The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000/05/24 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY MAY 24, 2000 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chamber 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman McNiel __ Vice Chairman Macias Com. Mannerino Com. Stewart Com. Tolstoy II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 10, 2000 Adjourned Meeting May 10, 2000 IV. 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 and 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. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC., (WALGREENS) - A request to modify the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of overhead utilities for a previously approved Conditional Use Permit to allow construction and operation of a 16,170 square foot drive- thru pharmacy on 1.15 acres of land in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located on the southeast corner of Carnelian and 19th Streets - APN 202-541-60. (Continued from May 10, 2000) B. INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 99-05 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to add "Automobile Fueling Services" in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. C. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A proposal to add a Mixed Use zoning district with accompanying definitions, processing provisions, and development standards to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. Related files: General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lA NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the General Plan land use designation from Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The City will also consider Medium- High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01, Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the Development District zoning designation from General Commercial and Medium- High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use, and the establishment of a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD), including deviation from certain development standards for the residential portion of the base district, for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The City will also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives for the entire site APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and Development Agreement 00-01. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A Development Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Northtown Housing Development Corp. for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 27.020.040 of the Development Code) including deviation from certain development standards for 80 senior apartment units and one manager unit on a Mixed Use site of 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with Page 2 La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, and Development District Amendment 00-01. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lB - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES -A request to change the General Plan land use designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 22.9 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of the intersection with Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-881-01. Related file Victoria Community Plan Amendment 00-02. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATE~5 - A request to change the Victoria Community Plan zoning designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 22.9 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of the intersection with Victoria Park Lane- APN' 227-881-01. Related file: General Plan Amendment 00-01B. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. V. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS I. PRELIMINARY REVIEW 00-09- SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION - A courtesy review of the proposed site acquisition of approximately 6 acres of land for an early education center, located in the Estate Residential District (up to 1 dwelling unit per acre) at the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Summit Avenue - APN: 227-111-05. J. ENGINEERING DIVISION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000/2001 VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission. Items to be discussed here are those which do not already appear on this agenda. VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS K. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PROGRESS - Oral report VIII. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. Page 3 I, Gail Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 18, 2000, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. / Page 4 VICINITY MAP C is CITYWIDE A ri I Hillside , Wilson Base G,H F :oothill D,E, ^~ow 4th > ~ , CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA "k CITY HALL & N HAY-23-2000 02:]9 P~ PIB. REALTY.