Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout88-640 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 88-640. A RESC~UTION OF THE CIT~ COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF R~CHO CUCAFDNGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 6,385 SQUARE FOOT 2-STORY OFFICE BUILDING ON .40 ACRES OF LAND IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VINEYARD AVENUE AND SAN BERNARDINO ROAD IN A COM~NITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WITHIN THE. FOOTHILL BOULEV~RD SPECIFIC PLAN ACTIVITY CENTER- APN: 207-102-09 A. RECITALS (i) Matlock and Associates has filed an application for approval of Development Review 88-11 described above in the title of this Resolution. Hereafter, ~in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application". (ii) On August 24, 1988, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed hearing on the subject matter of the application, and following the conclusion of said hearing, adopted their Resolution No. 88-168 thereby approving the application. (iii) The applicant has filed a timely appeal of the approved application request represented in said Resolution 88-168. The conditions appealed are described as follows: a. The requirement to change the roof material to something' other than metal (Planning Condition No. 12). b. The requirement to provide an arbor/trellis (Planning Condition No. 6). c. The requirement to pay an in-lieu fee for the future undergrounding of existing utilities along Vineyard Avenue and San Bernardino Road (Engineering Division Condition No. d. The requirement to upgrade, modification, and relocation, as necessary, of the traffic signal at the intersection of Vineyard Avenue and San Bernardino Road (Engineering Condition No. 2). e. The requirement of an access easement in favor of the property to the west over the north/south drive aisle and portions of the southerly east/west drive aisle shall be provided (Engineering Condition No. 3). Resolution No. 88-640 Psge 2 f. The requirement, that the developer shall coordinate with the developer of the Thomas Winery project for the design and construction of the San Bernardino Road and Vineyard A~enue improvements (Engineering Condition No. 4). g. The requirement of relocation of the Thomas House and possibly the garage off-site and financial contribution towards the move by the developer (Historic Preservation Commission Condition No. 1). h. The requirement of documentation of the Thomas House should it be demolished (Historic Preservation Commission Condition No. 1). i. The requirement to provide a letter guaranteeing the financing to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner (Historic Preservation Commission Condition No. 2). j. The requirement for an archeologic survey (Historic Preservation Commission Condition No. 3). (iv) ~ On October 19, 1988, 'City Council of the City of Rancho Ct~camonga conducted a. duly noticed public hearing on the subject matter of the approval of the application and, on said date, concluded public hearing. (v) ,All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution ,have occurred. B. RESOLUTION NOW, THEREFORE, it is found, determined and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. This Council hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and concurs with the issuance of the mitigated Negative Declaration issued on August 24, 1988. 3. Based upon the sustantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced October 19, · 1988 hearing, including written staff reports, the minutes of the above-referenced August 24, 1988 Planning C¢~mmission meeting and the contents of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-168 this Council specifically finds as follows: a. · The application applies to property located on the southwest corner of Vineyard Avenue and San Bernardino Road; ~ ResOlution No. 88-640 'Page 3 b. The property to the north of the, subject site is Single Family Residential, ~he property to the south of that site consists of a single family residential structure, the property to the' east is being developed as a specialty c. The design of th'e application is in~ substantial conformance with the design guidelines of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan; and d. The use of the metal roofing material~and inclusion of an arbor/trellis are appropriate accents for the activity center; and The requirements of the Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-168 (Conditions No,. ! through 4 Engineering Division), that the developer pay an. in-lieu fee for the future undergrounding of the existing overhead ~tilities remain an important and necessary condition; and f. The site and existing structure will not be considered for historic landmark designation and therefore, does not require preservation conditions; and g. The development as specified will not contradict the goals or. objectives of the General Plan or Development Code or Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and would not promote a detrimental condition to persons or properties in the immediate vicinity of the subject site. 3. Based on the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, an~ 3 a~_c~.F, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objective of the Development Code, and Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and the purposes_of the district.~n which the site is located; c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable previsions of the Development Code and Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan; and Resolution No. 88-640 Page 4 d. ,That . the proposed use, together- with the condi%ions -applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or mater~ally injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2, 3 and 4 above, this Council hereby approves the application subject to all the conditions set forth in Planning Commission Resolution No. 88-168 with the e;:ception of Planning Condition No. 12 and Historic Preservation Conditions 1 through 3 which are hereby deleted. (Copies of which are attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 1). 5. The Council hereby provides notice to Matlock and Associates that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by the Resolution must be sought is gOVerned' by the provisions of California Code of CivLl Procedure Section 1094.6. 6. The City Clerk is hereby directed' th: (a) certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to Matlock and Associates at their address as per City records. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 2nd day of November, 1988. AYES: Buquet, Brown, Stout, Wright NOES: None ABSENT: King ~ Dennis L. Stout, Mayor ATTEST: ~~uthelet, City Clerk Resolution No. 88-640 Page 5 I, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CITY ~ERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 2nd day of November, 1988. Executed this 3rd day of November, 1988 at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Beverly AtAu~hel%~, City Clerk Resolution No. 88-640 Page 6 EXHIBIT 1 RESC~UTION NO. 88-168 A RESCLUTION OF THE R~CHO CUCAFDNGA PLANNING COM~[[SSION APPROVING DEVW.OP~NT REVIEW NO. 88-11, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF VINEYARD AND SAN BERNARDINO ROkD IN THE OUMP~3NITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT - APN: 207-102-09 A. Recitals. (i) Ed Combs has filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 88-11 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application". (ii) On the 24th of August, 1988, the Planning Commission of the City of Ran6ho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting on that date. (iii) All legal prerequisites 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 forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolu%ion Are true and correct. 2. Based upon substan'tial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on August 24, 1988, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to prope~t~ located at the southwest corner of Vineyard and San Bernardino Road; and (b) The property to the north of the subject site is single family residential, the property to the South of that site consists of a single residential structure, the property to the east is being developed as a specialty commercial center, and the property to the west ismu/ti-family residential; and (c) The design is in substantial, conformance with the design guidelines of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan. Resolution No. 88-640 Page 7 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) That the proposed project is consistent with the obj actives of the General Plan; and (b) That the proposed use is in accord with the obi ective of the -Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and (c) That the proposed use is in compliance with each of.the applicable previsions of the Development Code~ 'and .(d) That the proposed use, together with the. conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or we/fare, or materially, injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby issues a Negative Declaration. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 2 and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the application ~ubject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Plannin~ 1) At the time of future connection to the west, that portion of landscaping necessary for vehicular connection shall be r~noved. .Trees shall .not be planted in that designated, area in the interim. 2) The column at the southwest corner of the b~ilding shall be a minimum of 24" square. 3) The block wall for the proposed project shall be plastered to match the building and have a cap consistent with the overall project building materials. 4) A clock shall be included as part of the tower design. 5) An articulated arch shall be provided to the doorway for the stairway on the south elevation. Resolution No. 88-640 Page 8 6) A trellis/arbor shall be constructed at the plaza area. 7) A consistent paving treatment such as exposed aggregate or interlocking pavers shall be used at the plaza, office entries and parking lot connection. 8) A greater mix of evergreen, deciduous, and accent trees shall be provided in the final landscape plan with general emphasis on the northeast corner. 9) A 36" box Crape Myrtle shall be provided on-site as a replacement for the Crape Myrtle being removed. The applicant shall file a Tree Removal Permit application to remove the Crape Myrtle and Pine trees. 10) All landscaping shall be done in accordance with the Foothi/1 Boulevard Specific Plan. 11) Approval of Development Review 88-11 shall not be considered final until the geologic report has been reviewed and approved by the City. Any adverse impacts found by the geologic study shall be mitigated to the degree of insignificance by conditions. These conditions shall become part of the Conditions of Approval of Development Review 88-11. 12) The roof material shall not be metal. The applicant shall return .to Design Review Cdmmittee for review of the revised roof material. Historic Preservatio~ In the event the Thomas House is designated an historic landmark, the following conditions shall apply: 1) The house and if possible the garage shall be moved to a suitable location off-site. The developer shall be financially responsible for an amount which is the equivalent to the high end cost of demolition. However, if after a good faith effort, a suitable site has not acquired the Thomas House must be fully documented by a professional historic preservation consultant with photographs, drawings, and further research to create as complete a record as possible. 2) Demolition permits shall not be issued for the Thomas House until building permits for the project are ready to be issued and a letter, guaranteeing that financing for the project has been secured, has been received by the City Planner. Resolution No. 88-640 Page 9 .3) An archeologic survey shall be conducted on the site by a qualified archeologist. The survey and recommendations shall be reviewed by the City Planner and all necessary action as determined by the City Planner shall be completed prio~ to the issuance of grading or building permits. Engineering Special Conditions: 1) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing · overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66 K.V. electrical) on the opposite sides of Vineyard Avenue and San Bernardino Road shall be 'paid to the City prior to the issuance of building permits. The fee shall be one-half the City adopted unit amount times the length as follows: a. San Bernardino Road - from the west project boua~da~ to the center of Vineyard Avenue. b. Vineyard Avenue - from the south project boundary to the center of San Bernardino Road. 2) Upgrade, modification, and relocation, as necessary, .of the traffic signal at the intersection of Vineyard and San Bernardino Road shall be the responsibility of the developer. 3) An access easement in favor of the property to the west over the north/south drive aisle and portions of the. south.e~ly east/west drive aisle shall be provided. 4) The developer shall coordinate with the developer of the Thomas Winery project for the design and construction of the intersection improvements including upgrade, relocation or modification of .the traffic signals so that the intersection will be completed as a single project as approved by the City Engineer. 6. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AM) ADOPTED T)~I~ 247H DAY OF AUGUST, 1988. PLAN#ING C0~II$$I0# OF* THE CITY OF RANCI'IO CUCAMONGA ¥. ATTEST:~;~~~~ Resolution No. 88-640 Page 10 I, Brad Bullet, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 24th day of August, 1988, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: GOMMISSIONERS: MCNI~L, CHITIEA, BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, T~STOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE