra- Hz. Earthquake and seismic waves are elastic waves sound downward to the Earth's surface from the ion- which occur at in/rasonie frequencies in the Earth's osphere, with periods of 20-200 s and sound pressure crust and in the oceans and seas. The physicaI laws levels of about 90 riB; (4) microharems radiated land- of propagation in the atmosphere are essentially the ward from storms over the oceans, with periods of 4- same as for audible sound. This article discusses the 7 s and sound pressure levels of about 85 riB. physics of generation and propagation, the results of Artificial sources of infrasound include powerful measurement of infrasound, the atmospheric global explosions, both Chemical and nuclear. The shock [~ propagation of infrasound at very. low frequencies, waves (sortie booms) from vehicles moving through :~' and the effects of infrasound on people. the atmosphere at supersonic speeds, aI altitudes be- :; The local speed of infrasound in air at ambient low about 78 mi (125 ksn), are also sources. SEE temperatures near 68°F (20°C) is about 1115 ftJs (340 Sheen WAVE: Some ~o0,~. re's). the same as for audible sound. The wavelengths Effects of air temperature on infras0und. At a fro- for all frequencies less than 20 Hz are therefore quency near 0.03 Hz (corresponding to a period of Fea~er than 55 ~ (17 m), and so the scattering by oscillation T of about 30 s) the ',','avelength of infra- buildings, trees. hills, and so forth outdoors is much sound is almost 6 rai (10 kin). The infrasonic v.'ave less than for audible sound. There are practically no field then extends well up into the atmosphere. The acoustical shado'.,.'s cast by infrasound. variation of local sound speed with altitude is a Fens Origin and global propagation. At frequencies less feature which has a substantial effect on propagation than about 1.0 He, infrasound propagates through the (Fig. 1). The variation is due to the variation of at- atmosphere for distances of thousands of miles with- mosphedc temperature with altitude. The speed rain- out substantial loss of energy. Sounds at these fro- imum in the stratosphere causes the waves to be chan- quencies are usually present at measurable intensities. neled between the ground and the layer of relatively Those of natural origin have many causes. including high sound speed at a 30-mi (50-kin) altitude. tornadoes, volcanic explosions, earthquakes, the au- Loosely speaking, the layer serves as a reflector. rora borealis, waves on the seas, large meteorites, and belt a poor one. For the shorter waves, where T is lightning discharges. A specific example is the infra- less than approximately 5 s, sound-ray trajectories are sound from the explosion in 1883 of the volcano useful for studying propagation. In general, the rays Krakatoa in the East Indies. The absorption of infra- from a source at ground level are alternately reflected sound from' the explosion was low enough so that the between the layer at a 30-mi (50-km) altitude and the waves were still detectable after traveling around the surface of the ground. Since the waves spend much Earth several times. The somewhat weaker sound of their propagation time in the relatively cool strato- E~ waves from the explosion in 1963 of the volcano sphere, the speed over the Earth's surface is on aver- 2~'Mount Agung, located on the island of Bali, were age about 1000 ftYs (300 m/s). d . erected and measured with modern infrasohic micro- Efi0els of gravity. At still lower frequencies. the places in North America. gravitational field of the Earth influences the propaga- Waves having high sound pressure levels, lasting lion of sound, particularly the phase velocity. The red- for hours, are (1) oscillations of the at- son is that the potential energy ofthe aix moving under Ultrasonics 9 carbide abrasive will produce a tolerance of applying a high voltage while the film is mechan callv ~less lhan 0.001 in. (25 gm) and a surface finish of stretched· See MicRoPhone. -30 microinches (0.5-0.75 !u-m) root mean square. Pulse systems. These have been used to measure Fmer grits, such as 800, cut more slowly but give properties of liquids and solids. A shun burst of ultra- i:loser tolerances and a smoother surface (8-12 gin. sortie waves from the transducer is sent into the me- j!' or 0.2-0.3 Fm). CuRing speed is faster with brittle dium and is reflected. By timing the received pulse work materials. with large grit-size abrasives, with a from the transducer with respect to the transmitted small area between tool and work, and with high- pulse, or by a phasing technique, accurale ve deity power application. measurements can be made. Such lechniques have Machines for commercial ultrasuRic work are made been used widely in measuring the elastic constants in a number of model sizes, ranging in power from of small specimens. The attenuation also can be mea- 200 to 2400 W. Accessories are provided to aceore- surer by the rate at which pulses decrease with dis- mudate a wide varie~' of machining operations. The lance WaRsmilled, but careful consideration must be ultrasuRic method is also applied to su~ace and cylin- given to spreading loss and to the losses in the seals drical grinding, with resulting lower temperatures and connecting the transducers to the specimens. · superior finish. but cost of the equipment is still too S01id dielectric transducer. This type of transducer high to justif',' wide use. Single point turning tools is made by stretching a sheet of dielectric film (typi- have been vii, rated normally and tangent a ly to the cally Mylar) that is metalliter on one side across a work with ~,ood results but again the cost is not often metal backplate. The conducting surface and the = ' ~ metal backplate form a capacitor. The separation be- . justified- Orlan W. Boston tween the su~ace and the plate ,.,aries because ultra- Bibliography. D. B. Dallas (ed.), The new look of sortie waves that are incident upon the surface com- ultrasuRic machining. Manuf. Eng. Manag., 64(1): press gases .tr..apped between the film and the .40--42, 1970; V. p. Severdenko et al, (eds.), Ultra- backplate. The change in separation results in a flow sonic Rolling and Drawing of Metals, 1972. of charge· These devices are used as both projectors and receivers in the frequency range 40-1000 kHz. The same transducer is used as both the projector and ' ' the detector in a pulse-e~'system that is frequetub' trasonics used to measure range for autofocusing cameras. See The science of sound waves having frequencies above EttcrRrr rn~.vsovcER. the audible range. that is, above about 20,000 Hz. 0peaacoustics. Modulated light absorbed b.x a fluid Original workers in this field adopted the tern~ super- or solid results in local heating and generation of an sorties. Howe;'er, this name was also used in the acoustic signal· Pulsed lasers can generate a study of airflow for velocities faster than the speed of short uhrasonic signal with significant energy in the sound. The present convention is to use the term ut- frequency range of I MHz to 10 GHz. Such pulses ','17.': u'asonics as defined above. The term silent sound also are useful in studying properties of materials and Io- has been used to denote ultrasuRic waves. Since there caring defects. 5re PHOTO.~COUSTtC SPECTRtSSCOPr. is no marked distinction between the propagation and High-poiner devices. For higher powers. ferroelec- the uses of sound waves above and below 20.000 Hz. tric ceramics. such as barium titanate (BaTlOs) [Fig. the division is artificial. In this article the emphasis is 1}. PZT (lead zirconate titanate). and sodium purRs- on instrumentation, engineering hpplications, and an- slum Riobate (NaKN'oO3}. or magnetostric:i'.e mate- alytical uses. 5~ Soc'.vo. rials, such as nickel or ferrites, commonly are em- ployed. The}' generally are used for uhrasonic ULTBA. SONIC GENERATORS AND DHEGTORS cutting, v,,.ear or fatigue testing. and uhrasonic v. eld- The earliest instruments for producing ultrasuRic inC. SEE FERRITE,' FtRRITE OEVICKS; FEleROELECTRtC5, waves in air were the Gahon whistle and the Hart- Shear waves in liquids. A number of shear-wave minn generator. These devices produce sound wa;'es transducers, most o[ them employing torsionaI or by blowing a jet of high-pressure air from a narrow shear-wave generators of quartz, have been used to slit against a sharp metal edge· The Hartmann gener- measure the shear viscosity and shear stiffness of liq- ator raises the ve deity of the jet above that of the uids, These devices measure the acoustic resistance R sound waves and in effect generates standing shock and the acoustic reactance X of a plane shear v. ave waves. SEt SHOCK WAVE. Sent into the liquid. SEE ACOUSTIC I.~4PED4 ~CE- Piezoelectrich, and magnetostriction. The usual types of generators and detectors for air, liquids, and solids are the piezoelectric and magnetostrictive Ren- ~!:~'f water-cooIed erators. X-cut quartz crystals are used to produce Ion- - .,,~r.~---.-: ~',rg':-;r:' ' gitudinal waves in gases, liquids, and solids. Y-cut .... and AC-cut quartz crystals are used to produce shear 6r transverse waves in solids. Thin-film zinc oxide ',' (ZnO) u~.nsducers can generate longitudinal waves at Fig. 1. Cross-sectional f~quencies as high as 96 GHz. At such high frequen- ~~ ~~r~~/~ Is view of a barium titanate cies, absorption in the transducer becomes substan- -? ,~.,~,~!-?~.-':.-~ ~i:'~C~: 'n term'na ultrasonic generator. Bar- tial. SEE MAG%'ETOSTRICTIOiV; PIEZOELECTRIC TY. ~;;;;?tiD'/f lure titanate is made to ' ' ~'~ i::5';- ':' J ~:L~ -. ' ' ;- ' generate sound waves. !~" ': Polymer transducer. The polymer polyvinvlidene - :: 2[5 ~- -,::. · Material to be treated Is .. fluoride has been shown to be a good transducer for ' ~ . ' placed in a glass con- microphones and other sound pickup devices. It acts tainer and lowered into effectively from low frequencies up to the mec'ahertz · the 0il. (After H. F. Otson, ~' Acoustical Engineering, 3d range of its low mechanical impedance. The trans- ' L, ed.. Van Noserand, 1957) ducer is formed as a thin film and is polarized by Another consideration is the Thus, "Q&A" might have given EE A F:{ N Y 0 LJ R flashover voltage between terminals of Ching the wrong answer if the trip the switch, The spacing is temperature of his batten, pack's B S.DEGREE range · rather close on most rotary switches. OF~M thermal cutout was rated very IN I have decided that building a DCmuch below the 128°C trip tempera- C O M P O T E R S voi=eter such as .~ne is not rea,,y~re specified for Radio Sback'~ cost effe'ctive. Even using the DPzMs270-1322 thermal cutout. OR advertised in recent issues ofMJ. McCLYMONT ELECTRONICS E,.=o.,csN=andVa~.~=~,e=0n,cs at about $10, a lower-priced digital multimeter is a better buy. A better use for DPMs is for somed~ng not onTHE DEMISE OF SWEEP the market, or something that has a high price. For example, I build an ALIEIME!l automobile voltage monitor, with a I'd Eke to offer a more precise range of 20 volts, that works better answer to the question, 'Sweep and costs less than any commercial AlignmentA Lost Art?" in the June '/~' unit I have found. 1995 "Q&A." _ '_ ' ' the introduction and rapid acceptance By Studying at Hom 'dthe;,,~/,,~,,~o,~,,~,~(SA@filter more than 20 )'ears ago. Developed Gr~.th~ QUIET, PLEASE! for the eo.,munications, S~W ~lters now in our 45th year, is wide acceptance in television enuedi In reference to Mark because they offer precise by printed article, "A Subwoofer for your Car can't be adjusted. If materials, computer fax, Stereo" (Electronics Now, October ~, you simply modem, and phone. 1995)--oh boy! Just what we need, ed it. No commuting at your own pace, while l more cars cruising the neighborhood 'SAXY filter is based on piezo- present job. Lean from easy-to- with subwoofers pounding. Iamready principles. If a signal is understand but and thorough to kill now. ~ an input section on a piezo- lesson materials, w additional help If you can invent some kind of electric substrate (made from device to send their loud music back such ma as lithium niobate or Granthhm o into their vehicles and blow out their quartz), surface wave will propagate education programs, to the follow- ing accredited de stereos, please let me lmow. substrate and be picked up (1) BOB RINEHULS Electronics. Tallahassee, FL r substrate is t)Tically about (2)The B.S.E.T. with 0.15-i square. By carefully con- Computers. troll the length and spacing (3) The B .S.C.S. -- thl ence i. Comp.ter Sc=ce.THERMAL CUTOUTS of the input and 6u~ut a filter with the desired An important part eing pre- Dave Ching's question about ther- These devices pared to move up is holding e rigln mal cutouts in the June araditional line-up pro- i my attention. I recend' cedures. Grantham can help you both ways--t~ thermal cutout in the motor DOUGLAS L. MOORE the process. ) s Write or phone for our free catalog. characteristics matched those of ECG Toll free, 1-800-955-2527, or see and NTE part numbers 8070 (72°C). mailing address below. . The important issue is that my ECG Accredited by catalog specifies that if the trip tem- theAccreditingCommissionotthe perature of the original thermal Distance Education and curtout is less than 120°, the replace- Training Councg . ment unit should have a trip tempera- GRANTHAM ture within 4°C of that specified for College of Engineering the OF~ part. / ,, Grantham College Road If the OEM part's trip temperature is greater than 120°C, the replacement Slidell, LA 70460 "Ca,, you be a bit more sln'ci~c?" should have a rating within 8°C. ' 7 Noise ' ' ' .!: '. Ever since the ~ndustrial ~evolution gave ns an Unprecedented power over our environment, we have been steadily making our. planet uninhabitable..All around us we can see the effects of the ~:~.~...: garbage dumps and rusting cars; rivers and lakes are choked . with industrial pollution; even the air we breathe'is laden with' ' .i.. j, .! ,. the outpourings of thousands of facto~ chimney stacks and ' millions of car exhausts· Incredibly, it is only in the last few years that the message has really been brought home to scientists and lcg{slators, w. ho are now .embarked on a desperate__ra~c~e,_t9 s I . has taken us even longer to recognize as a danger to' our well~j being: not waste matter, but wasted energy--noise_..__._____L. .... ~!~- In 1968, the 'U.S. Federal Council for Science and Technology' " set up a committee to consider the problem of environmental noise. In its report the task force stated: "Increasing severity of the oc~upa,es of~his h~use e~ ~he edge · of one of Europa's busiest airports .suffer a regular 100-dB. roar every two . ~.:~ minutes during the daytime in summer. An extreme case, perhaps, but environ- · mental noise is a growing prob/em in every developed country. i person--mankind. It is language that has given man his dominant Is it ever possible one wonders, to be in an entirely silent place? status in nature. , The deepest silence still seems to have its sound. On the other hand, he has evolved many different languages. One If, as an experiment, a human being is placed in a sound-proof has only to cross an entirely arbitrary, imaginary line, a frontier, to cell, whilst he is alive and awake, he will still experience sound. A " find that one cannot understand nor be understood. This gives rise body is full of sound--breathing, heart beat, blood coursing; even, to one of maws most persistent and inhibiting problems--mis_ perhaps, the "sdund"ofthoughts inthe head. The "hum" of silence. understanding, between one individual and another, between one natiol. and another. . And it does mean that we have to be circumspect in our explora- We could make a strong case for suggesting that, of all the senses, tion of the old scriptures. There has to be a limit to the experience that of listening most influences the subtle nature of man. It could and therefore the understandin,, of the chroniclers, of the later ,. further be suggested that it is the very sounds we are subjected to interpreters the translators and the expoundors Again, there can , constantly throughout our lives, w]i~'her we a~eaware of them"6F' not, that shape our natures. only be valid ity in those scriptures if they in some way illuminate our ' For souna c'~fff~rnes m~IT'more than factual information. All own experience, no matter at what level it takes place. · sound vibrations affect us, whether harmonious or discordant, whether crude or subtle forceful of'gentle. 'If I an~'Trequently' And we must not be confined just to interpretation of words. subjected to harsh sound', my whole being is discomforted and Behind each language--coming before each language--there is have to b.es__'iT'ong to wirestand it. IfI am surroun 'easin There are vocal sounds common to all people, no matter how soothed and pacified. C' they are moulded and expressed by millions of mouths. Have I not understood this in my experience--when I hayeft/ And then there is the man-made sound which by-passes the listened to the gentle sounds of a summer andscape been disturbed compIexities of the spoken word--the sound of song and music. by the sound of Violence, lulled by the murmur of a river, been cut And then there is the sound of other human emotions--laughter by a cry of pain, uplifted by birdsong after winter jarred by loud crying and so on--which is common to all men (and, as always2 machines, moved by strains of music... ? such sound means something, always communicates information). Whatever the quality of the sound, it seems to penetrate and be In nature--and which of us is not in, and of, nature?~we absorbed in my substance. It sounds within me. When I really listen to sound, what happens to me? are contained in sound. All kinds of sound continually give us It is as ifI become the sound; as if there is only the sound. our sense of location---our sense of space and where we are in it. , The running water of a brook does not sound different depending In the beginning was the }Vord, and the tq/ord was with God, and on the language you use; nor the wind passing through the branches the Word was God. of a tree; nor waves crashing against rocks, nor birdsong, nor the . bleat of a lamb, nor the buzz of a fly Always sound, always Why, in a book about religion, should we give so much attention communicating to us. to words and sound? 19 ~.?.?~;:,::!:; '.'~,':.:.y:;~., '.':'.'. .: i~i Floyd Dunn of the Electrical"En ' -:'80'!:~;:'.~'~i! ~ :;),'i.:.i!);; ' .. · · .:!~ University of Illinois. Dunn noted that~.pilots~'and~ :~ii · .subjected to artificially produced .~ : :I :~' ~ the area around Chicago, with intense storms"takin ' 1:~, ".:, 2: ,,. .... 4 8 16 .32 64 125 ':i~j The investigation, plagued with 'the~'difficulties'!, '(Flz.) .~2'::, .. :'' : retrospective studies where th9 investigator :.i:.:'.':, !'~::.(..:':: ' . produced by other people for another purpose~"nevertheless! sources ofindustrialnoisa {hat contain birth ta~,els olinIra- come up ~ith some evidence of a correlation between increaie thobulkolthoirsound-pressorelovolatlreqoonciesbelowthe :~ absgnteeism and car accidents· on' the::oneT. hand;' '. Sources shown ar~ interior of 1 -liter carat infrasonic disturbances in the atmos 7O mph with windows closed(broken line) and drlvor~ window open (dash-dot (white ~n, that many utias (black arrows). I ' conditions put down to the state of the climate may:b~., .... ""?; "" :.: · · infraso~icwaves. Ifso, and in view ofthe ~ · .. .... pti0nsarevery'powerfulsourcesofinfrasound. The mechanizedsociety is continuously~ ,lion of 1883, for instance, gave rise to infrasonie radiation, then Vladimir traveled around the world several times. This sound, ;"" modern society are of about one cycle every 10 seconds (0. l Hz.); frequency sound could well hive fluctuations detectable even on ordinary bare- produce infrasound--a hct that is Japan in the prediction of tsunamis, the giant tidal enerated by underwater earthquakes. And there are many ' ': phenomenaltornadoes, intense storms, and so on-- that' are also known to give rise to infrasonic waves. It is known that' before an earthquake, people~and .animals in particular-- feelings of unease, even panic; and storms, too, thought to be the cause of behavioral upsets, ranging from mild malaise or an increase in forgetfulness, right through to increases~n suicide attempts. Can ~logical disturb- be put~nd ? " ' '~' "" gh it is not possible to answer this question with cer- :.. number of. investigations and experiments suggest that· ~)~nfrasound can have profound psychologi~l effects. The most Ga vfea u's first infrasonic gun (top) and his 1.5-m-diameter whistle with a potential 2000 times that of a nornTal police whistle. Right: subject wears earpb ones carrying infrasonic waves and skin electrodes to test tbeir effect on involuntary movements of eye that occur when balance is disturbed. Traces produced by ultraviolet recorder (below) are sbown at bottom of pages. They represent electrical potentials from eye muscles of person subiected to infrasound at 6 Hz. at level ,142 dR. (left) and2 Hz. at level 150 dR. (right). L atter sub]ect reporl ed severe Ioss of balance and nausea.~'> CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIVIONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: February 14, 1996 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 93-03 - FINAL SCORE - A request to conduct entertainment consisting of live bands, disc jockeys, and dancing in conjunction with a r~s'taurant and bar, in the Community CommerCial District within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 8411 Foothill Boulevard APN: 207-571-75. (Continued from January 24, 1996) BACKGROUND: On January 24, 1996, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to review the above application, and received public testimony including residents who were against the granting of the permit. The Commission deliberated on the compatibility issue and whether the control measures would be effective in addressing the neighborhood concems. Because of a lack of majority vote to approve or deny the permit, the Commission continued the application to this meeting. Attached are copies of the January 24, 1996, staff report (see Exhibit "D"). Since the last meeting, staff has received a total of 13 additional letters from surrounding residents who are against the granting of the permit. These residents are from the condominium complex located south of the Rancho Villas complex as shown in Exhibit "E." Attached are copies .of the letters, see Exhibit "B." Also, the Police Department has provided records of calls for service for the site as shown in Exhibit "J." Between January of 1994 and the present, a total of 30 service calls was recorded. The calls ranged from non-injury accidents, grand theft auto, disturbances, driving under the influence, assault, and concealed weapon. According to a representative of the Police Department, the adding of entertainment would be expected to increase the number of service calls. At the last meeting, the Commission raised concerns with noise coming from the inside when the main entry is opened. A suggested control measure is to add a vestibule at the main entry for attenuating the noise. This control measure is placed as a condition of approval in the attached Resolution. ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREPORT EP 93-03 - FINAL SCORE February14,1996 Page 2 E__~_G_OMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission conduct a public heating to review the application. If the Commission concurs with staff's analysis and findings, including the control measures as listed in the attached resolution, then approval of the Entertainment Permit would be in order. Respectful submitted City Planner ..... BB:NF:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Applicant's letter dated December 20, 1995. Exhibit "B" - Residents' letters including the ones received after January 13, 1996. Exhibit "C" - Noise Study Exhibit "D" - January 24, 1996 Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes, and July 27, 1994 Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes. Exhibit "E" - Location Map Exhibit "F" - Site Plan Exhibit "G" - Floor Plan Exhibit "H" - Residential Noise Standards Exhibit 'T' - Chronology Exhibit "J" - Police Records. Resolution of Approval with Conditions : R I::: C E J V E D Rantre:) .C.ucamonga · Callforn~ 917:X) "' ::"" :;:= "" 1995 ' ' ' ' ' ' ·' DEC ~ 0 : "" o : -" . .~ HOME VISITOR City 01 Rancho Cucamongs, SATELLITE SPORTS planning Division (909) 985-4515 FOOD · GAMES FAX (909) 9ss-7484 Dear Nancy Fong We are asking for a contiuance due to a prior out of state, Engagment. We would appreciate our hearing date on Jan 24,1996, To better prepare ourselves. -- Also we would like to drop our C.U.P.And we are requesting a variance,to allow us too serve breakfast,lunch & Dinner. From the hours of 8am to 10pm Mon-Sun.We are approved by the A.B.C. to Serve Alcoholic beverges. We would like to serve beer & wine only in our outside area. from the hours of 8am-10pm. There will be 10 to 15 - Tables with a capacity,of 25 for dinning 90 for viewing sporting events Thank you very much for your time in this matter. Garry Rausa,Mgr; FINAL SCORE e.c. ,1 19- BECEIVED Planning Division DEC')O 1995 City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 917295!tyoiRaDcho Cucam0nga December 21, 1995 Planning Division This letter is in response to the Notice of Public Hearing posted on our property regarding a request for an Entertainment Permit 93-03 for the Final Score Bar located at 8411 Foothill Blvd. in Rancho Cucamonga. This meeting is to be held January 10, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. I understand from my neighbor, Helen Defina, who has called you, that we will be receiving this notice also in the mail telling us that the bar owners have made some changes to their establishment that should take care of some of the complaints we had in 1994 when they also had requested this entertainment permit. I am writing this to you before receiving the letter as I will be leaving on vacation. I am enclos- ing copies of letters of July 1994. A petition was sent to your office, signed by 50 home owners in Rancho Villas, also at that time, requesting that the entertainment permit not be issued to the Final Score Bar. _You listened to us at that. ti~e., please LISTEN TO US AGAIN. Even if the improvements, or changes, made to the Final Score Bar building do cut down on the level of sound and the vibrations from the percussion instruments, we still have the nuisance of additional patrons leaving the bar's parking lot early hours in the morning making so much noise that it wakes us up from our sleep. We have ex- perienced the patrons with too much to drink even coming up onto the railroad tracks, which are practically in our back yards, arguing, using foul language, smoking "pot" and having fist fights. I assume that Garry Rausa is still the owner of the Final Score Bar. He definitely has shown in the past that he has no concern whatsoever for his neighbors. Going ahead and having live bands play knowing full well that he did not have a permit to do so from the city in 1993 certainly should be a big point against him. As his neighbors, we do have a right to a peaceful, safe neighborhood. We have appreciated the past 17 months without any problems from the bar. Please consider our wishes very carefully and do not issue an entertainment permit to the Final Score Bar. Thank you all. Charles and Shirley Kovar Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 982-0628 RECEIVED JAN 2 2 1996 January 18, 1996 City of Rancho Cucarnonga Planning Division Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Entertainment Permit 93-03 - FINAL SCORE I am writing to oppose the permit being requested in the above referenced establishment. We are residents of Rancho Villas HOA and think the Final Score bar is already a detriment to our neighborhood. The people who frequent this bar are of questionable character. The patrons frequently hang out outside on the railroad tracks and parking lot making a lot of noise and in one incident shot a bullet into our neighborhood through a homeoWners window. If they start having live bands, D.J., etc... there will be even more people and more noise. Even if they make repairs to the building to keep the noise level down, there will still be noise every time they open the door. We will be very disappointed in the City if this permit is granted. This part of town see. ms to be continuously neglected. We moved to Rancho Cucamonga 5 years ago and have seen all of our tax dollars going into making the east side of town attractive. The section of Rancho Cucamonga west of Vineyard and south of Foothill is a embarrassment to the city. If Final Score is granted this permit, this side of town will only get worse. Sincerely Diane and Timothy Atherton 6475 Lemon Grove Drive Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 P- c. F~ECEIVF= JAN .? 3 Lqg,r,, City of F~anc~o Cueamerica ~anning Division /~<' ZI& July 1994: - Planning Commission Chairma'r~ .. ' ' ion: 'Nancy' FOng l'Richard'Alcorn · Rancho Cu'camonga Ci~ Hall. ' ' ' · '10500'C~vic Cen~er Drive : . Rancho Cucam'0nga, CA 91729 . . · · ' · ~ Dear Sirs: . .R~arding En~e~ainmen~ P~rmi~'93-03 ~0r'ihe' Fina~.Sc~re, I ~an~ you ~o kDow why I am unconditionally op~0sed ~o ~he ~ermi~'s ap'pr0v.al~' Tha~ s,' unless ~he~ agree ~o build~a new soundproo~ s~mc~ure and agree ~o' keep ~e ~in~ows and doors closed when they have loud music. I doub~ ~ha~ ~hey would a~ee ~o 'suc~ an investment, as ~hey ~ave so ~ar "demo'ns~ra~ed no concern ~or ~he surrounding c~mmuni~. In ~a~, Ga~'Rausa and his.em~16y~ h~ve sp0~ed an a~i~Ude ran~in~ ~rom c~operate" ~o ~'u~e~ y ~de"~:..I .live ~re~ly behind his bar, ~i~h~n. 150 ~ee~ by my es~ma~n, . and ~hek~nds o~ disturbances I have experienced in ~he p~s~' dur.ing I.i~'ban~ pe~ormances '. ar~ as ~llows: loud ~humping .music,: noisy patrons ~alk~n~ and' yelli. n~ noisy p.alrons brawling, helicopters 'overhead. lhundeEin~ .mo~r~cles s~a~ing and rew~ng up, ~hunder~ng Zmot~r~cles racin~ o~ up and' down Rou~e'~; bo~les braking while being dumped into dumps~er.in back ~ ~he ba~, and bo~le~e~kin~ while bein~ ~hroWn, 'presUmaBly By .pa~.ons. This wen~ on .~t~nely be~ee~'~he hours o~ 9:00 p~m. a~3:~'a.m.Z mostly on weekeBds.' I. have p~rsonally Hled ~he bar m~ny ~ime~, ask~n~'~h~m ~ pleas~ keep ~he ~lume down W~B no' results. '1 ~mly believe ~hey could c~e less i~ I slept ~'s when lbeg~n Sherrif's Depa~men~.. They a~ leas~ had a ~ympa~he~c ear, ~l~hou~h ~hey ~o~ I~le more cooperation ~rom ~he bar ~han '1 I ~eel like ~h~s'~s al~ a waste o~ ~axpayers' money, since ~Bis bus~ness ~as op~r~e~ wi~h so H~le concern ~or iB nei~hbors, ha~ Cooper~e~ w~h ~he POliCe only ~o ~he minimum ex~en~ required. And ~hey did ~h~s when ~hey d~dn'.f eyen have a I~cense ~or ~ I~ve band! Eet's ~ace ~he ~a~ ~hese people are lawbreakers and, ~nmy opin~on~ shouldn'~.even have a bus~ness ~icense, much les~ a license ~o operate a live band..Their kind o~ a~v~' may have been.appropriate '~ecades a~o when ~Bere were ~e~ ~nh'abi~an~s in ~h~ Bea~ Gulch area..Bu~ ~o~ay ~he~ are surr~un~e~ by ' people who' wa~ ~o sleep a~ night; ~h~.po~n~ being ~a~ ~he~' l ~eel ce~ain ~ha~ i~ you ~ive ~hem ~h~s Ijcen'se, lhey w~ll be ~epriving all o~ us o~ ou~ sleep, and we; in ~urn, w~ll be calling .~he ~o ce .ou~ here eve~ weekend. .S~cerely, ..- '. · '. . . , ' ' /' ', · = · ' Hen ~. DeF~na · · -"' Cedar~oo.~ Lane - ' . . ' Ranch6 Cucamonga, CA 91730 -' "": · ~' ' ' " ' "' · .... ~) 985-7033 - " ~ ...; " RECEIVED FEB 0 5 1996 of Rancho Cucarnonga · planning Division Vickie D.M.Rigsby, Villa-Gabriel Homes, 8330 B Gabriel DR, Rancho-Cucamonga, Ca. 91730. #54 02/02/96 .... Attention Planning Commissiofi, I have no objections to an establishment having LIVE MUSIC close to my home, and I feel that you are being PreSUmptuous about this matter by jumping to conclusions. I fail to see that the noise level of the music or the traffic would in- crease that much more. My time is spent running my own affairs and minding my own business, and I simply do not have the time to force people to bend my way. Why ~o~t you adopt the wa.it and see attitude ?. I~eSpi~2t~fu'l'ly,, e..c. RECEIVED Planning Divison FEB 0 5 1996 City ofRancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division Dear Members; My family and I wish venJ much that the permit for LIVE ENTEKTAINMENT for the FINAL SCORE bar and resturant be denied. Within approxamately one hundred yards of this establishment there two rather large condomininm complex, with many children and senior citezens. We donot wish to have our peace and quiet interupted into the wee small hour of the night. Our investmen in the area is quite extensive and we do not wish to see it deterlate any more than it has due to the present real estate market. This is primarily a residential area not enratertainment zone. I respectively request that this permit be denied. tS/ F HERMAN F. DUNN III 8351-A Gabriel Drive Rancho Cucamon~a, CA 91730 (909) 949-9535 RECEIVED FEB 0 5 1996 Saturday, February 03, 1996 CiTy of Rancho Cucarnonga Planning Division Planning Division. City of Ranch Cucamonga P.O. box 807 Rancho Cucamonga,.CA 91729 Dear Planning Commission. I don not wish to have an establishment with live music so close to my home. I do not care for the noise or the traffic it will bring. p.c, p.c. z-p~/9~ RECEIVED 2-5-96 FEB 0 iS 1SgPo Gity of Rancho Oucarnonga Planning Division To: Planning Division, City Of Rancho Cucamong P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91729 We live in Victorville but rent our condo at 8453 Cedarwood Lane in Rancho Cucamonga. We are 100% against the live entertainment permit. We heard enough noise when we lived there from the screaming and hollering and the noise'from the motorcycles which was enough. I really do not understand how the commission could allow such an application for this permit so close to where people live. Noise travels and people have a right to their privacy.. There certainly is enough areas where establishments of this nature can be opened without bothering and upsetting the lives of people who like peace and quiet. These people have a right and I thought there was a noise ordinance. ~ ~ictor Rogers ' ~ February 5, 1996 R E C E I V ~ D City ofRancho Cucamonga FEB 0 6 t996 Plarming Commission P.O. Box 807 City of Rancbo Cucamonga Rancho Cucarnonga, CA. 91729 planning Division PuS: Entertainm-ent Permit 93-03 8411 Foothill Blvd., APN: 207-571-76 Dear Planning Commission: As a home owner nearing 8411 Foothill Blvd., I would like to register my objection over the .above referenced live entertainment permit. I believe that an entertainment establishment with live bands, disc jockey, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, is not suited to our residential community which is located very near by. The expected noise, traffic, and disorderly conducts associated with a night club / bar places our community and children at risk. In addition, after interviewing with local Realtor, residential property value near by is expected to be negatively impacted with such an establishment. Please take our views into consideration and DISAPPROVE ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 93-03. Thank you. Michael Chang 8372-B Gabriel Drive, 8342-A Gabriel Drive, 8384-D Gabriel Drive, 8384- C Gabriel Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91730 F '(' 2fir/q:/ February 5, 1996 H E C E I V E D City ofRancho Cucamonga FEB 0 6 1996 Planning Commission P.O. Box 807 City ot Rancino Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91729 V'lanning Division RE: Entertainment Permit 93-03 8411 Foothill Blvd., APN: 207-571-76 Dear Planning Commission: As a home owner nearing 8411 Foothill Blvd., I would like to register my objection over the above referenced live entertainment permit. I believe that an entertairanent establishment with live bands, disc jockey, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, is not suited to our residential community which is located very near by. The expected noise, traffic, and disorderly conducts associated with a night club / bar places our cormnunity and children at risk. In addition, after interviewing with local Realtor, residential property value near by is expected to be negatively impacted with such an establishment. Please take our views into consideration and DISAPPROVE ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 93-03. Thank you. George ~ ~ 8366~D Gabriel Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91730 February 5, 1996 RECEIVED City ofRancho Cucamonga Planning Commission FEB 0 6 1996 P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91729 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division RE: Entertainment Permit 93-03 8411 Foothill Blvd., APN: 207-571-76 Dear Planning Commission: As a home owner nearing 8411 Foothill Blvd., I would like to register my objection over the above referenced live entertainment permit. I believe that an entertainment establishment with live bands, disc jockey, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, is not suited to our residential community which is located very near by. The expected noise, traffic, and disorderly conducts associated with a night club / bar places our community and children at risk. In addition, after interviewing with local Realtor, residential property value near by is expected to be negatively impacted with such an establishment. Please take our views into consideration and DISAPPROVE ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 93-03. Thank you. Rancho Cit~d~IS'~velopment 11955 Rivera Road Santa Fe Springs, CA. 90670 ~p~/~ ~// villa abriel Homes, Tract 2S95P.C. Rancho Cucmnonga, CA. 91730 VIRGINIA RAMIREZ VILLA GABRIEL HOMEOWNER R E C E I V E D 8321-C GABRIEL DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA FEB 0 G 1996 city ot Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division PLANNING'DIVISION, CITY OF RANCHO'CUCAMONGA P. O. BOX 807 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91729 DEAR PLANNING COMMISSION: I DO NOT WISH TO HAVE AN ESTABLISHMENT WITH LIVE MUSIC SO CLOSE TO MY HOME. I DO NOT CARE FOR THE NOISE OR THE TRAFFIC IT WILL BRING. LY' RECEIVED City of Rancho Cucamonga 835i Gabriel Planning Division Ra, ncho Cncamonga, Ca 91729 February 5, 1996 Planning Division Ciry of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Planning Commission, I strongly disagree with the idea of giving out live entertainment permits for the sake of the neighboring residents who xdll have to live with the noise. Please take the views of Villa Gabriel homeo~,mers seriously in reviewing this matter. Thank you for >,our time and consideration. Sincerely, RECEIVED FEB 0 6 1996 831g Gabriel City of Rancbo Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91729 Planning Division Febmar).' 5, 1996 Plmming Division Ci~' of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Planning Cornmission, I strongly disagree with the idea of giving out live entertainment permits for the sake of the neighboring residents who ~ll have to live ~4th the noise. Please take the views of Villa Gabriel homeowners serionsly in reviewing this matter. Thank you for 3'our time and consideration. z- ?-c RECEIVED FEB O, 6 199 8378 Gabdel City ol ~ancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, Ca 91729 ' planning Division February 5, 1996 Planning Dix4sion Ci~' of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Planning Commission, 1 strongly disagree with the idea of giving out live entertaimment permits for the sake of the neighboring residents who will have to live with the noise. Please take the views of Vilta Gabriel homeowners seriously in reviex~ing this matter. Thank you for your time and consideration. Ming-Yi Yen RECEIVED F~ ~ ? ~s::~..:; / ~ ~-~" ............... _. . ........... -:... ,_ _ ' d~'~"" · GEORGE E. LEIGHTON CONSULTANT, NOISE CONTROL ~ECEIVED ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS REPORT #709 N0~ 1 ~J 1995 for ,,.., m Rancno Cucamonga LIVE BAND MUSIC ~lanning Divisioa at FINAL SCORE ULTRA SPORTS BAR Prepared for ' NANCY FONG, AICP Senior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Prepared by Certified Acoustical Consultant 11-6-95 1307-A SOUTH EUCLID STREET · ANAHEIM, CA 92802 · (714) 535-8648 FAX (714) 535-8649 (800) 570-3666 e.c. CONTENTS page Forward 1 Summary Preliminary Analysis 2a Preliminary Noise Survey 2b Preliminary Conclusions - - 2d Preliminary Recommendations 2e Preliminary Cost Estimates 2f Follow-On Acoustical Inspection Resulis 3 Conclusions 4 Appendix 5 1. George Leighton, Consulting Services 2. Noise Survey Data Sheets 3. Calculations ; 4. Brochure - National Council of Acoustical Consultants FORWARD This report was prepared for Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Its purpose is to identify potential community noise problems at the Final Score Sports Bar associated with live band music. A further purpose is to answer the following questions: 1. Can live band music be played without: a. Violating the community fioise ordinance? b. Imposing disturbing sound upon the adjacent residents? 2. What noise-control measures are required to make this possible? Noise surveys were made, noise problems were identified, and on-site solutions developed. Recommended solutions are documented in this report. It is intended that the recommefidations be presented' in a clear, logical minner with sufficient explanation of acoustic theory, practice and supporting data to allow the reader to understand the specific noise problems and the specific noise-control measures necessary to resolve them. As will be shown, with the recommended noise-control measures, the live band music can be accommodated without neighborhood disturbance and at modest cost ($1,500.00) to the owner of the sports bar: NOISE LEVELS - dBA LOCATION EXISTING MODIFIED *ALLOWABLE Rear Yard 41 27 50 1st Floor 41 27 50 2nd Floor 51 37 50 2nd Floor interior, windows open 39 25 35 *10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m., with 5 dBA penalty for impulse noise NOTE: Above noise levels based upon actual on-site noise measurements SUMMARY Preliminary Analysis The Final Score Ultra Sports Bar is located in a single-story frame building with an attic over the bar and lounge, and a plain fiat roof over the pool room with no interior ceiling. Three 1-3/4 inch solid core exterior doors provide public access and emergency exits. Two small windows are covered with interior shutters to exclude outside light. Superficially it appeared that the structure was inadequate to contain 100 dBA interior band music without extensive renovation. This proved to be an erroneous assumption. 2a Preliminary Noise Survey On 8-27-95, a noise survey was conducted at the Final Score Ultra Sports Bar. It involved two phases: 1. Recorded music was played through the sound system at normal levels (85 dBA) in the bar. Noise levels outside along the top of the railroad tracks were barely audible against an ambient noise level of 42-45 dBA. This would have rendered it inaudible at the nearby residences. 2. Music levels were set at maximum power - 97 dBA in the bar, 103 dBA in the pool room. Maximum noise level of 55 dBA was measured at the top of the railroad tracks. This would result in 51 dBA at the second-story windows and 41 dBA in the rear yard of the most seriously affected residence. It should be noted that interior noise levels of 95-100 dBA are usual in a bar with live bands.' Hence, the tests realistically simulated a live band. These results were totally unexpected. It was expected that these neighborhood noise levels would have been much higher, precluding the use of live band music. Instead, it showed that with additional noise-control measures bands could successfully play here. It is due to two factors. 1. Acoustical UpSfades In my preliminary survey performed for the purpose of defining the proposal to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, it was pointed out to the owner that among necessary upgrades would be: a. Attic Insulation over Bar b. Window Upsfades Subsequent to this and prior to the above survey, he insulated the attic and sealed the east-facing window in the bar. : 2. Buildinto Interior Layout Except for part of the east-facing bar wall, all of the east-facing and south-facing walls had interior rooms (rest rooms, offices, and storerooms) which insulated the outside wails from interior noise. An exterior building noise survey was then made to define high-noise locations and thereby identify further noise-control measures: 1. Add Door Seals New solid-core doors were installed in the past year or two, but acoustic door seals are required. 2b 2. Add Pool Room Ceiling There is no ceiling ... the roof deck and beams are exposed. An interior ceiling with R-11 insulation is required to reduce roof-radiated noise. 3. Isolate Speakers from Structure In the pool room, two large speakers are rigidly attached to the roof. Tests showed that only one speaker is needed. This would cut the noise energy in half. Isolating it from the roof would eliminate structure-borne noise through the roof. 4. Up~rade lihaei~e--Windows The remaining windows should be upgraded. With the above upgrades, exterior noise levels were expected to be reduced by an additional 10-12 dBA. 2c Preliminary Conclusions 1. The noise problems can be resolved using straightforward acoustical techniques. The specific acoustical materials and hardware items, however, must be imaginatively selected and designed to achieve the desired acoustical objectives in the most cost- effective manner. 2. After incorporating the recommended noise-control measures, exterior noise levels at the adjacent residences would be reduced below 40 dBA. This is far below the 50 dBA Residential Noise Standard, well below the expected 42-45 dBA late-night ambient noise levels, and virtually inaudible at all nearby residences. 3. By following the report recommendations, live band music can be permitted in the sports bar. 2d Preliminary Recommendations 1. Buildin~ Modifications a. Install acoustical door seals b. Install ceiling in pool room c. Upgrade remaining outside windows d. Remove one speaker, pool room e. Isolate speakers from building structure 2. Follow-up Noise Survey After incorporating above modifications, conduct a follow-up noise survey to verify the noise predictions. With successful testing, allow live band performances subject tq below operating procedures ..... 3. Operatin~ Procedures a. Outdoor Patio (1) Limit operating hours (2) Close door during live band performance b. Other Outside Doors Normally closed Note: The owner plans to immediately incorporate the recommended changes. Costs are reasonable. Installing attic insulation over the bar has reduced air conditioning costs significantly. Installing the pool-room ceiling with R-11 insulation provide~-economic justification for this expenditure. The same would apply to the windows. 2e Preliminary Cost Estimates 1. Acoustic Door Seals $1,504.00 Installed (3 doors) Heavy duty, commemial 2. Ceiling, Pool Room 1,683.00 22 x 17 = 374 sq. ft. @ $4.50 3. Windows, Pool Room 150.00 Sub Total $3,337.00 4. Speakers - Isolate 300.00 Total $3,637.00 Subsequent to the above estimates the owner completed the above changes with the help of qualified contractors. Total costs, including the rear door upgrade are estimated at $1,500.00, a modest sum. Because of the prior noise complaints by neighbors, the modest cost, and the savings in air conditioning by insulating the attic and pool room ceiling, the owner decided to make the recommended changes immediately irrespective of the status of the application for entertainment permit. This proved to be a wise decision because it allows us to demonstrate the acoustic success of the recommendations before appearing before the Planning Board. We have proved definitively that live band music will be far below the City's noise ordinance limits and will be inaudible at the nearby residences. 2f FOLLOW-ON ACOUSTICAL INSPECTION RESLrLTS 1. Visual Inspection - On 10-27-95, a visual inspection was made of the Sports Bar prior to making the early morning acoustical analysis. The following were observed: a. Ceiling Installation Pool Room - The gyp board ceiling was installed as directed but installation was incomplete at this time. Caulking and trim strips had not yet been installed. b. Windows - Windows were modified as directed. c. Acoustic Door Seals - Acoustic door seals were installed on all three exterior doors, however, inspection revealed that the seals had not been adjusted properly leaving gaps for the escape of noise. d. Speakers - As directed, one speaker was removed from the pool room and ' ' the remaining speaker was suspended friSm the ceiling surface. 2. NoiSe Survey - Sunday morning, 10-8-95, at 6:00 a.m. a noise survey was conducted which was identical to that conducted earlier. Recorded Countpj and Western music was played at full volume through the existing sound system. Noise levels were 100 dBA in the bar area, 97 dBA in the pool hall. The bar area noise was 2 dBA above that previously measured and the pool room noise was 3 dBA below that previously recorded because of the removal of one of the two speakers. As expected exterior noise levels measured along the railroad track were reduced by I0 to 12 dBA to 39-43 dBA: This is far below the required 50 dBA at the property line. 3. Additional Modifications Required a. Pool Room Ceiling - Complete the installation of the ceiling. : b. Acoustic Door Seals - Adjust as required. c. Rear Door to Patio - During testing this door appeared to be deficient in noise barrier properties. 'This will be upgraded acoustically in accordance with the attached sketch. Note: In the 11-2-95 meeting with Nancy Fong at the Planning Department, Gary Rousa, son of the owner, indicated that all of the above modifications had been completed or were in process. 3 CONCLUSIONS 1. Successful acoustical upgrades could be made at modest cost. 2. Follo,qing installation of these upgrades sound surveys confirmed their success. 3. The presence of the elevated railway constitutes a 13 foot high noise barrier between the Sports Bar and the adjacent homes. This reduces noise in the rear yard by an added 10 dBA. 4. Calculated noise levels based on the above are far below allowable levels and will be inaudible to the adjacent residential neighbors. 4 APPENDIX 1. George Leighton, Consulting Services 2. Noise Survey Data Sheets 3. Calculaiions 4. Brochure - National Council of Acoustical Consultants GEORGE E. LEIGHTON CONSULTANT, NOISE CONTROL CONSULTING SERVICES Mr. Leighton is an acoustical consultant with an impressive list of clients. Some of the more well known are listed below: Chevron Texas Instruments Digital Equipment Textron General Electric 3M Gulf Oil U.S. Navy International Harvester United Technologies He has over 35. years o~ professional engineering experience with over 25 years exclusively in the field of industrial, commercial, and residential noise control: lndus~:rial ~rial experience covers the entire range of noise abatement. He has worked with OEM's (Original Equipment Manufacturers) to design quiet equipment and provide field retrofit kits. He has designed, built and installed noise-control systems involving single items of equipment through entire plants for the metalworking, automotive, construction, printing~ chemical and petrochernical industries. Techniques ranged from initial noise surveys through computer prediction and computer modeling to insure compliance with in-plant and community noise standards.. . 0SHA compliance experience ranges from noise surveys, corrective action to meet OSHA standards, consulting with clients and attorneys under OSHA citations, and negotiating with OSHA to develop abatement plants for ci'ted clients. Commercial His commercial experience covers new construction and corrective action for churches, recreation halls, existing schools, restaurants, factory and office buildings, hospitals, hotels and motels. Code-compliance reports prepared for interior and exterior (community) noise requirements. Mechanical systems analysis provided for new construction and corrective action for existing systems. Residential His residential experience covers new and existing apartments, condominiums~ and private homes. Acoustical Analysis Reports prepared for Title 2t~, building and grading permits. He specializes in analysis and correction of problems in existing buildings. Expert-witness testimony provided in court actions. Typical clients are industrial firms, architects, developers, contractors, homeowners~ attorneys, consulting engineers, schools, city and national governments. 1307-A SOUTH EUCLID STREET oANAHEIM, CA g2802 · (714) 535-8648 FAX (714) 535-864g (800) 570-3666 GEORGE E. LEIGHTON PROFESSIONAL OUALIFICATIONS · BOARD-CERTIFIED ACOUSTICAL CONSULTANT · REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER (MA) · GRADUATE ENGINEER, MASTER'S DEGREE · 35 YEARS' PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING EXPERIENCE · 25 YEARS EXCLUSIVELY IN NOISE CONTROL · MEMBER: Acousficol Society of Americo Institute of Noise Control Engineers Nafionol Council of Acoustical ConsultGnfs Notional Society of Professionol Engineers Society of Testifying Experts Cm e~-~o CORRECTION TO BE SUBT~CTED FROM TOTAL NOISE dB . . . Workchart 6 Nolse Barrier \.. I- '~0 /,--1/.~./ ,/',,.~ " /' ~ 20 , -'17 '/ "//'//' Orr· __ oco 4 ..x,,~;;;,. ..x,~;,,.;.~o '~ -~..-,~ ~ .,--' ~_.,,~ 4o .~ ,,' bJLdO Q-I-- 2 '/ ,<:: -z =.-' ~y.~;,: ' / · I--(_)_J 0 '///z' ;//~ / OZ / _O-- '¢. 05 7 rrrr m~ 04 --< zO ./ ..~..,, / ma,_ bjn- 0.~,/,,, ~: 0,2 - z A F- 0.15 /' F, · ,\\ %~, \\\~ \\r,,,~ \\\\ _ D/R (or R/D) \~, \ - USE WHICH EVER 0,5',~, RATIO IS SMALLER , \, '~, 13 OF GROUND ATTENUATION \ ~,,,~ J2- B R ~ 15 .LESS THAN 1.3 0 '\,~ 17 1.5 to 2.0 -.I \ 2.1 to 5.2 -2 lo 5.o 5.1 or more -4. · \'\ EY-h GEORGE E. LEIGHTON SOUND SURV Location ~/~ ~ Date ~ ', ~' ~ SKETCH 125 I 250 1500 I I I ITEM COr~IMENTS CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA ' ~ STAFF REPORT . DATE: January 24, 1995 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT 93-03 - FINAL SCORF - A request to conduct entertainment consisting of live bands, disc jockeys, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, in the Community Commercial District within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Boulevard S~p_ecific Plan, located at 8411 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 207-571-75. (Continued from January 10, 1996) BACKGROUND: On July 24, 1994, the Commission conducted a public hearing to review the above application. The Commission received public testimony including a petition from the residents of the adjacent townhouse complex who objected to the Entertainment Permit because of nuisance problems such as noise, loud music, loitering activities in the parking lot and along the railroad embankment, etc. The Commission felt that additional information was needed to address the noise impact. The applicant was directed to submit an acoutiscal study that assesses the noise level generated by the proposed entertainment and identifies the necessary mitigation. Copies of the July 24, 1994, staff report and minutes are attached to this repod for reference. A final noise study was completed on November 13, 1995, as shown in Exhibit "C." A chronology of the application is shown in Exhibit "1." ANALYSIS: A. Proposed Entertainment: The applicant proposes to offer entertainment along with the serving of food and alcohol. The proposed entertainment consists of live bands, disc jockeys, and dancing. It will be offered four nights a week from Thursday through Sunday, between the hours of 8 p.m. and 12 midnight. The area for dancing is 110 square feet as shown in Exhibit "G." According to the applicant, rhythm and blues, jazz, and rock and roll are the types of music being offered. "B. ' Neiahborhood Concerns: At the July 27, 1994, public hearing, residents from the adjacent townhouse complex raised their objections to the proposed entertainment. Their concerns were loud music, noise, disturbances from activities in the parking lot, and loitering activities on the railroad embankment. Public hearing notices for this meeting were mailed to the same list of residents. At the preparation of this report, staff received a letter from a resident from the adjacent townhouse complex who raised the same concerns (see Exhibit "B"). The townhouse project (TR 10762) did not prepare a noise study for addressing the noise impact from the railroad tracks because the line was abandoned. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EP 93-03- FINAL SCORE Janua~ 24,1996 Page 2 C. Results of the Noise Study: The City's noise consultant, Mr. George E. Leighton, conducted a site survey on August 27. 1995, between 6 a.m. and 7 a.m. to assess the building construction and measure the noise level inside and outside the building. Recorded music was played inside the building at a sound level of 95-100 Decibels (dBA) to simulate live entertainment so that he could measure the noise level inside the building at various points and outside at three points each at the top of the railroad embankment and at the property line of the adjacent townhouses. Exhibits "C7" and "C13" show the locations where the readings were taken. The highest decibel reading was 55 dBA at Location 3 of the railroad embankment. The City's Noise Standard has a maximum interior noise level of 40 dBA between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., and 45 dBA between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. for residential area, as shown in Exhibit "H." Subsequently, the applicant insulated the attic over the bar and sealed the east-facing door. On October 8, 1995, the consultant measured the noise level again at the same locations. The decibel reading was 43 dBA at L~ation 3. According to the consultant, this affirmed his conclusion ~hat noise-control measures are effective in reducing the ambient noise. The following are additional noise-control measures recommended by him to further reduce the noise level to meet the City's Noise Standards: 1. Add acoustic door seals to all exit doors. (Permit not required) 2. Add interior ceiling with R-11 insulation over the pool room. (A building permit has been issued and work is complete) 3. Isolate speakers from the structure. (Permit not required) 4. Remove the two speakers from the roof ceiling and only hang one speaker down from the roof ceiling. (Permit not required) 5. Upgrade the interior of the windows. (Permit required) 6. Close doors during entertainment. : 7. Limit operating hours. D. Comoatibilitv of Use: At the last public hearing, the Commission raised several concerns with the proposed entertainment at this location. One of the concerns was the close proximity -.. of the site to a residential neighborhood. The City has experienced nuisance problems with similar cases where well-intended mitigation did not work. Another concern was the lack of information on whether the building structure could be modified to attenuate noise, and the types of noise-control measures. A third concern was to determine what mitigation would be successful in preventing the loitering and other unwanted activities on the railroad embankment which would negatively impact the adjacent residents. The results of the noise study show that noise-control measures done to the interior of the building can effectively reduce the loud music and noise to an insignificant level that has negligible impact to the adjacent residential neighborhood. However, noise from loitering or other unwanted activities within the parking lot and on the railroad embankment could still be a negative impact to them. A possible control measure to address this concern is to require PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EP 93-03-FINAL SCORE January 24,1996 Page 3 a solid wall along the properly line that abuts the railroad embankment. However, staff believes that a solid wall on one hand may deter the unwanted activities but on the other hand may invite graffiti inside and outside the wall, which creates another neighborhood problem. Staff recommends that a decorative wrought iron fence with dense shrub massing and trees could deter someone from getting onto the railroad embankment and reduce the opportunity for graffiti and unwanted activities. Another control measure to address the loitering activities is to have security personnel stationed outside to patrol the parking lot. Limiting the hours and days for entertainment is another control measure that could reduce the intensity of the use. The combination of all these control measures should address the concerns raised by the adjacent residents. The success of these measures will depend upon the management of the business. E. Public Safety Concerns: A concern with any entedainment use is the potential for an increase in the need for fire and p_olice resources. Based on the floor plan. the Fire Department established the maximum number of occupants allowed in the bar, restaurant, and dance areas to be 44 and the area designed for pool tables to be 12. If the number of occupants exceeds the above maximum, then the applicant shall obtain a separate permit and approval from the Fire Depadment Comments and records from the Police Department regarding this site were not available at the time of preparation of this report. Staff will present the information at the meeting. F. Site and Buildinq Improvements: Staff met with the applicant and the consultant on November 2, 1995, to discuss the noise study and the ongoing interior building improvements. The applicant acknowledged that he did the interior upgrades on his own with the understanding that he may have the risk of not receiving an approval for the Entertainment Permit and the consequence of additional cost for redoing the upgrades if they were not done according to City codes or for complying with further noise control measures. In addition to the interior upgrades, the applicant resuffaced (added a slurry seal coat) and restriped the parking lot, as recommended in the July 27, 1994, staff report. Staff commended him for his effort to address the property maintenance issues, but the recommended improvements were intended to be subjected to City Planner review and approval for compliance with the current codes. Staff found that the dimensions: of the parking spaces and the width of the drive aisle do not meet current standards. Other improvements include a wrought-iron fenced patio area for serving food and alcohol at the north side of the building and two satellite dishes at the northwest side of the building which were not approved. Staff recommends that the applicant submit a Minor Development · . --. Review application to show all the improvements to date so that staff can verify that they are in compliance with City codes. This is placed as a condition of approval. G. The Servinq of Food and Alcohol in an Outdoor Patio Area: Related to the Entertainment Permit application is a Conditional Use Pei'mit (CUP 93-39) application for the building expansion and the outdoor patio area for serving food and liquor, This application has an incomplete status as of March 10, 1994. In his letter dated December 20.1995, the applicant requested a withdrawal from a CUP application because he is not pursuing the expansion of the building but requested the serving of food. beer, and wine in the fenced patio area. The serving of food outside is considered ancillary to the restaurant use but the serv ng of alcohol, whether beer, wine, or distilled liquor, is considered as an expansion of the bar use. This expansion would still require a Conditional Use Permit. The concern with serving alcohol PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EP 93-03-FINAL SCORE JanuaW 24,1996 Page 4 outside is the increase in the nuisance problems such as noise that may negatively impact the adjacent residents. Staff does not recommend the serving of alcohol outside because of the close proximity of the site to the residential neighborhood. Outdoor seating may increase the likelihood of doors being left open during entertainment which would exacerbate the noise problem. H. Conclusion and Mitic~ation: Based on the above analysis, staff believes that there are control measures that could minimize and reduce the potential nuisance problems to an acceptable level. These control measures are as follows: additional noise-control measures done to the interior of the building as recommended by the City's noise consultant; adding decorative fencing and dense landscaping along the property line that abuts the railroad embankment to prevent unwanted loitering activities; limiting the days and hours of entertainment to 12 midnight on Friday and Saturday only; providing security personnel inside the building and outside in the parking lot during the days and hours of entertainment; no serving of alcohol outside on the patio. at all times; an~'no serving of food or non-alcoholic beverages in the outdoor patio area after 9 p.m.; and, establishing a maximum occupancy of 44 persons in the restaurant, bar and dancing areas and 12 persons for the pool table area. FACTS FOR FINDING: The Commission must make all of the following findings in order to approve this application: A. That the conduct of the establishment or the granting of the application would not be contrary to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. B. That the premises or establishment is not likely to be operated in an illegal, improper, or disorderly manner. C. That the applicant, or any person associated with him as principal or partner or in a position or capacity involving partial or total control over the conduct of the business for which such permit is sought to be issued, has not been convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving the presentation, exhibition, or performance of any obscene show of any kind or of a felony or of any crime involving moral turpitude or has not had any approval, permit, or license issued in conjunction with the sale of alcohol or the provisions of entertainment revoked within the preceding five years. D. That the granting of the application would not create a public nuisance. · .- E.' That the normal operation of the premises would not interfere with the peace and quiet of any surroundings residential neighborhood. F. That the applicant has not made any false, misleading, or fraudulent statement of material fact in the required application. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to the adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the project including those residents who signed the July 18, 1994, petition to the Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EP 93-03-FINAL SCORE Janua~ 24,1996 Page 5 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a hearing to receive public testimony. If the Commission concurs with staff's analysis and findings, including the control measures, then approval of Entertainment Permit 93-03 through the adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. Respectfully submitted, BB:NF/jfs ...... Attachments: Exhibit "A" Applicant;s letter dated December 20, 1995. Exhibit "B" Resident's letter Exhibit "C" Noise Study Exhibit "D" July 27, 1994, Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes Exhibit "E" Location Map Exhibit "F" Site Plan Exhibit "G" Floor Plan Exhibit "H" Residential Noise Standards Exhibit "1" Chronology Resolution of Approval with Conditions at no time during the discussions regarding the Olive Garden Restaurant had been any such condition discussed. He said so far as he was aware, this the first time they were being made aware of such a future He noted that Terra Vista Town Center and this development are owned by different entities, even though they are both related to Lewis Homes. He the appropriate time to deal with the matter would be when the owner of sta Town Center proposes development of the northwest corner of the center. Mr. James agreed the potential condition for the southbound right-turn lane had not been Iht up until the technical review comments on this project had been to the applicant. Chairman Barker asked if Mager was now aware that future development on the Terra Vista Town Center will trigger such a condition. Mr. Mager affirmed that he was. Chairman Barker again closed the blic hearing. He said he was not comfortable .w~th the condition being ked to~is project. He felt the minutes would provide a sufficient paper ~il. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by o issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Use Permit 93-49 with modifications to delete Planning Condition No. and Engineering Condition No. 7 and require City Planner approval of the ~cape and landscape along Building 9 frontage prior to the issuance of the .cate of Occupancy. Commissioner Lumpp requested that the traffic study .red in Engineering Condition No. 8 look at the traffic circulation as it re zes to the master plan including the west side of Spruce. The motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER, NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried The Planning Commission recessed from 9:10 p.m. to 9:25 p.m. E. ENTERTAINMENT pERMIT 93-03 - FINAL SCORE - A request to conduct entertainment consisting of live bands, disc jockey, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, in the Community Commercial District within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 8411 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 207-571-75. Brad Buller, City planner, stated that he had placed before the Commission and given to the applicant a copy of the minutes from the city Council Meeting of Planning Commission Minutes -14- July 27, 1994 p.. - · May 4, 1994. He observed that following discussions on Sam's Place and Babe's Club 66, Mayor Pro Tem Buquet had suggested that anytime there is a sale of alcohol at a business or an entertainment permit, the matter should go before the full City Council for approval. He noted that Council Member Gutierrez had concurred with the suggestion. Mr. Bullet said he was bringing this to the attention of the Planning Commission, applicant, and residents to show that the City Council is seriously concerned about where these uses occur and any neighborhood concerns. He stated that under current City Codes, the Planning Commission has the authority to approve, deny, or approve with conditions the application before them. He suggested that the Commission might consider taking no formal action and instead referring the matter up to the City Council with a resolution recommending the Commission's position. Chairman Barker stated he had read the minutes and he appreoiated the concern of the City Council. He said he also understood Mr. Buller's desire to follow the direction of the City Council; but that it was his opinion that because no changes have yet been made to the code, it is currently the obligation of the Planning Commission to act on the matter. He noted he had also discussed the matter with the Mayor a few minutes before the meeting when Mr. Stout had happened by And that the Mayor had been of the same opinion. Chairman Barker said the commission would hear the matter. He said that although the Commission could then either make the decision as they had.made such decisions in the past or simply forward with a recommendation to the City Council, he believed it was the Planning Commission's duty under current regulations to fulfill their obligation to hear the matter and make a decision. He said the matter could always be appealed to the City Council by anyone, including the City Council. Commissioner Melcher shared Chairman Barker's opinion and felt the applicant was entitled to an action by the Planning Commission. He commented he was entirely amenable to referring the matter up to the Council when and if the City Code is changed. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed the Commission should proceed as before. Commissioner McNiel concurred that the Commission is charged with that responsibility until the Code is changed. Commissioner Lumpp concurred. ~ Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and indicated that an additional letter of opposition had been received following preparation of the staff report and a copy had been given to the Commissioners and the applicant. Commissioner Lumpp asked if there had been any problems related to police activity when the business operated as The Cub. Ms. Fong responded that she had not asked the Police to go back that far for records. Commissioner Melcher observed that Paragraph 3.a of the resolution states that the Commission finds "That the conduct of the establishment or the granting of Planning commission Minutes -15- July 27, 1994 · the application would not be contrary to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare." He reported that Ms. Fong had stated that language is directly out of the Entertainment Permit. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Greg Dorst, attorney, 818 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, introduced Mr. and Mrs. Rousa, the owners, and their son Garry Rousa, the manager. He said the Rousas are part of the community and they have 38 years of experience in the hospitality bar/restaurant business. He presented a letter from the Executive Director of the Boys & Girls Clubs of the Inland Empire indicating that the Final Score had donated proceeds and food to the clubs. He said they wish to work with the neighbors. He stated they have spent a considerable amount of time going over the problems and they have some solutiong. He noted that staff had also proposed appropriate conditions of approval. He said the main concerns raised have to do with noise. He acknowledged that staff is correct that mitigations to contain the noise inside the business will not work if doors and windows are left open. He said the establishment currently does not have outside security personnel assigned to the parking lot. He pointed out the conditions proposed by staff call for parking lot security and he felt approval of the entertainment permit would make the situation better because there would be supervision in the parking lot and supervision of the doors. He said the permit was also conditioned to cease entertainment at midnight and he felt the crowd would leave earlier and that would also cut down on the late night noise. He observed that sound attenuation measures would be required with approval of the entertainment permit and he proposed a second set of entry doors on the east side to act as a buffer zone. He hoped that the residents and condominium owners would go to either he or the Rousas to discuss any concerns. He pointed Out that the entertainment permit can be revoked at any time if it is found to be a nuisance. He felt approval Of the entertainment permit will give the City control over the establishment where such control does not now exist, but would also allow the Rousas to utilize their property to its fullest extent. Commissioner Lumpp questioned the occupancy rating of the facility. Mr. Dorst thought it is currently 52. He noted the proposal is for 44 people in the dance area and 12 in the pool table area. Commissioner Lumpp observed that Mr. Dorst had proposed another set of doors on the east side and he questioned when those doors would be installed. Mr. Dorst replied it would be prior to entertainment being offered. Commissioner Lumpp questioned how the applicant plans to comply with Condition No. 6, which calls for the restriction of parking in certain parking spaces. Mr. Dorst responded that currently the trash dumpsters are in that particular location and a structure will be built for the dumpsters. He said the area would be blocked off at all times. He indicated the Final Score does not need that parking area and they proposed blocking it off with a low railing or a chain. Planning Commission Minutes -16- July 27, 1994 'Bob Fleming, 8434 Cedarwood Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he is the Vice President of the Board of Directors for the Homeowners' Association and he was speaking for his neighbors and the majority of the association. He commented that the attorney had said they had been in business for 38 years, but they had opened the establishment and provided live entertainment without obtaining the City's approval. He said the music went until 2:00 a.m. and rattled the walls of his condominium which is located 100 feet away with a railroad embankment between. He said their clientele tends to drive motorcycles and they tend to sit in the parking lot and rev up their engines when they are leaving. He felt the residents should not be disturbed by the noise emanating from the establishment just as contractors have to comply with certain regulations regarding noise during certain hours. He said there have also been problems with loitering on the railroad embankment. He stated that one of his neighbors had distributed a letter in the neighborhood regarding tonight's meeting and when the manager of the club heard about it, he called her up and used profanity. He felt that did not show a willingness to work with the neighbors. He thought the doors are left open because the ventilation is poor. He said the Homeowners' Association does not want live entertainment to be permitted during any hours. He did not feel it would be physically possible to soundproof the building. __ Commissioner Melcher asked if the building had been a bar the whole time that Mr. Fleming lived there. Mr. Fleming responded affirmatively. Commissioner Melcher asked if the primary problems had occurred when there was entertainment. Mr. Fleming said that was correct. He said there is a normal nuisance from the bar, but the main problems have been with live entertainment. He said that he had called the police and the police had been out there several times in response to noise complaints prior to the cessation of live entertainment. Gary Johnson, 11626 Mr. Hood Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he has known the Rousas for about two years during which time he has patronized their establishment. Me said they have taken security measures during the last three months, such as installing surveillance cameras that show the.parking lot. He said the manager does not allow people to get drunk or diSorderly. He felt the entertainment permit should be approved so that young people would have a place to go at night. Steve Scharry, 8414 Cedarwood Lane, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that he lives in the condominium project south of the bar. He commented that all of the bedrooms in the complex that face the bar are the second and third bedrooms and are typically occupied by children. He did not feel it is good to have children looking out their bedroom windows and seeing the type of activities that go on in the parking lot of a bar. He stated there had been a shooting incident in the parking lot several years ago and one of the stray bullets went through his neighbor's bedroom window when young children were sleeping in the bedroom at the time. He thought that the current owner has made attempts to get rid of the biker crowd but he felt that live entertainment would be a hazard to public safety and morals. Planning Commission Minutes -17- July 27, 1994 'Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Commissioner McNiel asked when the condominiums were built. Mr. Buller replied they were built in the early 1980s. Commissioner McNiel stated that it has been fairly consistent practice to give business people an opportunity to. operate while retaining the right to withdraw such permission based upon whether there have been sufficient complaints, police reports, etc. He said the matter could also be potentially reviewed by the City Council. He stated he understood the concerns of the residents and he felt them to be valid. He thought the vast majority of potential complaints had been considered and attempts had been made to provide mitigations for those problems. He said the tragedy has-been that in the past, the City has too many times experienced problems. He supported the application- Commissioner Tolstoy stated he supports the opening of a sports bar as it provides a service to the community. He said that in recent entertainment permit applications, the City has looked at the ~.ffer between the use and the neighborhood. He observed that years ago a bar was allowed to operate in a neighborhood center quite close to residences and it has not worked. He said several other entertainment permits were recently approved on the basis that they were well buffered from the neighborhood. He did not feel this particular location is sufficiently buffered from residences and he therefore hesitated to vote for it. commissioner Melcher felt that both Commissioners McNiel and Tolstoy had presented compelling arguments. He did not feel the Commission had sufficient information upon which to base its decision. He thought the proposed mitigation measures need to be thought Out more carefully and he felt an acoustical report should be prepared to be sure that proposed soundproofing measures would work. He said he had visited the site and gone up to the railroad tracks and was promptly apprehended by Garry Rousa because he had seen him on the video system. Commissioner Melcher felt that was proof that the video system works. He thought the Rousas want to make the project work. He felt an acoustical study should address what would be needed so there would be no additional noise heard at the condominium project .and the study should consider whatever measures were built into the co~dominium project because at the time the condos were built the railroad was operating. He said he was not prepared to act this evening. Commissioner Lumpp stated he had always been in favor of allowing business people to try to make a living in the community. He felt the applicant's proposal to install a set of double doors should be further investigated through a noise study which looks at the interior and the exterior. He was not convinced that the benefits of interior mitigations would not be negated by a tendency to leave doors open because of a lack of proper ventilation. He agreed that there was not enough information to support the project. He suggested that staff look at the possibility of installing a fence that would prevent people from climbing up or loitering on the railroad tracks. He said he did not want to be in a position of having staff spend money and time to try to revoke a permit because the applicant has not complied with conditions. planning Commission Minutes -18- July 27, 1994 · Chairman Barker said he does not have a lot of sympathy for people who move next to an existing condition and then are upset. He stated this situation is one where there is a pre-existing non-conforming use which has caused some problems through the years, but now the Commission was being asked to add entertainment which may exacerbate the problem. Be did not feel the proposed attenuation measures are sufficient to handle the problem. He said it will be difficult to satisfy him because he has experienced the soars of watching the Commission and City Council go out of their way to attempt to make something work which will not work. He stated he will have to be shown that attenuations could be made so the expanded intensity of use would not create an increased irritant to the neighborhood. Commissioner Melcher asked if it is truly an existing non-conforming use. Mr. Buller stated it is an existing non-conforming site development structure and therefore a conditional use permit is required for expansion. Chairman Barker said it was something that would not have been approved but it was already built before the City was formed. Commissioner Melcher asked if a sports bar is a permitted use on the site. Mr. Buller replied it would be a conditionally permitted use. Commissioner Melcher stated he was not convinced of the adequacy of the sound attenuation measures. He said he had been told by the applicant that there are further plans for the development of the site and he felt an acoustic study should be necessary for not only an entertainment permit but also any additional changes. He felt that sound is a very specialized area. He commented that it was noisy when he was up on the railroad tracks not because of the bar, but because of Foothill Boulevard. He noted that the railroad line has been abandoned and in the future the berm may be removed and the land may be developed. He felt a more comprehensive approach to solving the problem is needed. He noted the berm was constructed to elevate the trains to get over Foothill Boulevard and he thought part of the problem is currently solved by the berm but it should not be relied on to solve the problem as the berm may be removed one day because the railroad is abandoned. Chairman Barker stated that a berm will not stop sound, it will only ~edirect it. He stated he was not at all sure that he would ever be satisfied that the noise could be adequately mitigated. Commissioner Lumpp stated he was not ready to approve or deny the project. He suggested that the matter be continued until the conditional use permit application and a sound study are ready for the Commission's consideration. chairman Barker asked if the project were to be denied without prejudice, if the applicant would have to pay a second application fee if they wished to resubmit the project. Mr. Buller confirmed that a second fee would be required. He suggested asking the applicants if they would be willing to continue the matter until the study is completed. Planning Commission Minutes -19- July 27, 1994 · Commissioner Tolstoy stated that when he visited the bar, he talked to Mr. Rousa and he indicated there were future plans including a patio, enlarging the area with the pool tables, and placing a double door on the east side. He said he then talked to Garry Rousa and his plans were a little different. He said it appeared they may not be sure what their plans really are. He felt a patio could certainly present some noise problems. He thought an acoustical study should include what their plans are. He said the building has been expanded several times and he felt some parts of the building may have to be treated differently. Chairman Barker reopened the public hearing. Mr. Dorst stated there had been live entertainment back in the 1960s and that had been approved by the County. He said that was why the Rousas thought that entertainment was a permitted use. He commented that the people who spoke in opposition to the entertainment permit were addressing problems that currently exist and those problems will not improve unless the entertainment permit is approved because conditions would then be imposed. He questioned what noise level was expected When the condominium project was approved. He said at that point a train was running and. Foothill Boulevard is a very noisy street. He said he did not know if the entertainment permit would create a noise level that would be above that expectation level. He asked what levels would be set. He requested that the commission approve the permit, keep a watchful ear to see if problems develop, and stop the use if there are problems. Chairman Barker stated the applicant was advocating a change in the status quo and the Commission would need to be convinced that taking such an action would not have a negative effect. Be said the majority of the Commissioners had indicated that the proposed conditions are insufficient to make them comfortable in making those findings. Mr. Dorst noted that Planning Condition No. 5 calls for sound proofing and indicates that whatever is necessary must be done before commencement of entertainment. Chairman Barker said he was not willing to dump the matter on staff. Commissioner Lumpp stated he was also concerned about the the possibility that the air conditioning does not operate properly and the doors are propped open for ventilation. Mr. Dorst said that the doors have been closed in the recent heat wave, which would indicate that the ventilation is adequate. He said that could also be investigated. He proposed that the matter be continued to a time when they can present sound attenuation measures based on a competent professional study. Mr. Bullet indicated that staff may have the acoustic study validated by an independent consultant at the applicant's expense. He suggested that the matter be tabled until the study is complete and verified. He said the matter would then be readvertised- Planning Commission Minutes -20- July 27, 1994 · Mr. Fleming stated the condominiums are not sound proofed and have single pane glass. He said the train had only served a lumber yard and went by only once a week. He stated the problems had not existed until live entertainment was brought in. Commissioner McNiel stated he supported Commissioner Lumpp's suggestion for a fence to restrict access to the railroad tracks. Chairman Barker again closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Lumpp, seconded by McNiel, to table Entertainment Permit 93-03 to allow the applicant to prepare an acoustical study. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried Chairman Barker stated the application had been tabled to allow the applicant an opportunity to provide additional information. He said that when the matter is rescheduled for Planning Commission consideration, it would be readvertised and a public hearing notice would again be mailed to the same group as before. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-16 - AIRTOUCH CELLULAR - A request to construct ~ ~O-foot cellular antenna adjacent to an existing building in the General ~trial District (Subarea 14) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, at 9272 Hyssop Drive - APN: 229-283-12. Nancy Fong, ~r Planner, presented the staff report and suggested that the resolution be ~d to require the installation of street trees. chairman Barker e public hearing. Marie Landall, D. E. Architects, 160 Newport Center Drive, #112, Newport Beach, stated they prepared to comply with the conditions of approval including the street ~ Commissioner McNiel asked why the ~s to be 90 feet tall. Ms. Landall replied that is the minimum !tional height to adequately pass signals to neighboring cel sites. Commissioner Lumpp asked if the applicant would ob to changing the gate to another material from the proposed chain link gate redwood slats. Ms. Landall felt that would not be a problem. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public Lring. Planning commission Minutes -21- July 27, 94 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT V DATE: JUly 27, 1994 TO: Chairman and Meters of the Planning Co~ission ' FROM: Brad Buller, City planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ENTERTAINME~ pEtIT 93-03 - FIN~ SCO~ - A request to conduct entertainment consisting of live ~nds, disc jockey, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, in the Co~unity Commercial District within Subarea 1 of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at 84~1 Foothill Boulevard - APN: 207-571-75. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: .... A. Site Characteristics: The site is located at the junction of Foothill Boulevard and San Bernardino Road. It contains the Final Score building, several structures such as carports and garages, and an office for an auto repair shop- The existing improvements are non-conforming because the ultimate public improvements are missing and the on-site improvements, setbacks, percentage of on-site landscaping, and parking are not up to current standards. B. Surrounding Land Use: West of the site is vacant and zoned for commercial uses- North of the site is the Sycamore Inn and zoned for commercial uses- South of the site is a railroad track which is no longer in use- Beyond the south side of the tracks are townhouses and single family homes- C. proposed Entertainment: The applicant proposes to offer entertainment along with the serving of food and drinks. The proposed entertainment consists of live bands, disc jockeys, and dancing. It will be -offered four nights a week from Thursday through Sunday, between the ~ours of 8 p.m. and 12 midnight. The area for dancing is 110 square feet- According to the applicant, rhythm and blues, jazz, and rock and roll are the types of music being offered. D. parking Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square parking Spaces Spaces of Use Foota~e Ratio Required provided Final Score 2,400 1/100 24 Auto Repair 3 bays 2/bay 6 __ TOTAL 30 41 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EP 93-03 - FINAL SCORE July 27, 1994 Page 2 ANALYSIS: A. General: According to the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for the operation of a bar. Final Score (formerly The Cub) does not have a CUP because the business was established prior to the City's incorporation and the adoption of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Since the applicant would like to expand the building and add a patio area for outdoor seating, besides offering entertainment, he has submitted a Conditional Use Permit as well. Because the application has been deemed incomplete, the applicant has requested that the Entertainment Permit be forwarded to the Commission for review first. He stated that he intends to pursue the CUP and will submit revised development plans in the near future. B. Compatibility of Use: In reviewing this application, the primary issue identified by 'staff is the compatibility of the proposed entertainment with the-surrounding land uses. South of the site, beyond the abandoned railroad line, is all residential uses including single family and townhouses. The proposed entertainment could negatively impact these residents. LOud music and noise from within the building and loitering activities in the parking lot, in combination with the likely late evening and early morning hours of a night club business, will impact these residents. Possible mitigations to the impacts noted above include: improving the sound attenuation of the building, adding inside and outside security personnel, and limiting the hours of operation. The effectiveness of these mitigations is largely dependent on the property and business management. Building improvements for additional sound attenuation could be negated by an open door or window. The City's Code Enforcement personnel could monitor this to ensure compliance and failure to comply would be cause for revocation of the entertainment permit. C- Neighborhood Concerns: In May Of 1993, the City received a letter collectively signed by several homeowners of the townhouse 'complex complaining about the loud music coming from the Final Score on the weekends. In addition, the City continued to receive complaints whenever entertainment was conducted. As a result of Code Enforcement action, the owner of the Final Score agreed to cease offering entertainment until an Entertainment Permit is approved by the City. Since July of 1993, neither the City nor the Police Department have received any more complaints. After the mailing of the public hearing notices for the application, staff received several letters, as well as a petition from some of the residents at the southerly townhouse complex, objecting to the Entertainment Permit. Concerns raised relate to their experience with the previous entertainment including: loud music, loud noises, and other disturbances from activities in the parking lot in the late evening hours (see attached letters and petition, Exhibit "D"). They felt that the granting of the Entertainment Permit would result in having more of the same nuisance problems. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EP 93-03 - FINAL SCORE July 27, 1994 Page 3 D. Public Safety Issues: Another concern with the entertainment use is the potential for an increase in the need for police and fire resources. The Fire Department stated that they have not responded to any calls for service at the business. Based on the floor plan, the Fire Department established the maximum number of Occupants allowed in the bar, restaurant, and dance area to be 44 and the area designed for pool tables to be 12. If the number of occupants exceeds the above maximum, then the applicant shall obtain a separate permit and approval from the Fire Department. Records from the Police Department indicate that they have responded a total of four times to this location from January of this year to the present. The Police reports filed range from battery to robbery to public drunkenness. During this period of time, the Final Score did not have live entertainment. E. Parking and Other Site Improvements: Based on the floor area of the Final Score and the number of bays for the auto repair shop, the site exceeds the minimum number of required parking spaces (see Parking Calculations section of this report)- However, a field inspection of the site indicated that the parking lot is in need of maintenance, such as restriping the parking spaces, a new slurry seal coat, parking lot lights for safety and security, etc. Staff also found two trash bins within the parking lot which are unscreened. These recommended improvements have been placed as conditions of approval in the attached Resolution. F- Conclusion and Mitigation Measures: Based On the above analysis, staff believes that there are mitigation measures that could minimize and alleviate the potential nuisance problems to an acceptable level. These mitigation measures are listed as conditions of approval in the attached Resolution. To name a few, some of the mitigation measures are: limiting the hours of entertainment to 12 midnight for Thursday through Saturday; providing interior sound attenuation; prohibiting patrons from parking in spaces closest to the residences during the evening hours; p~oviding security personnel in the parking lot for nights that trey have entertainment; and establishing a maximum occupancy of 44 persons in the restaurant, bar, and dancing areas and ~2 persons for the pool table area. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: The Commission must make all of the following findings in order to approve this application: A. That the conduct of the establishment or the granting of the application would not be contrary to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. B. That the premises or establishment is not likely to be operated in an illegal, improper, or disorderly manner. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EP 93-03 - FINAL SCORE July 27, 1994 Page 4 C. That the applicant, or any person associated with him as principal or partner or in a position or capacity involving partial or total control over the conduct of the business for which such permit is sought to be issued, has not been convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving the presentation, exhibition, or performance of any obscene show of any kind or of a felony or of any crime involving moral turpitude or has not had any approval, permit, or license issued in conjunction with the sale of alcohol or the provisions of entertainment revoked within the preceding five years. D. That the granting of the application would not create a bublic nuisance. E. That the normal operation of the premises would not interfere with the peace and quiet of any surrounding residential neighborhood. F. That the applicant has not made any false, misleading, or fraudulent statement. of material fact in the required application. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to the adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff reco~nends that the Planning Commission conduct a hearing to receive public testimony. If the Commission concurs with staff's analysis and findings, including the mitigation measures, then approval of Entertainment Permit 93-03 through adoption of the attached Resolution would be in order. Respectf ly submitted, BB:NF/jfS Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Floor Plan Exhibit "D" - Letters and Petition From Residents Exhibit "E" - Entertainment Permit Application Resolution of Approval ~AN~IHG DIVISI~I Planning Division aJjJULI 91994 city of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 July 18, 1994 This letter is in follow up to my telephone conversation with Nancy Fong on this date reporting a harassment telephone call made to me from Garry Rausa, an owner of the Pinal Score bar located at 8411 Foothill Bivd., Rancho Cucamonga, CA. As one of the many concerned homeowners of Rancho Villas located to the south of this bar, I had recently distributed, to the home owners in Rancho Villas, a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing dated July 6, 1994 from the Planning Commission as I was told that it had only been mailed to residents living within 300 feet of the Final Score. My neighbors living on Cedarwood Lane, my husband, and I felt it was our duty to alert the other residents of our complex of the fact that the Final Score was applying for an Entertainment Permit 93-03. We had been greatly disturbed last year when this bar had live entertainment, without a permit, and we did not-want to have to put up with this nuisance again. I, ' therefore, with the approval of Nancy Fong and the agreement of my neighbors distributed a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing along with a letter of explanation from myself. As I left these letters with the homeowners in our complex I also asked them to sign. a petition against the owners of the Final Score being grant- ed an Entertainment Permit. If no one was home I taped these two letters to the windows at their entrances. Sunday, July 18, 1994, approximately 3:15 p.m. I received a phone call from Garry Rausa of Final Score. He was very intimidating with his tone of voice, four letter word language, and his message to me. He told me that a Rancho Villas homeowner, who is a cus- tomer of the bar, gave him the letter I had left on his property. He told me that I had no business leaving such a letter telling people that he has a bad place, if I could leave a letter at the doors, then so could he and he just might do that. He went on and on without my being able to get hardly a word in. He said that he has a lawyer and I should get my lawyer and we could get together and fight it out. He said he is going to show up at the ~ublic hearing with 200 patrons of his bar to stand up for him and that I had better watch out. Believe me by the time I could get through to tell him that I did not care to listen to him and tell him I was hanging up, I was extremely nervous and upset. Our bedroom faces the rear of the Final Score and I envisioned having rocks thrown at our house during the night as Garry Rausa was that intimitating to me. I am waiting for the police to come to my home today to make out a report on this harassment matter. 8438 Cedarwood Lane Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Copies Letter to homeowners from Shirley Kovar, July 13, 1994. Enclosed: Notice of Public Hearing, Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission, n~ANNING DIVISI~I Js3L I 9 1994 The attached letter from the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission, dated July 6, 1994, regarding the Final Score bar filing f6r. a live entertainment license is being distributed, by me, with the permission of the Project Planning Coordinator, Nancy Rong. This letter was mailed to the homeowners within a 300 foot radius of the Final Score bar located at 8411 Foothill Blvd., Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Some of you will remember that a petition went around on May 21, 1993 due to the fact that this bar was having live music entertainment, which was very disturbing to the homeowners of Rancho Villas, especially those living closest to the bar. It was learned that the owners of this bar were providing live entertainment without a proper entertainment permit from the city. At that time the City Code Enforcement Department was very cooperative, and succeeded in stopping the live entertainment at the Final Score bar. Now it is time_for us all to rally round the~.cause again. Please sign the petition that I will be coming by with,,o~ ~m~ft2 ~Yd~/ to sign it, should I miss you at your home. But o something on your own -- call the Planninq Division at 909-989-1861, AND/OR write a letter to the Planninq Division with your objections. IMPORTANT:ATTEND THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE CIVIC CENTER JULY 27, 1994 7:00 P.M. If we are to succeed in having the live entertainment permit turned down by the city, we must show our disapproval. Nancy Fong told me that the more imput she receives from the homeowners, the better our cause will be served. You can take all three steps: CALL, WRITE, ATTEND THE PUBLIC HEARING. Keep in mind, that having this type of bar so close to our complex could very well lower the value of our properties. Homeowner - Shirley Kovar . , .t Dated: July 13, 1994 98 -o6 8 RANCHO VILlaS HOME O[~'NERS SIGNATURE SHEET. WE HEREBY VOICE OUR OBJECTIONS TO ~N ENTERTAI'~Ir'~ENT FER~'[I'I 93-03 HEARING TO BE HELD ON JULY 27, 1994 AT THE R~NCHO CUCAM~MOCucAMONGA CIVIC CENTER. ~ L~'IC~t2,/ ~{~.~,C~I Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 / / · [ RANCHO vI! S HONE OWNERS BiGNATURE SEEEl' BEING GRANTED 'PO FINAL BCORE_, 84ii FOOTHILL BLVD. CUCAMONGAS, CA. THIS 15 IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF PUB ~C] HEARING TO BE HELD ON JULY 27, 1994 AT THE RANCHO CU~ 994 ~ , ,' t~.7,'F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 L~0~ ~Ov~ DR' Rancho Cucamonoa, CA q~7~n .... i~ 3~ F~y~77 ~Y{~C ~. Rancho CucamonOa, CA 91730 Rancho Cucamonqa~ CA 91730 ./7. ,-,., H~. ~~Jao~ ~L~J Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RANCHO vII 3 HOME OWNERS SIGNATURE SHEET. CIrr~r~CilV~O CUCAMONGAS, CA. THIS 1S IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF P L~, HEARING TO BE HELD ON JULY 27, 1994 AT THE RANCHO CUCA~ Dated: July 18, 1994 RANCHO VIi 3 HOME OWNERS SIGNATURE SHEET. WE HEREBY ~,ulCE OUR OBJECTlOIS TO .~N EN'FER'[.-',INNENT FER~H~/.".9~F~I~yED BEING GRANTED j~0 FINAL'~C6~' ~ ff' FO0T~LE"~L~D .'~'~A~d~'6~,~.,~HO Cuc~uo~o~ CUCAMONGAS] CA. THIS lS I~ ~'ESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD ON JULY 27, 1994 AT THE RANCHO CUCA~NG~Hr, .~. ~L'>J'-~ - , ~ /~ . ' ~'; " ' ( Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 'q " L Dated: JuZy 18, 1994 RANCHO VII 3 HONE O;';NERS ~iGNATURE SHEET BEING GRANTED I;0 FTg~L"~C6~',"~.'iEi Fooq'nri, L BLVD., R.A~Qfi~?'~F~Z~6 CUCA~%NGA CUCAMONGAS, dA. ~Hi~ Y~ ~ ~ESPONSE q'O THE ~OTICE OF CIVIC CENTER. ~ j~:' ~ U 1994 ,~1~ .,/"?L (.L,6'C~' "'),},I ;:: \__.,rV -7 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 L~3 _~.6,SC/t._~.,~'.,~, Rancho Cucamonqar CA 91730 ~/~z~//~J~/~_,,:~z, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 __ ~D~3C C~c~a,"~c'oc~ I,c~ Rancho Cuc onga, CA 91730 ~ ..... ,/' / -. ~ ~ ~ ~,~,~ ~,~, Dated: July 18, 1994 -- nECEIVED -- .~,ngelo R. &Emily V. Kardel CITy OF FtANCHO CUCA~ON~ 8430 Cedewood Lane PLANNING DIVISI~I Rancho Cucamonga. CA 19 july 18, 1994 Pla~ing Division City of R~cho Cuc~onga P.O. Box 807 Rancho CucanDnga, CA 91729 RE: ENTERT.~N~IENT PE~X~ 93-03 - ~N'AL SCORE .~ homeox~ers. we ~e ve~, concome& if ~he Final Score were to receive ~ ent¢~aiment pemit. We ~k that the city of hncho Cuc~on~'s PInning Commission not ~ant a petit b~ed upon previom problems =d compta~ made a~amst ~e Final Score. ~ 1992 ~d 1993 ~e Fml Score beg= ~ving live entem~ent, we wo~d l~e to ad~ess the fact ~at ~ey did not have a pemdt. but the ci~' pemitted them to continue despite the nmerom compla~ts from most of hameo~ers on Ce~vocd L~e. The m~ic berg played w~ loud eno~ to ca~e vibratiom ~ic~es moving) to o~ walls. The Final Score is located o~y 100 t~et ~om ~'o of o~ be~ocms (See Pict~es Enclosed). Even wi~ our windows closed. television viewing or sleeping w~ ~possible ~til after 2 o'ctock ~ the rooming. This went not only on weekends. but alsu d~ing the week. t~ "b~nd bre~", we have also obse~'ed parrore smok~ m~i~na ~der ~e pine tree. sou~ of the prope~~ line. We have had conffon~tio~ with some ot'these patrons several t~es. Occ~ionally there have been g~ho~ (tkecrackers?) ~d loud prof~ty he~d. We ~ve been irfomed. but ca=or subst~tiate about ~gs and prostitution on ~e premises, ~is m itself is a ve~ seno~ problem. In an a~empt to placate the homeowners on Ced~'ood L=e. one o( ~e co-o~ers of the F~al Score ~. Rata) b~ plac~ notices of upcoming Fml Score events into o~ mailboxes. ~ese notices also requested the homeo~ers to call ~he F~al Score ~ not the police if the m~ic were mo loud. Phone calls to the Final Score about the lou~ess were i~ored, so we cont~ued to call ~e police, Nk. h~a also approache&'~vited homeo~ers over to the Final Score br a &~ in his effo~ to show m ~e sold prooting ~at he claimed w~ ~talled. We do not balieve =y homeowner obliged Cu~ent a~oy=ces ~sociated ~ the Final Score have been c~s ~ci~ ~o~d the p~k~ lot =d cont~umg out onto F~thill Boulev~d without stopp~ =d motor cycles rew~ up ~ek ~uffle~ pipes br 2 thll minutes almost eve~; ~y dumg ~e e~ty momg hours. We suspect that were the Final Score to be ~anted a live ente~aiment pemit ~d operate ~mving they ~e now in compliance, ~d flint m-ca homeo~mers would have no recourse, the noise ~d dis~b~ces would be louder th~ bebre. .16July 1994 - ~ECEIVED -- CITy OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Planning Commission Chairman PLANNING DIv!SI011 i and Members of the Board 'J U L .[ 8 1994. Attention: Nancy Fong./Richard Alcorn Rancho ': 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho.Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Sirs: Regarding Ente~ainment Permit 93-03 ~or the Final SCore, I. wa~t you to .know why I am unconditionally opposed tothe permiVs approval. That is, unless they agree to buila ~ new . soundproo~ stru~ure and agree to keep the w~ndo~ and doors clos~ when they have loud music. I doubt that they would agree to such'an investment, as they have so far . demonstrated ho concern for the surrounding communi~. " In fa~, G'a~ Rausa and his employees h~ve spo~ed ~n a~itude ranging from "unwilling to coopgrate"'t0 "u~erl~ rudeft. I live di[e~ly behind ~is bag Within ~50 feet by 'my estimation,. and the kinds of distdr6ances I have experienced in the p~st during live band pe~ormances are as follows: loud thumping music, noisy patrons talking and yelling, noisy patrons brawling;. helicopters overhead, thundering motoracles sta~ing and'rewing up, thundering 'm'otor~cles racing off up and down Route ~, bO~leS breaking ~ile being dumped into dugpster in back' 0~ the bar, and b0~les breaking while being thrown, presumably, by pat~o~s. ~is went on l~utinely be~een the hours of 9:~ p.m. and 3:~ a.m., mostly on w~kends. I have p~rsonally' alied the bar many times, asking them to please keep the volume down sO I ~ould get to sleep, with no result. I truly believe .they could care .less if I.slept. ~at's when I beg~n calling the Sherrff's Depa~ment. They at least had a sympathe~~ ear, although they got li~le more' cooperation from th9 bar t~an I did. " I ~eel like this is all a waste o~ taxpayers' money, ~ince this business ~aS operated with so li~le concern for i~ neighbors, has cooperated with the Poli'ce .only to the minimum extent required. And they did ~h)s when they didn't even have a license for a live bandl. Let's face the fa~.that these people are lawbreakers and, in my opinion shouldn't even have a business license, mu~h less a license to operate a live band..~eir kind of a~ivi~ may h~ve been appropriatedecadeS ' ago when there were ~ew inhabitan~ in the Bear GUlch area. But today they are'sUrrounded by. people Who w~nt to sleep at night; the point being that they' don't ~eem to care. I feel ce~ain that if you give them'.tHis license, they will' be depr.i~jn9 all o~ us 0~ our.sleep, and we, in turn, will be calling the Police out here ev~weekend. Sincerely, . - . / -' ~elen' M. DeFina ~/27 ~ ' ' Ceda~ood Lane · Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730' '~ -- ~ECEIVJD" Cl'tY OF ~ANCI~I0 CUCAk~ONGA PLANNING DIVISIO~N fi~JUL ]. B t994 8475 Lemon Grove Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 July 14, 1994 Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission 10400 Civic C~r;iter Drive .... Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 To Whom It May Concern: SUBJECT: Entertainment Permit 93-03-Final Score We are homeowners in Rancho Villas which is the housing complex directly behind the Final Score Bar. We strongly urge you not to grant an entertainment permit to the above referenced establishment. Loud music, bar fights and partying in the parking lot will undoubtabiy disrupt our peaceful complex. If this permit is granted, it will also lower our property values considerably. Please vote NO on July 27! Sincerely : ' ;" '/ '/ '~-/-~ If'n,. ,,-; "! Diane and Timotl~y Athert~n CITY OF ~ANCHO CUCA/,,4ON~,, PLANNING DIVISWOTI Planning Division JUL 18 1994 City Of Rancho Cucamonga ~ ~ P. o. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 July 15, 1994 Thank you for your Notice of Public Hearing concerning the request for an Entertainment Permit 93-03 by the establishment known as the Final Score, 8411 Foothill Blvd., Rancho Cucamonga. We live almost directly behind the Final Score and have exper- ienced what has occurred with live entertainment there last year. For many reasons we object to this bar having a permit for live entertainment and dancing, etc. Vibrations from the live music seemed to have just shaken our walls. The volumn of the music was in excess to the point of disturbing our sleep. Having live entertainment seems todraw-a "rough" type of patron. There have been fights in the parking lot and on top of the railroad tracks. Loud talking and yelling as patrons are leaving the bar. Persons have been seen on top of the raised railroad tracks smoking what appeared to be a "joint", and then return to the bar. Tracks lay between the bar and a row of homeowners. The noise of motorcycles being rewed up is very disturbing. Even the noise of the empty liquor bottles being dumped into the dumpster located at the rear of the bar's property (close to our home) can be very disturbing and irritating. All these complaints have the potential for increasing with addi- tional patrons being drawn to the bar because of live entertainment. The disturbances mentioned accelerate as the closing hour ~or the bar approaches, being the early morning hours when we are trying to sleep. The fact that last year the Final Score did have live entertainment WITHOUT A PERMIT, we feel, should be held against them. The owners do not seem to have good characters. The persons operating this bar are not very considerate of their neighbors. They had been called with complaints of the recorded music being too loud and were asked to turn the volumn down and close the back door to the bar. Their responses were always very rude and sometimes the music then would be turned up even louder. 71 7 .t rT '71 o Page 1 of 2 Planning Division City of Rancho Cucamonga July 15, 1994 One night last year Gary Rausa was on top of the railroad tracks and saw us in our back yard. He asked if the volumn of live music was too loud. We replied that it was and he said that he would take care of it, but it instead got even touder. We do not know if Final Score has a permit, or needs one, for what is going on there now. We are disturbed now by afternoon affairs. Beginning this past Easter Sunday, and several week ends since, there have been some sort of activities being held outside to the east of their building. From what we heard it seemed to be contests with games and prizes being awarded. On driving by on Foothill Blvd. we could see that drinks and food were being served outside. We thought we would keep an eye on future activities of this sort and see what happened before complaining to the City. We sincerely hope that you will HEAR THE-VOICE OF THE PEOPLE and deny the Final Score's request for an Entertainment Permit 93-03 or any other permit for entertainment, not just because the bar is a nuisance in so many ways to its neighbors in Rancho Villas, our complex, but also due to the fact that our property value would be depreciated with a live entertainment establish- ment so close to our homes. This request by the Final Score should be denied in the best interest of the homeowners, community and the City. Charles and Shirley Kovar 8438 Cedarwood Lane Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 909-982-0628 P. S. We will not beable to attend the public b. earing on this matter as we will be out of town. I have been in touch with both' Nancy Fong and Richard Alcorn via the telephone, voicing Our Objections to granting this permit. Shirley Kovar g e of Gentlemen: For a period.of many months, phone calls have been made, most every weekend, either to your department, the sherlff's stationt or to the bar directly, complaining of the extremely loud live music in the evening coming from the: FINAL SCORE BAR 8411 Foothill Boulevard. Rancho Cucamonga, California 909-985-4515 OWNERS: Dorothy, Chuck and Garry Rausa We, the undersigned owners of homes living kehind or near the Final Score Bar, are writing to request that the nbise level being emitted' from said establishment be considered completely u~- acceptable during the late evening hours. We strongly ask something be done immediately to avoid an~ legal actio~ we hawe to consider to solve this problem. The vibrations and volume of the music is to the point where it is 'impossible to sleep at night. E~en with doors and Windows closed in their units, the sound and vibrations are coming through. The police have been very cooperative in going to the bar and alerting them of the complaints, but the response is very negative, Copy of the bar's business card with message on the reverse side ie included in this letter to show you that the bar owners were aware Of homeowner's complaints to the sheriff's station of disturbinq ]oud music. Still they have not rectified the problem. These I' business cards were left in the homeowners mailboxes, the night before the party. The owners of this bar are DISTURBING THE PEACE and SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE. For having live music at any time, we would.appreciate the Final Score Bar's LICENSE NOT BE RENEWED. Also, consider not renewing the license for operating a bar at this location. This would solve not only the loud music problem, but also eliminate the disturbance caused especially at closing time by the sound of the motor vehicles leaving and the occasional fights between the patrons. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. ,.~ 8438 Cedarwood Lanb (SEE ATTACHED SIGNATURE SHEET) Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 co: Sheriff Station cc: Planning CommissiOn 9333 Nint.h Street P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Raf~:ho Cucamonga, Ca 91729-0807 P~IU~TC SI~ DA~ P~" ~~'HEBAUSA'S L-~ -- ffECEIVED -- CITy OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING DtVISI01'I .'t JUL 2 0 1994 July 20, 1994 8454 Autumn' Leaf Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Nancy Fong City Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Ms. Fong: I am writing to express a strong objection to the granting of Entertainment Permit 93-03 to the Final Score Sports Bar. As a homeowner living in close proximity to this establishment, live entertainment would be especially disturbing. In addition, my neighbors and I are concerned that having a bar such as this in our neighborhood will significantly lower the value of our properties. I am a voting member of this community and would appreciate your consideration in this matter. Sincerely yours, IF YOU CHALLENGE A~ OF THE FOREGOING ACTIONS iN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR FINAL ACTION DESCRIBED IN THIS NOTICE, OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLA/<NING COMMISSION AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE PUBLIC HEARING. July 6, 1994 Rancho Cucamonga Plannin Commission Date '7~7~~ q/73D 9518()8.134/35-37 Roncho, Cucomonga Cny207-57 · ' ' ' ' Tax Ra/e: Area -- ~jAN-BERNAR~)H',rO ROAD ***/, / I p,/~ -LEAF : PnPtATE ) ..... I / 12 ~T CITY OF RANCttO CUC~0NGA ~ ~ ', ~ PIJNING D~SION EXtlIBIT:, SCALE: ,~- ~1..; ~.t! ? cOD cOD- co ._..F', f'~ Tt,~CJ, ~ ,. cl P CF--) cO.> cO) .,zcr-A .~:., ~,-~¥E.'-~,',,,.%,_ " CiTY OF ~Eh~O::.':~UCAMONGA ITEM: ;FP qP-'/~ . .......... ., Tn'LE: floor P[~ PLANMNG-'DMSION ! ':"~:!':;"'::2"':":"" ! EXHIBIT: Q SCALE: ~?ar Section 17.08.080 Section 17.08.080 Performance Standards A. Intent. The intent of this section is to protect properties in all residential districts and the health and safety of persons from environmental nuisances and hazards and to provide a pleasing environment in keeping with the nature of the residential character. The performance standards set maximum tolerability limits on adverse environmental effects created by any use or development of land. B. Administration and Measurement. The standards of this section shall be enforced by the City Planner. Upon discovery of any apparent violation of these standards, the City Planner shall investigate using such instruments as may be necessary. If a violation is found to exist, the violation shall be abated as a nuisance as prescribed in the Municipal Code. C. Exemptions. The following sources of nuisances are exempt from the provisions of this section. 1. Emergency equipment, vehicles and devices. 2. Temporary construction, maintenance, or demolition activities between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., except Sundays and National holidays. D. Noise. No operation or activity shall cause any source of sound at any location or allow the creation of noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person, which causes the Ambient Base noise levels to exceed the following standards, and as contained in Section 17.02.120. TABLE 17.08.080-D RESIDENTIAL NOISE STANDARDS LOCATION MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE OF MEASUREMENT 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 1. Exterior 55dBA 60dBA 2. Interior 40dBA 45dBA Notes: (a) It shall be unlawful for any person at any location within the city to create any noise or to allow the creation of any noise which causes the noise level when measured within any other fully enclosed (windows and doors shut) residential dweLLing unit to exceed the Interior Noise Standard in the manner described herein. (b) If the intruding noise source is continuous and cannot reasonably be discontinued or stopped for a time period whereby the ambient noise level can be determined, the same procedures specified in Section KD~ ~t~7=~F[~ff17.02-120 shall be deemed proper to enforce the provisions of this Section. (c) Each of the noise limits above shall be reduced 5dBA for noise consisting of impulse or simple tone noise. -92- " ' CHRONOLOGY FOR EP 93-03 AND CUP 93-39 - FINAL SCORE 1993-1994 Date Status 8/24/93 The applicant, Garry Rousa, submitted the two applications. 9/20/93 Staff sent a notice of incompleteness to him. 9/21/93 Staff met with Garry and went over the incompleteness comments with him item by item. Staff suggested to him that he should hire a professional to prepare the development plans. 3/17/94 Staff received a progress print from the applicant. 3/20/94 Applicant resubmitted plans for the two applications. 4/4/94 ' ' Staff sent a notice of incompleten~is to the applicant. 5/11/94 Staff informed the applicant that he can proceed with the EP application if the detailed site plan and floor plan are provided. 6/7/94 Applicant submitted a site plan and a floor plan. 6/13/94 Staff scheduled the EP 93-03 for the 7/27/94 Planning Commission meeting. 7/18 to 7/25/94 Over 10 letters objecting to the EP were received. Also, petitions objecting to the EP from the residents who lived at the southerly condo complex were received. 7/27/94 Planning Commission tabled the item and directed the applicant to submit an acoutiscal study to determine the noise level gener.ated by the proposed entertainment and the necessary mitigation. 8/29/94 Staff sent a letter to the applicant verifying that he preferred the option where the City selects and hires a registered Acoustical Engineer to prepare the study at his expense. 9/12/94 Staff obtained two verbal estimates (Gordon Bri'cken & Associates and J.J. Van Houten & Associates) - $3000 to $5000. 9/19/94 Verbally informed the applicant about the cost of the study. He stated this is way beyond his budget. i r 2-1q - f~ CHRONOLOGY FOR EP 93-03 AND CUP 93-39 - FINAL SCORE 1995-1996 5/4/95 Applicant provided a consultant's name (George E. Leighton) who will do a noise study for a cost of $300 and $400. 5/16/95 Staff sent a letter to three consultants inviting them to submit a proposal for a noise study. The three consultants are Gorden Bricken & Associates, J.J.Van Houten & Associates and George E. Leighton (Applicant's suggested consultant) 5/30/95 Staff received proposals from all three consultants. The cost ranges from a high of $7,700, to $3,200 to a low of $800. 5/31/95 Staff notified the applicant that once a consultant is selected he must submit the money to the City before staff would give notice to the consultant to begin work. 6/5/95 George E. Leighton submitted supplemental information to clarify his scope of work. 6/12/95 Staff informed the applicant and George E. Leighton that the latter is selected as the consultant to do the noise study. Staff also informed the applicant that he must submit $800 before staff would authorize the consultant to begin work. 7/10/95 Staff received $800 from the applicant. 7/18/95 Staff notified the consultant to begin work with a 30-days deadline. 8/8/95 Staff called and left a message for the consultant to find out the status of the noise study. .: 8/10/95 ditto 8/17/95 ditto 8/21/95 Staff called and connected with the consultant. He stated he would be doing the report next week. When staff questioned him on the delay, he stated that it was due to the relocation of his office which affected his productivity. Staff reminded him that he needs to let staff know when he could perform the work because staff has to make the proper arrangement for him to be on the site or at the site of the adjacent townhouse complex. He stated it would be most likely next Thursday and he would call to confirm the date. Staff did not receive a confirmation date. CHRONOLOGY FOR EP 93-03 AND CLIP 93-39 - FINAL SCORE 1995-1996 CONTINUED 9/11/95 Staff received a preliminary report from the consultant. 10/9/95 Staff notified the consultant that his report is incomplete and inadequate. Staff also found that the applicant has been doing improvement to the interior of the building according to the recommendations of the consultant, ahead of the procedures and without authorization from the City. 10/16/95 Staff met with the consultant to discuss the noise study. Staff told him that the proper procedures were as follows: the consultant to submit a completed noise study, which identify the existing building construction, the projected noise level with the entertainment on, and the noise-control measures to reduce the noise to an insignificant level; staff to review the completeness and adequacy of the study and determine which noise-control measures require building permits; and, only after the approval of the Entertainment Pennit (EP) can the applicant process plan check for those noise-control measures that require building permits and begin construction. 11/2/95 Staff met with the consultant and the applicant. At this meeting, staff emphasized to both that the applicant chose to do the improvements on his own. This could result in the following risks: the approval of the EP is not guaranteed and/or the work done are not according to City codes. The consultant agreed to revise the preliminary study to address the identified deficiencies and submit a final noise study. 11/13/95 Final noise study received. 11/20/95 Based on a review, staff determined the study to be compl.~te and adequate. Because of a need to re-advertise the EP for a public hearing and the next available Commission meeting was too close to the holiday season, staff, with the consent of the applicant, scheduled the hearing for the January 10, 1996 meeting. 12/20/95 Applicant requested a continuance to the January 24, 1996 meeting because of a time conflict. 1/10/96 The Commission continued the item to January 24, 1996 meeting at the request of the applicant. Printed: 02/05/96 15:02 Final Score 8411 Foothill , LOC DR DATE TIME DAY TYPE CALL STAT TYPE 8411 FOOTHILL BL 119400496 01/11/94 0946 TUE 242R 940110057 RTF ASSAULT REPORT /fq~ 119400499 01/11/94 1221 TUE COUNTR 940110093 RTF COUNTER REPORT 02/17/94 1824 THU INC 940480178 SUP INCIDENT/MISC. L~W ENF CALL 119402347 02/21/94 0049 MON 647F 940520005 ARR DRUNK IN PUBLIC 119403900 03/29/94 1805 TUE 415S 940880175 RTF SUBJECT DISTURBANCE 04/23/94 0124 SAT AP. EACK 941130017 CAN AREA CHECK REQUESTED 05/13/94 2018 FRI 1182 941330256 NAT NON INJURY ACCIDENT 11941018408/27/94 2007 SAT 242R 942390261 RTF ASSAULT REPORT 08/31/94 0029 WED UNKPRO 942430007 NAT UNFuNOWN TYPE pROBLEM 119411000 09/17/94 1833 SAT 1182 942600206 RTF NON INJURY ACCIDENT 119412344 10/19/94 1547 WED 488R 942920161 RTF PETTY THEFT REPORT 11/.13/94.1553 SUN AOD 943170159 NAT AS~.~ST OTHER DEPARTMENT 119414035 11/29/94 0006 TUE 12025R 943330001 ARR CARRY CONCEALED WEAPON REPORT I19424fi~7 11/29/94 0135 TUE 496 943330012 ARR STOLEN pROPERTY 01/01/95 2354 SUN 10851 950010272 UNF GRAND THEFT AUTO - INPROGRESS 01/31/95 0636 TUE 459A 950310036 FAL AUDIBLE ~ 02/07/95 1920 TUE 5150 950380194 GOA PSYCHO I~;ESTIGATION - INPROG 02/08/95 1545 WED COUNTR 950390176 NAT COUNTER REPORT 119502993 03/05/95 1752 SUN 20002R 950640164 RTF HIT AND RUN NON INJURY REPORT 04/03/95 1730 MON 1182 950930187 CAN NON INJURY ACCIDENT 04/11/95 0946 TUE 459A 951010072 FAL AUDIBLE kLAP~M 07/22/95 2311 SAT UN"KPRO 952030289 CAN U~N"KNOWN TYPE pROBLEM 11950847007/22/95 2311 SAT 23152R 952030291 RTF DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE REPORT 08/03/95 2242 THU 10851R 952150265 UNF GRAND THEFT AUTO REPORT 09/24/95 0129 SUN 415V 952670022 NAT VERBAL DISTURBANCE 10/07/95 1753 SAT 10851 952800144 UNF GRAND THEFT AUTO - INPROGRESS 12/21/95 0000 THU 242R 953550001 NAT TRU ASSAULT REPORT 01/18/96 1621 THU LTNKPRO 960180187 CAN tTN~LNO~CN TYPE PROBLEM FGTTHiLL ,NI,, 11/15/94 2252 TUE VEHCK 943190260 NAT VEHICLE CHECK Records printed: 30 P.o. l'ff s RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT NO. 93-03, A REQUEST TO CONDUCT ENTERTAINMENT CONSISTING OF LIVE BANDS, DISC JOCKEYS, AND DANCING IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT AND BAR IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 1) OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD SPECIFIC PLAN. LOCATED AT 8411 FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 207-571-75. A. Recitals. 1. Gain/Rousa of the Final Score has filed an application for the issuance of Entertainment Permit No. 93-03, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 27th day of July, 1994, the Planning C6mmission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application, concluded said hearing on that date, and took no action pending the submittal of a Noise Study from the applicant. The Commission directed staff to advertise said application for a new public hearing once the Noise Study information was submitted and ready for their review. 3. On January 10 and continued to January 24, and February 14, 1996, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. 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 Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set fodh in the Recitals, Pad A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public headrig on January 24, and February 14, 1996, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at 8411 Foothill Boulevard with a street frontage of 545.21 feet and lot depth of 150 feet and is presently improved with several buildings and structures; and b. The property to the north contains a restaurant, the properties to the south contain an inactive railroad track and single family homes and townhouses, the property to the west is vacant; and c. The applicant proposes to offer enterlainment consisting of live bands, disc jockeys, and dancing in conjunction with a restaurant and bar, from Thursday through Sunday, between the hours of 8 p.m. and 12 midnight; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EP 93-03-FINAL SCORE February 14,1996 Page 2 d. Adjacent residents on the south side of the site have submitted a petition objecting to the granting of the Entertainment Permit because of the nuisance problems of loud music, loud noise, and other related disturbances; and e. To address the nuisance problems, a Noise Study was done to assess the noise impact and determine the noise control measures. The applicant has sound proofed and/or agreed to sound proof the building in accordance with the noise-control measures listed in the Noise Study. The noise-control measures are added as conditions of approval contained in this resolution. f. Additional control measures are added as conditions of approval contained in this resolution to alleviate and minimize other nuisance problems such as noise and disturbances from the loitering activities within the parking lot and/or the railroad embankment. These control measures included providing fencing along the property line that abuts the railroad tracks, providing security personnel inside and outside the facility, limiting the days and hours of entertainment, etc. g. With all the control measures in place, the potential nuisance problems can be minimized to an acceptable level. 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 I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the conduct of the establishment or the granting of the application would not be contrary to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare. b. That the premises or establishment is not likely to be operated in an illegal. improper, or disorderly manner. c. That the applicant, or any person associated with him as principal or partner or in a position or Capacity involving padial or total control over the conduct of the business for which such permit is sought to be issued, has not been convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction of any offense involving the presentation, exhibition, or performance of any obscene show of any kind or of a felony or of any crime involving moral turpitude or has not had any approval, permit, or license issued in conjunction with the sale of alcohol or the provisions of entertainment revoked within the preceding five years. d. That the granting of the application would not create a public nuisance. ' e. That the normal operation of the premises would not interfere with the peace and quiet of any surrounding residential neighborhood. f. That the appliCant has not made any false, misleading, or fraudulent statement of material fact in the required application. 4. This Commission hereby finds and determines that the application identified in this Resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereafter, pursuant to Section 15061 b-3 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EP 93-03 - FINAL SCORE February 14, 1996 Page 3 Planninq Division 1 ) Approval is granted for the following entertainment uses: a) live bands; b) disc jockeys; and c) dancing within a floor area of 110 square feet. Any expansion of entertainment shall require modification to this permit. 2) The days and hours of operation for the entertainment shall be limited to between 8 p.m. and 12 midnight, Friday and Saturday. Any expansion of days and hours shall require modification to this permit. 3) No adult entedainment, as defined in the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, Section 17.04.090, shall be permitted. 4) A minimum of two duly licensed. certified or trained, and regularly employed security guards from a reputable security firm shall be required to be on the premises from 8 p.m. until two hours after the conclusion of any entedainment. One of the guards shall be in "peace officer attire and shall remain on duty in the parking area and outside adjacent areas of the facility to avert problems such as loud noise, disorderly conduct from patrons or anyone in the parking lot, loitering activities, and any other nuisances or disturbances. 5) All noise control measures contained in the Final Noise Study and as listed below shall be completed: a) Add acoustic door seals to all exit doors. b) Add interior ceiling with R~I 1 insulation over the pool room. c) Isolate speakers from the structure. d) Remove the two speakers from the roof ceiling and hang only one speaker down from the roof ceiling. e) Upgrade the interior windows. Detailed plans and/or specifications shall be submitted within 60 days for City Planner and Building Official review and approval. and the building inspected for compliance prior to commencement of entedainment use. 6) Decorative fencing together with dense landscaping of shrubs and trees along the property line that abuts the railroad tracks shall be provided. Detailed plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted within 60 days for City Planner review and approval. The fence and the landscape shall be completed and inspected to the satisfaction of the City Planner prior to commencement of entedainment use. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EP 93-03 - FINAL SCORE February 14, 1996 Page 4 7) The row of parking immediately located southwest of the building (parking spaces numbered 1 through 9 and 35 through 41) shall not be used by the patrons of the Final Score between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. RESTRICTED PARKING signs shall be posted prior to commencement of entedainment use. 8) Serving of food and non-alcoholic beverages in the outdoor patio area shall cease on and after 9 p.m. The serving of alcoholic drinks is not allowed at any time in the outdoor patio area. 9) All parking and outdoor seating areas shalt have a minimum maintained one-foot candle power security lighting. All parking lot light fixtures shall not exceed 15 feet as measured from the finished surface to the top of the light fixture. The light fixtures shall have shields for reducing the glare and shall be odented away from residential areas. A detailed lighting plan shall be submitted within 60 days and the lighting installed prior to commencement of entedainment use. 10) -A trash enclosure, per City Standards, shall be provided and completed prior to commencement of entedainment use. 11) Detailed plans to show the completed improvements to date and required new improvements or upgrades such as, but are not limited to, the outdoor patio area, the parking lot, the satellite dishes, the trash enclosure, etc., shall be submitted as a Minor Development Review application within 60 days for City Planner review and approval prior to commencement of entertainment use. 12) All doors and windows shall remain closed during the business operating hours except in the case of emergency. 13) The maximum number of occupants shall not exceed building and fire codes. The maximum occupancy for each room shall be posted as determined by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and/or the City's Fire Prevention Unit Division. 14) The building shall comply with all requirements of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. Plans shall be submitted for the Fire Distdct's review and approval within 60 days. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to the commencement of the entedainment use. 15) The building shall comply with all requirements of the Uniform Building Code. Plans shall be submitted for the Building Of~cial's review and approval within 60 days. The building and the site shall be inspected for compliance prior to commencement of entedainment use. 16) If the operation of the business creates public safety problems such as but not limited to: loitering and disturbances, noise, overcrowding, blocked fire exits, etc., this entedainment permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for consideration of modification and/or revocation. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval and applicable City Ordinances shall cause the suspension and/or revocation of the Entertainment Permit by the Planning Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. EP 93-03 - FINAL SCORE February 14, 1996 Page 5 17) Provide a vestibule at the main entrance of the building for sound attenuation. Detailed plans shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The vestibule shall be completed prior to commencement of entertainment use. 18) All conditions of approval shall be satisfied prior to commencement of the entedainment use. ~Division 1) The issuance of a building permit for the trash enclosure and the parking lot lighting will require an irrevocable offer of dedication for the Foothill Boulevard frontage which will total 64 feet from the street centerline to the property line in accordance with the Municipal Code, Chapter 12.08. 6. The Secretary 'to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1996. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, dq'hereby cedify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopte'd by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of February 1996, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Griffin Industries February 14, 1996 Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner City ofRancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Cueamong,, Cornerpointe Project Dear Brad: This letter shall serve as our formal request to withdraw Cucamonga Cornerpointe's Application for a Development Code Amendment consisting of text changes to add small lot subdivision standards to the City's Development Code. This request was submitted in conjunction with General Plan Amendment 95-03A, Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 95-04, Development District Amendment 95-02, and Vesting Tentative Map 15727. After much review, we have decided to revise the proposed Tentative Map to conform with the City's standards for a conventional subdivision. This more conventional project will not require the Development Code Amendment that we were requesting for our original proposed site plan with small lots and detached condominium homes. We sincerely appreciate the time and attention that you, your staff, and the Planning Commissioners have given to our proposal. We also appreciate the Planning Commission's willingness to consider new innovative product designs. However, after considerable economic analysis we have concluded that a conventional residential neighborhood is the most prudent approach to the development of this site. The Cornerpointe site is an excellent location for a quality residential neighborhood that will compliment the existing neighborhoods to the north, the west, and the south. The future public park along 6th Street will remain an important part of our Cornerpointe project proposal, and will be enjoyed by both current and future residents. We are looking forward to working with you, your staff. and the Planning Commission on the new site plan for the project area. It is our understanding that our withdrawal of the Development Code Amendment request will have no effect on the timely processing of the General Plan Amendment, the Industrial Specific Plan Amendment, the Development District Amendment, or the completion of the draft EIK. Sincerely, Richard A. Niec RN/vad ' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT - DATE: February 14, 1996 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CUCAMONGA CORNERPOINTE LLC - A request to consider initiation of text changes to add small lot subdivision standards in conjunction with General Plan Amendment 95-03A, Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 95-04, and Development · District Amendment 95-02. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant, Cucamonga Comerpointe LLC (in association with Griffin Industries), is requesting a Low-Medium (4-8 dwelling units per acre) designation for 65 acres within the area presently designated as Subarea 16 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Such a request requires the review and action of a General Plan Amendment and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment as well as a Development District Amendment. These applications have been filed and are being reviewed by staff with an Environmental Impact Report currently being drafted by a City consultant. The applicant has also requested that the City consider "small lot" subdivision standards in conjunction with the Low-Medium land use designation. The lot size and housing product type do not conform to the current standards of the Development Code. Therefore, the applicant has submitted this request in the form of a Development Code Amendment, which can only be initiated by the City Council or the Planning Commission. The General Plan Amendment, Industrial Specific Plan Amendment, and Development District Amendment will be considered by the Planning Commission along with the Development Code Amendment at a future meeting. ANALYSIS: At the direction of the Planning Commission, staff will research the standards proposed by the applicant and make recommendations appropriate to current Low-Medium development policies. To determine the most appropriate standards, staff will review existing single family standards throughout the community and advise the Commission of the effects of the proposed standards on the City development policies. The applicant has deposited an application fee equivalent to the Development District Amendment fee with staff to cover staff time on the project. The proposed amendments include reducing the current optional standards for lot area and yard setbacks, and creating special standards for "private motor court" designs. ITEM B PLANNING COMMISSIONSTAFFREpORT DCA95-01- CUCAMONGACORNERPOINTE LLC February14,1996 Page 2 The applicant was advised of staff's preference to approach the issues of "small lots" via the Development Code Amendment method versus an additional specific plan or variance applications. The initiating of the Amendment does not imply that the request will be approved. ACTION: Staff requests that the Planning Commission accept, through minute action, the proponent's request to initiate the text change through the submittal of a Development Code Amendment by the applicant. Any change in land use will be considered under separate General Plan Amendment, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment, and Development District Amendment applications at a future date. The Development Code Amendment would be brought before the Planning Commission at the same time as the land use considerations. ysubmitted -. ulle ~ CB~ty pl<armer BB:AW:mlg O LEGEND OFFICE RESIDENTIAl. ~G~ MIXED USE ~ LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL ~ COMMERCIAL/OFFICE I'M~ MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL ~"""""'""'""""'"""~°""'"~": ~"~""""""""' ~',~'¢p'T//,ff, Z- £P COMMERCIAL PUBLI~C ~_~ s. Ec,A,_ CO.ME.C,AL [C~] COMMUNm, COMME.C~AL ~ PUeUC [I~R~ REGIONAL RELATED COMMERCIAL ,___: MAST. "LA. A.EA LAND USE PLAN i CC 'I , t \/ LEGEND OFFICE RESIDENTIAl. ~ MIXED USE 30 ~ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ~ OFFICE <m ~ LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL ['~ COMMERCIAL/OFFICE ~' ~ MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL Q' ~ MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL ~ LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ~' COMMERCIAL ' PUBLI(;; ; ~ s. EciAL COMMERCIAL F'~ UTILITY ~ I~ COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL o ~ PUBLIC R~C~ REGIONAL RELATED COMMERCIAL F"T ,___~ MASTER PLAN AREA LAND USE PLAN LEGEND OFFICE R_ESIDENTIAt, ~ MIXED USE ~_.~ Low .E.S,T~ .ES,.E.T,AL FT1 OFF,C. ~. LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL ~ COMMERCIAL/OFFICE t.~"I MED,uM .ES,D~.T~XL mDUST.~,L COMMERCIAL PUBLIC ~ SPEC~.L COM.E.C~XL ~ UT~UT~ ~ COMMUmTV COaME.C~AL ~ PUBUC ~.~ ...,o..~ .~.~.. ~o....~,.~ Df~l ,,~,, ,~,, ,.,, LAND USE PLAN LEGEND OFFICE RESIDENTIAI~ ~G~ MIXED USE ~ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ~I OFFICE L~I LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL I~1 COMMERCIAL/OFFICl I~MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL ~ MEDIUM-HIOH RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL ~ LIGHT INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL PUBLI~;~ I'~ ~o.-~.,,, ~o.-~.~,.~ ~ "~"~'~ LAND USE PLAN ~C J REQIONAL RELATED COMMERCIAL F"T MASTER PLAN AREA SUMMARY TABLE OF pERMITTED (P) ANID CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED (C/USES RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES ?~i!ii~Ei~i Subarea On~ii~iii~iiiii Subarea Two i!i!~!iiiiii~i Subarea Three i~!i~iii~ii~ Subarea Four i~i~!~i~i~sc cc o MR P i~i~!~i~i~!sc CC 0 MR mHR~i!i!i~i!i!ii~SC CC CO LMR mR U mU~i~i~i~i!~!iiCC RRC MR L~ 0 Antique Shops ........ P !!!!iii P Appliance Stores and Repair ::'::::: P P :::::::. P ':::::: P P Art, MUSIC, Photographic Studio5 Auto Service 5tatIon C C ....... C C ........... ::' C C :¥::::::; CC C ....... CC upholstery, etc.) .............. C ....... C C ...... C C d) Coln-op Washing .................... C i~i~i~ii C C f) Parts and Supplies ............. P P ........ P ............. P P Barber andBeauty Shops ~:~:~:~:i~ ppp ~iii~i~i~i~i! PPP ::~E::~E~Epp p p ~i~i~T~!~i~i pp* P Bed and Breakfast S:!~!E!S!~!E! C C ~!iii]ii~i~i~ C C C ........ C C 0 ........ C Bicycle Shops ....... P P ........ P P ~:::::::::PP ~ii~iii~i~: pP* ....... C C C ...... C C C C ....... C C C C C C C C Cleaning and Pressing Establishments~/i~ii~ P P ~!:~!~E~E~ pp ~E~:~:~i:~pP P P i!i!i!~iiiii~ PP C ........ CC C and blllards ........ C C ....... C C ......... C C C C and basketball ........ C C ..... :::::::C C ......... C C C Convalescent FacilitlesandHospltalsi:i~i!i~i!!ii! C C 0 i~i~ji~ii!i~C C C C i!iii~:~i~ C C C ~i~iii~iiiii~ C C C a) over I0,000 sd ft. : ...........P P ::::::':::P P iii~iiiiiii! pP SUMMARY TABLE QF PERMITTED (PI AND CONDITiONALLY PERMITTED (CI USES RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES i?iii~iii~i~ Subarea Oneiiiiiii Subarea Two ~i!i~iiiii!iii Subarea Three iiiiiiiiii!i~Subarea Four (CONT.) i!i~i!i!iiiiiiSC CC O MR P iiii~!~i~iiiiSC CC 0 MR MHRi~i!~ii!i~i~TiSC CC CO LMR MR U MU!!iii!~!iiiCC RRC MR LIO Private (Including colleges and ...... ' ............ Floor Covering Shops .............. P ....... P p !~i!i!iiiiii pp Furniture Stores ........ P P ....... P P ......... P P ....... P P Hobby Shops ....... P P ........ P P ......... P P ..... ¥::::: PP* Jewelry Stores ......... P P ....... P P ....... P P ::::::':; PP Leather Goods and Luggage Stores !i]i!i!iiiiiii pp .............P p ::~::Es'~: pp ~i~i~i~ii pP Messenger and Wire Services '::::::: P P P P :::::::::::::PP P* Mortuaries and Cometaries ::::'::': ::::::: C ::::::::::PP P P P Paint. Glass and Wal Ipaper Stores ....... p ....... P ....... P ............. P P Parks and Recreation Facilities publi~E~E!s!T~ .................... Pet Shops ....... P P P P ........ P P* Photocopy (Xerox) Political or Philanthropic HeadquarteE~Ei:s! ....... : C YOuth Group Uses EEE!E~E!E!E!E! ....... E:;:?E:]:E: C a) WIth entertainment and/or the ~i~i~! ........ : ...... wine (without a cocktail Ioung~i~i~i~iii E:E'~:E:EE:S ..... ............. bar, entertainment or dancing) ~i~ii~i~iiii P P C ~i~i~i!i~i~i~ P P C i~;~:i~:~i~! P P C C i~i~i~iiii~ P P P d) Fast FOOd: with drlve-thru ~:~iEE~i[::E~:C ............ C ::'h': C ...... C C C Revised: 11/3/gl iV-g4 d ~;UMMARY TABLE OF PERMITTED (P) AND CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED (CI USES RETAIL COMMERCIAL USES iii~i Subarea On~iiii~i!iii!i Subarea Two Subarea Three iiiiiiiiiESubarea Four (Cont.) ~i!i~i!i~i!i!SC CC 0 MR P ~i~!~i~i~i~SC CC O MR MHRii~i~i~i~SC CC CO LMR MR U MU~i~i~i!i!~iCC RRC MR LI O a) Non-boarding b) Boarding ........ C ......... C ........ C C ........ C C ENTERTAINMENT AND CULTURAL iii~i~ii Subarea Oneii~iEiiiiiEi Subarea Two i~iii~i~i~ii~ Subarea Three ~i~i!~iiiiii~Subarea Four b) Movie Theater Includlno Multip~ C :~E~E~E!EE]i: C ]EE.::i.E C ~ii~i~i~i~i~ C C OFFICE AND ADMINISTRATIVE i:i!:ii~:~ Subarea On~!i!i~i~i~ii Subarea Two iiiijiiiiiii~i Subarea Three ~i~i~ii~i~i!5ubarea Four USES ii~!i!~iiiiiiSC CC O MR P i~i~i~Ei2~2~SC CC O MR MHRiE~i~i~i~i~iiSC CC CO LMR MR U MUiii!~i~iiiEi~CC RRC MR LI 0 Profess ionaI Off ices !!:E!:!:i:!: p p p :::.:: P P P ..... P P P P ~i~i P P* P i nst I rut ions: w Ith drive-thru E:~:~:E~:~:E: C C C ....... C C C iiiEiiiiiiiiii C C C C i;~;i;ii~z~ C C C withOUt drlve-thru ~iiiii~ii~ii P P P !jEi~E~E~ji p p p E:~E~EE~EE!~ p p p C ~i~i~i~!~iii~ PP P Interior Decorat ing Firms i~iiii~iii~i~i P P P :E::::~ p p p ~5~?EE P P P ......... P P Health Clinics Uiii~iii~i PP P =:::::=:=~ p p ?i~i!i~i~i!!P P C P P* P Opt Ic lan and Optometrical Shops ii~!i!ii~i(i~i PPP ............ p p i=i=i~iEi:~:~:P P C !E!z!i!i!E!~! PP* P Realtors and Real Estate Offices ............ P P P P P P ............. P P P P P* P Travel Aoencles ....... P P P i?!i!~iisi P P P i!ii~i!i~i~iEP P P P Ei!i~iE~!EiE PP* P Reviseo: 11/3/91 IV-94 O ~;UMMARY TABLE OF PERMITTED (P) AND CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED (C) USES RESIDENTIAL USES iiiiiii Subarea On~iiiii~ Subarea Two iiiii~i!i! Subarea Three iiiii!i!~iiiSubarea Four !!!iiiiisc cc o MR P iii i i i iisc CC 0 MR MHR! ii i!iSC CCCO LMR MR U MUi ii!i ii!iCC RRC MR U 0 Single Fatal ly Detached ?::: ....... P ................... P P ....... P triplex, fourplex) ......... P ........ P P ........ P P P ......... P Ily D ............... : ....... P P ........... P Ancillary Resident lal Uses: ........ a) Home-care Facilities .............................. (6 or less) ::.~:E?~:z p p p ....... p p p ......... P b) Home Occupation ~!zi!!!!!!~!~ p p p ....... P P P P PUBLIC USES ~i?::.~?i!~Subarea One:.iiiii:iii::Subarea Two s~:!!s::!!E::: Subarea Three ~iiiiii::i:~::i~ Subarea Four Transit Facilit los ....... .............. C Public Utility installations :! ............. : ...... P ........ ~i~s~E:~ii Subarea On~i~ii~!i!ii~i Subarea Two ii:E:i:i:E~s:~ SuParea Three iiiiii Subarea Four HOTEL USES i!i!i!i!~!i!i!5C CC 0 MR P ~!~!~!~!~!~SCCC 0 MR MHR!!!~i!i~iii!iiSCCC CO LMRMR U MUiii~i~i!~i~!iCC RRC MR LI 0 ....... C Hotel/MoteI ........ Facilit les (major) .................... Ancillary Uses Beauty/Barber Shop ..................... a) ..... P b) Cafes : c) Catering Services ....... : ...... : ............ C nge ............ C o) CocktailLou ....... : ..... : ............ Facilities ....... C f) Florist Shops ....... ........................... P g) Shops ....... ..... G I f t ........ : ............ : ..... P spaper/Magazine Stores ................. P Pharmacies ....... :::::: iii~iiii~i~ii P !.!:!~!:!;:::!:: Subarea Oneiiiii!i::i!i:: Subarea Two ii!!iLii:i:i~iSubarea Three !i::ii~:: Subarea Four INDUSTRIAL USES :!:.!~.!~i:~i~sSC CC 0 MR P ::!iE:i~!!i!i~iSC CC 0 MR MHR~i~i!i!i~i~i~SC CC CO LMR MR U MUi::~:iE:~::~E:~iCC RRC MR LI 0 All industrial uses and development Standards shall be as provided In Sub-area 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan (ISP). Refer to RRC ( * ) Section 9.9.2 Revised: I I/3/91 I v-94 d LM ,rl .............................. :-- _NC~i Li/' ~ ......... M "' ..... ~ ~,-~!lt R~IDENTIAL ................ M LM M ~ ~,,~.~ M ~ ~" ' ' LM ~ ~ m-~o ~ · S~ERCIAL MH LM M /. ~-~ p ~' ' ~UBLIC & QUASI-PUBLIC MH _~, ~ ..... P CC MOC ~ CC ~C MHO .e e ACRES OF UH ~C 65ACRESOFH ~ ~UEN A~AES Ran es of Approved Proje~s may va~ sli htly from the Plan; FIGURE lU-17 See "As Bui~ Land Use Progress Plan" - Figure ~1-3 on page V1-11. Land Use Plan ~ ~T~: CPA 9~1B and ~CPA 95~1 Cg OF RANCHO CUCgONGA gE: Community PI~ L~d U~ Map ~ ~L~G D~VIS]ON E~B~: "B" SCALE: ~ /I H · "' FOOTHILL BOUI. EVARD -; .... MASTER SITE PLAN T V Z (/) LU HILL : ARROW C COMMERCIAL  HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT INDUSTRIAL PARK 4,h s'r. ~ GENERAL INDUSTRIAL II ~ ~ MINIMUM IMPACT -" ~ HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CITY OF CAMO~ RANCHO CU leg INDUSTRIAL AREA PLAN ...... HIGHLAND ~ LM L [~ ~<,~ONAtC[~rC[~ VC Village Commercial RR CO~NITY ~M Victoria Amended By Ord. 470-47! 39 REVISED DATE The Wattmon Arno Company Foothill Marketplace FOOthill Boulevard & Eliwanda Avenue Comparison of Uses - General Commercial, Community Commercial, ISP Subarea 7 DISTRICTS · Community ISP General Commercial Subarea USES* . Commercial Terra Vista 7 ),. Offices and Helated 1. Admin/exec F. Optician/Optical Sale 6. Pharmacies 5. Medical, Dental, etc. 4. Financial service/inst 3. Clerical/Professional F. Real Estate/Escrow 2.Art/Photo Studio TV. Employment Agency F. Intedor Decorating B. General Commercial 36. Hotel/motel 54. Photocopy 18. Cleaners 55. Print shop 15. Book/gift/stationary 13. Blueprint/photocopy 65. TaiJor 30. Rodst 70. Travel agency 47. Newspaper/Mag 43. Locksmith 53. Plumbing/supplies F. Paint/GlassANallpapr 21a Corn. recreation - indoor 26. Drug store TV. Lighting F. Cudain/DrapeW 11. Barber/beauty B. Athletic clubs, etc. 34. Hardware 35a Home improvement - indoor >.,54. Swim pool supplies 10. Bakedes (retail) 31. Food/superrnarkets 16. Candy/confectionat7 23 Dairy store il 9f Auto gaso~ne/minor repair ~g Auto paRs/supplies g~h Auto tires/service ~c Auto repairs 9e Auto automatic wash 9d Auto Coin-op wash 9b Auto rentals 9a Auto sales/leasing ElectronicSal/Serv 33. General retail F. Record/Tape/CD 31. Food/supermarkets 32. Fumiture/inc repair 51. Pet 39. Jewelry 48. Nusery/garden supply 58~ Shoereeh~slrepalr 46. Music/Dance/MadialAr 24. Department store _ ~ 63. Stamp/coin 4, Apparel stores F. Yardage 12. Bicycle 5. Ad,Music,Photo supply 69. Toy 6. Appliance sale/repair 62. Sporting goods 73. Vadety F. Watch/Clock sale/repair F. Specialty retail F. Delicatessen 57b. Restaurant w/beer & wine 57a. Restaurant w/entedmnt./Tbar 28. Fast-Food w/o ddve.thru 28. FasFFood w/ d~ve-thru 2Oh. Cocktail lounge w/restaur. %'** 20a. Cocktail lounge no restaurant 38. Janitor serv/supply 49. OfficeSupp/bus roach F. Convalescent Hosp 52. Political/Philanthropic 19. Carpenter/cabinet 17. Catering 61. Spiritualist, etc 59. Second-hand/pawn 1. Antique shops 29. Feed/Tack 40, Laundry coin-op 3. Animal Care - intedor only 42. KiosMn parking lot 41. Liquor 50. Shopping center 7. Arcades 35b Home imprvmt.-outdr storage 71. Transit depots 45. Morturay/cemetary 21a Corn. recreation - outdoor 72. Truck trailer/rent,etc 25. Ddve-in business 44. Mini-storage/indoor 3. Animal Care - extedor kennels 27. Equipment rental 56. RV storage yard [TV. Wholesale Bus. ~F. Art Gallery F. Floor Covedng TV. Import TV. Outlet/Off price TV. Showroom/Car'log F. MessengerAMre Serv F. Ice Cream/Soda Ftn 7b. Theater Movie inc. multiplex 7a. Dinner Theater F. Day Care F. Hobby Shops F. Vetinary non-boarding F. Vetinary boarding F. Leather/Luggage Note: "Uses" - Numehcal listin SP; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIM2ONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: Jan ry 31, 1996 TO: C airman and Members of the Planning Commission FR ad Buller, City Planner B Dan Coleman, Principal Planner S APPLICATION REVIEW 96 01 MARK TAYLOR : ..... The review of 264 condominiums on 19 acres of land in the Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac) zone located in the Victoria Planned Community on the north side of Baseline, one block west of Victoria Park Lane. Consistent with your discussion at the last meeting, Mark-Taylor, Inc. has submitted the attached application for Pre-Application Review of their proposed condominium project. This item has been scheduled for February 14, 1996. Attachments: Concept Site Plan Applicants Letter cc: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Bob Porter, Assistant Engineer John Thomas, Sr Plans Examiner Ralph Crane, Fire Marshal I:\DANXPAR9601 .MEM NIARK-TAYLOR INC. 6623 N. SCOTTYDALE ROAD SCOTFSDALE, ARIZONA 85250 (602) gg I -g I I I: CELLU~R (co2) 309-6857; VNAIL g2g- 102g F~:(eO2) ggI-g138 RECEIVED january 23, 1996 JAN 3 0 1996 Planning Commission City of Ranoho Cucamonga City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RE: Pre-Application Submittal, San Vineyard, North Side of Baseline Road West of Victoria Parkway Dear Commissioners: "- This letter shall serve as a Letter of Justification / Explanation for the above referenced project submittal. The details are as follows: 1. Envirorunental Setting / Existing Site ConditiOns. The project is currently vacant land consisting of what was formerly an agricultural field of grape vines. The site is generally flat and level with a general slope from north to south. The project site is bordered on the north by existing railroad tracks, on the south by Baseline Road and existing commercial uses, on the east by improved and unimproved commercial land and medium-high density residential buildings, and on the west by an existing mini-storage and recreational vehicle storage facility. There are no unusual or important site features, cultural or historical aspects to the site. 2. Proposed Land Use and Applicable Zoning Regulations. The proposed land use is residential attached dwelling units of iess than 14 units per adjusted gross acre. The applicable zoning classification is Medium Density Residential ~M" land use designation which allows for detached or attached residential dwellings not exceeding fourteen dwellings per adjusted gross acre. Therefore, the proposed land use is compatible with the existing zoning regulations. In addition, the project as presented meets or exceeds all setback, parking, open space, building coverage, common area, recreation and amenity requirements of the Rancho Cucamonga development code without variance. 3. Compatibility. The proposed project will be entirely compatible with the surrounding land uses and will, in-fact, be the lowest density residential project developed when compared to the land uses immediately adjacent. As noted previously, Planning Commission Page 2 January 23, 1996 adjacent land uses include existing medium-high density residential apartments (approx. 20 units per acre) and to-be- developed high density residential of 24-30 units per adjusted gross acre. The proposed project will not create any undue noise, traffic or other conditions that would be objectionable or detrimental to the other permitted uses in the vicinity. The project site fronts Baseline Road, the major arterial corridor in the area and would not cause any significant increase in traffic congestion. The subje~6 project will provide a well designed, attractive and compatible step-down buffer to the surrounding land uses. Architecture / Project Design. Architecture. The proposed project will consist of high quality, two-story residential buildings. The buildings will feature concrete tiled hipped roofs and pa~pted stucco exteriors with arched window treatments. Variat'ion will be provided in the form of roof level and plane changes, architectural reveals and details. The architecture will be compatible with the surrounding residential character. Please see the attached photograph of a typical building types. Scale. The building height will not exceed 26 feet as compared to the 35 foot code allowance. The spacing and orientation of the buildings is done to provide maximum use of and exposure to the landscape, open space and recreational facilities provided. The scale of the project will be entirely compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Building coverage, open space and dwelling unit sizes are all in excess of the minimum City code provisions. Materials and Colors. Building materials will feature concrete roof tiles, stucco building and site walls. Colors will range from off-white for building and site walls, red roof tiles and verde green building accents and trim. A photograph showing some typical building colors is attached. ~ Siqninq. Signing shall be done in a high visibility fashion and in a style compatible with the architecture. A sample photograph of typical signage is attached. EquiDment Screeninq. All mechanical and rooftop equipment will be screened from public view. Access and Circulation. The site will be accessed via a large covered portico featuring an integral guard house. Access to resident areas and parking will be controlled by card access security gates. Each resident will enjoy a covered, dedicated parking space with an additional 81 detached, private garages available. Provided parking exceeds required parking by over 15%. Planning Commission Page 3 January 23, 1996 Amenities and Recreational Facilities. immediately adjacent to the main entry will be the main leasing, activities and recreation facilities. These facilities will be highlighted by a large water feature consisting of cascading water spilling over artificial boulders into a decorative pool. The main activities building is flanked by a dedicated and fully equipped fitness center which is available to the residents 24 hours a day. Additional amenities include fully equipped tot lots, barbecue areas with covered ramadas, court facilities, main pool and spa and open lawn areas. The provided amenities exceed the required amenities by 60%. The following attached pages contain a brief analysis of the proposed project versus the City ordinances for same. Respectfully, On behalf of'Mark-Taylor, Inc. attachments OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~M" MEDIUM DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION STANDARD REQUIRED PROVIDED COMMENT Minimum Site Area (gross) 5 ac. 19. 181 Adjusted gross acreage excluding Baseline Road dedication. Actua gross is 20.655 acres. Dwelling Units Per Acre Up to 14 13.77 Based on adjusted gross acreage. Min. Dwelling Unit Size Studio 550 s f None Net living area excluding .... balconies One Bedroom 650 s.f. 690 sf 'Two~Bedr'06m' 800 s.f. 1012 sf Three Bedroom 950 s.f. 1200 sf Height, LimitatiOn ~ 35 ' 26 ' Ope~ Spac~ ~ ' ' ] 225/150 225/~150 Co~,u~onI ,~ ~ 35 % 40 % Usable-Pvt~+ Common) i 40% 45% , Recreation 'Area/Facility. I Standards require any combinatio i] :-,,-oben.,L~wn~Lx~:50'~,~in'i jt 3 of the listed amenities for a cumulative of ten. _=<?.~'~:.'Enct~)sed'~'T0t .~nd~r~>!!, =>~ 2 · '~; 'Jog/Walking[Trails . ' '. ~>'".q"~i~El~Fj,._?='Jt-~! 1 Private, fully equipped 24 hr. 125 Cf 800 Cf PVt. or W/D common provided '" -' ' Security_ ?Syst'em%' =- i ~ c.' =t None Provided EntrylGuard HouSe None Provided - '- None Provided Water Features None Provided Tile ROofs None Provided Detached Garages None Provided Parking Resident 456 456 Guest 66 66 Private Garages 0 81 TOT~ PEING 522 603 EVdO Saturday, Ju~y ~5, 19'~5 The Arizona Republic / The Phoenix Gazette · APARTMENT LIVING San Marquis in Scottsdale: Location, location, location The prospective resident brochure - : - The 224-unit for San Marquis states it succinctly: San Marquis 2Z4-unit communily offers a resortlike offers a Patio/bRIton) walls are higher Ihan roofs. and homes offer defined entri~, emcient :~Z,:~:LZ~.;,~: ~,~::~=4~E~. higher than for placing furniture, privacy, Storage is suFr at San Marquis: big enough to hold cloth~ and bulky ;he~ WHERE: eitherinoradjacenttobathr~ms. i'5~~ RENT: All San Marquis apartments feature m P'n2. ~ quis washer and d~er, Rather than a = apa~ments, 81410 1,248 square Application fee (per applicant) laund~ r~m conveniently is I~atcd ~ 1~ $25. Non-refundable from the rest of the apa~ment, : ~ Refundablesecuritydeposit$150 scald with a mix or indigenous :GLENDAtE' a~ FEATURES: 24-hour maintenance service, con- L_ZCHANDLER patio/balcony with storage; walk-in r~idents 24 hours a day). An almost mind-~ggling selection AMENITIES: Ameniti~ at San Marquis are north Io Scottsdale Fashion PETS?: a median age of 27. ~e mix also The r~t of metro~litan Phinix inctud5 ramdi~, who can ~nd Iheir can ~ quickly accused by San SCHOOL DISTRICT: San J\'larquis l\partments, 264: U~tiks, Scol:t:sdale, San Marin, Scottsdale, AZ i Example of Typical Dwelling Unit Interior San Marin, Scottsdale, AZ San Paloma, Scottsdale, AZ San Antigua, Scottsdale, Az. S,~n p~lon~,% Scottsd~xlc AZ San Paloma, Scottsdale, Az. Example of Typical Signage San Paloma, Scottsdale, Arizona Example of Typical Site Signage San Paloma, Scottsdale, Arizona