~DVISOR 909 478 977] P. 02 REC/~[VED: 5-23- 0; 1:16PM; 909 476 977'1 => R CUCAUONGA C0M DEV; #3 tiRY-23-2000 02:20 Pti PIB, R£RLTY, RDVISOE 909 476 9771 P. 03 ? May 9, 2000 P.B.I. Reality Advisors 1050 N. Ontario Mills Dr., Suite B Ontario, CA 91764 Dear Mr. Arise: This letter is to advise you on the estimated cost & timeline for relocating our aerial telephone facilities at the intersection of Carnelian & 19~ ST. in Rancho Cucamonga to an underground system. The total estimated cost is $109,44~.00 which included a California Public Utilities Commission mandated surcharge tax of 31.9%. Tills cost also includes substructure work to be performed by GTE to tie into an existing GTE 6ubetmcture system on the West Side of Carnelian Ave. The estimated time frame to complete our work will be app~ximately 90 to 120 clays. There will be no phone outages bemuse of our work as w~ are able to transfer all working fines wi~out interruption to our ~stomers. If you require further assistance, please contact Steve Hock at IKI9-489.6327. Acting Section Manager- ~ Design Jl.: t~flY-23-2000 02:20 PR PIB. REALTY. flDVI$0E 909 476 9771 P.04 May 17, 2000 P.B,I, Reality Advisors 1050 N. Ontario Mills Dr., Suits B Ontario, CA 91764 · DeerMr. AJ-iee .... This is an attachment to the letter sent out on May 9~, 2000, concerning the cost and timeline for undergrounding our aeda! facilities at the corner of Carnelian & 19~ St. in the city of Rancho Cucamonga, In regards to substructure work Involved in this location, the tims frame for closing lanas or tTaffic is estimated to be two to three weeks depending on the final design. If a manhole rebuild is necessary, it could be an additional one to two GTE will do sverything in if~ power to minimize traffic congestion while installing substructure needed to conlpl~e the undergrounding. If you should hays any questions, plsass call Steve Hock a[ 909/469-632'/'. Sincerely, Section Manager - Access Design JL: ksc 02:21 Pt1 ?lB, RE,%'I'¥, (~DVISOR 909 4'76 9'77] P,05 ESTIMATED UNDERGROUND COSTS S.C. Edison $ 120,000.00 G.T.E. $ 109,445.00 Private Contractor $ 90,000.00 Estimated Total Costs $ 319,445.00 Estimated Building Cost $1,200,000.00 % underground costs Vs. Building Costs 26.62% R A N C H O C U C A ~ O N G A St rff Report DA3E: May 24, 2000 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Phillip Verbera, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: CONDITION MODIFICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC., (WALGREENS) - A request to modify the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of overhead utilities for a previously approved Conditional Use Permit to allow construction and operation of a 16,170 square foot drive-thru pharmacy on 1.15 acres of land in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located on the southeast comer of Carnelian and 19m Streets - APN 202-541-60 BACKGROUND: The Commission reviewed the condition modification and project undergrounding of overhead utilities at their meeting on April 26, 2000. The Commission neither approved nor denied the modification, and the Commission continued the item to May 10, 2000 and May 24, 2000. The Commission directed staff to work with the Developer and utility companies involved to obtain additional information and details of their required street or intersection closures for the undergrounding work. At the time of this writing, staff has not received any further details or new information from the utility companies or the Developer. Staff will present orally any new details it receives at the May 24, 2000, Commission meeting. ITEM A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC May 24, 2000 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff is not making a recommendation, only providing any additional details regarding street closures for any undergrounding of the overhead utilities. Attached are both a Resolution modifying the condition to pay an in-lieu fee instead of undergrounding and a Resolution of denial of the request and the project's staff report from the last Commission meeting. Respectfully submitted, Dan Jame~ Senior Civil Engineer DJ:PV:dlw Attachments: April 26, 2000, Planning Commission Minutes April 26, 2000, Staff Report with attachments Resolution of Denial Resolution of Modification Specific Plan, located at the southwest comer of Etiwanda Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 227-171- 004. Related File: Conditional Use Permit 99-64. Chairman McNiel pulled the items to be heard in conjunction with Item C. PUBLIC HEARINGS C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-64 - JOHN LAING HOMES - The single- family lots of a 31-1ot subdivision on 9.11 acres of land within the Etiwand~ Overlay District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) within the Etiwanda Specific Plan it the southwest comer of Etiwanda Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 227-17 Related Files: Development Review 99-78 and Tentative Tract 15947. Warren Morelion, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Charles Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, 1061 Boulevard, Suite 395, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he represented the applicant, and indicated the project engineer and architect were available to answer Hearing no further testimony, closed the public hearing. Motion: Moved by Mannerino, , Macias to issue Negative Declarations and adopt the resolutions approving Development 99-79, Development Review 99-78, and Conditional Use Permit 99-10. Chairman McNiel stated th~ had been a pleasure to work with the applicant through the design review process. He said ~ submitted a good product and were cooperative. Commissl that the Design Review Committee had looked at compatibility with the neighborhood. SI it will be a good project. Motion carrie following vote: AYES: MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NONE AB NONE - carried D. MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC., (WALGREENS) - A request to modify the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of overhead utilities for a previously approved Conditional Use Permit to allow construction and operation of a 16,170 square foot drive-thru pharmacy on 1.15 acres of land in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located on the southeast corner of Carnelian and 19th Streets - APN 202-541-60. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Commissioner Stewart asked if GTE was estimating closure of the intersection to be six months. Planning Commission Minutes -2- April 26, 2000 Mr. James responded that GTE stipulated the process would take from six months to a year and he believed that includes the planning process. He said he did not see anything in the letter to indicate the length of time the intersection would be closed. Commissioner Stewart asked what would happen if Caltrans refuses to issue a permit for the closure. Mr. James replied the City would then process the project under the Subdivision Map Act; and since the undergrounding is an off-site improvement, the applicant would be able to process without doing the undergrounding. Commissioner Mannerino asked if the entire intersection would be closed. Mr. James said he had not looked at the matter in detail and was just going by the letter submitted by Southern California Edison. Commissioner Macias observed that the Commission had no knowledge of the length of the closure. Commissioner Tolstoy commented that the degree of closure was also unknown. Commissioner Mannerino did not think the Commission could make its decision without that information. Mr. James stated the utility companies would have to go through their entire plan check process to provide that information. Commissioner Mannerino felt further clarification was necessary. Commissioner Macias requested that staff reseamh the issue further before the Commission makes a decision. He did not feel the Commission had enough information to make proper findings to justify changing its position on requiring undergrounding. Commissioner Mannedno agreed. Commissioner Macias observed that there is trenching on Milliken Avenue but traffic goes through every day. He did not feel it should be necessary to completely close down the intersection for only 400 feet of undergrounding. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Dave Ariss, PIB Realty Advisors, 1050 North Ontario Mills, #B, Ontario, stated he represented the applicant. He reported that GTE had indicated the six months to a year includes design and construction and Southern California Edison indicated the intersection would have to be closed about a month. He said that irrespective of the whether the length of undergrounding is 300 feet or 465 feet, all adjacent properties are not undergrounded. He stated the shopping center has fallen on hard times. He thought the Commission should waive the undergrounding requirement because of the heavy concentration of services to other users. Commissioner Mannerino reiterated Commissioner Macias' concern that the Commission did not have enough information to make the findings necessary to waive the policy. He wanted to know the cost and how long the closure would be for the telephone company portion. He hoped staff could assemble the necessary information in a short time. Mr. Ariss stated that the applicant is not opposed to paying an in-lieu fee. He said he would work with staff to gather the specific information prior to the next Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commission Minutes -3- '~ ~ April 26, 2000 commissioner Stewart noted the condition had been imposed in July 1999. She questioned why they are just now asking for the condition to be waived. Mr. Arlss replied there had been an oversight on exactly what was needed and they had just recently discovered the enormity of the task and how disruptive it would be to many other people. Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Mannerino, to continue Modification to Conditional Use Permit 99-10 to May 10, 2000. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MAClAS, MANNERINO, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE - carried Chairman McNiel felt that there shouldn't be any poles in the sky because of fiber optic technology. E. -:A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 00-02 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A re( consider initiation of text changes to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to add UMedium icturing" and "Medium Wholesale, Storage and Distribution" as conditionally permitted KJrt Coury, Ass the staff report and indicated a letter had been received from Riverside Com~ ipport of the request. Chairman McNiel asked how cres in the City are currently available for the type of use being sought. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, prepared an exhibit of the vacant land but had not calculated the exact acreage. He . in the 100s of acres. Chairman McNiel noted the conceptual dicate any building intrusion into the Haven Overlay District. Mr. Coury responded that was correct. He said the e : had initially plotted buildings going into the Overlay District but that had been changed. Chairman McNiel observed the warehouse buildings shown are currently not allowed in the subarea. Mr. Coury confirmed that was true. Commissioner Mannerino asked if efforts would be made to coordinate the ge with the General Plan Update Task Force. He thought there may be some chan, in the revised Land Use plan in this area of town. Mr. Coleman responded that the preferred Land Use Plan submitted by the General Pl~Update consultant had been reviewed by the Task Force and no changes were recommended in th'i~area. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes -4- '~ ~ April 26, 2000 R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A DA~E: April 26, 2000 TO:. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Phillip Verbera, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: CONDITION MODIFICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO~ INC., 0NALGREENS) - A request to modify the condition of approval requiring the undergmunding of overhead utilities for a previously approved Conditional Use Permit to allow construction and operation of a 16,170 square foot drive-thru pharmacy on 1.15 acres of land in the Neighborhood Commemial District, located on the southeast comer of Carnelian and 19~h Streets - APN 202-541-60 This project, the construction and operation of a drive-thru pharmacy, was approved by the Planning Commission on July 14, 1999. The Planning Commission's Resolution of Approval No. 99-67 is attached as Exhibit WA." As established City Policy, this development is required to complete the undergrounding of existing overhead electrical and telephone lines on Carnelian Street fronting and adjacent to the project site. This is specifically noted on Paragraph B.5, Engineering Division Item No. 4 on the attached resolution, Exhibit "A." An Overhead Utility Plan showing existing utilities is attached as Exhibit "B." CONDITION MODIFICATION: The applicant has requested that the City modify or eliminate the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of the existing overhead utility lines on Carnelian Street. The applicant's request letter, with attachments 1, 2 and 3, is attached as Exhibit uC." The applicant contends that under certain circumstances the Planning Commission may decide to have the developer pay an in-lieu fee instead of actually undergrounding the utilities. Staff is in concurrence with this, as this option is noted on the City policy for undergrounding, Planning Commission Resolution No~' 87-96 and paragraph 1.b. The resolution is attached as Exhibit PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC April 26, 2000 Page 2 ANALYSIS: The eppl'ic~nt's request letter lists four items they believe ere circumstances that would warrant the Planning Commission to mods the undergrounding condition to an in-lieu fee amount. Staff has reviewed those items in regard to the Policy Resolution and offers the following clarifications and comments: Item #1 -Yes, the propefl~/~ frontage is less than three hundred feet measured to the centerline of 'lg' Street. However, the Policy Resolution relates to the actual length of undergrounding as being short if it is less than 300 feet and not to the length of frontage. In this c~se, the project is required to underground from the first pole north of lg~ Street to the first pole south of the southerly project property line an approximate length of 465 feet. Therefore, Item # I does not directly comply with the intent and circumstances listed in the Policy Resolution for deciding on an in-lieu fee instead of requiring the undergrounding of the lines. item#2-Utility lines are not undergrounded adjacent to site. Staff is in concurrence, this is a fact and a circumstance noted in the Policy Resolution for use by the Planning Commission in reeking its decision to require undergrounding. However, this circumstance is included as a stipulation that goes elong or together with the above noted Item #1 as written, "...(less than 300 feet and not undergrounded adjecent)....' This circumstance alone may not be c~use to modify the undergrounding decision but should be incorporated and considered as a part of Item #1 above. Items #3 end ~ - St~ff has included two utiiity company letters submitted with the applic~nt"s request letter (Exhibit "C') as Attachment No. 3. The utility letters address the Policy Resolution and circumstance related to 'heavy concentration of services" and "disruption to existing improvement." The two letters ere included for the Commission's information end possible use in deciding the applicant's request. The applicant's request letter also asks for consideration of the analogy being made that the telephone trunk lines should be considered as equivalent of e 66 KV electrical line. This may then become a circumstance that the undergrounding Policy Resolution lists as an exception to undergrounding, Paregreph 4 of the Resolution. Staff will only state that in the .past telephone trunk lines have not normally been exempted from undergrounding by being considered equivalent to a 66 KV electrical line. The analogy is being noted for the Commission's consideretion. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 99-10- EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC April 26, 2000 Page 3 CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is not making a recommendation, only providing a review of the applicant's request. Attached are both a Resolution modifying the condition to pay an in-lieu fee instead of undergrounding and a Resolution of denial of the request. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ:Pr:sd Attachments: Exhibit 'A" - Resolution No. 99-67 (Approving CUP 99-10) Exhibit uB" - Overhead Utility Plan Exhibit "C" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "D" - Resolution No. 87-96 (Undergrounding Policy) Resolution of Denial Resolution of Modification RESOLUTION NO. 99-67 A RESOLUTION OF THE pLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-10 TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 16,170 SQUARE FOOT DRIVE-THRU PHARMACY ON 1.15 ACRES OF LAND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CARNELIAN AND 19TH STREETS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 202-541-60. A. Recitals. 1. Evergreen Devco, Inc. has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. 99-10, 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 14th day of July 1999, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE. it i$ 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 Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on July 14, 1999, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commissjpn hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the southeast comer of Carnelian and 19th Streets with a street frontage of 169.35 feet and a lot depth of 241 feet, and is presently improved with a 5,000 square foot bank building with drive-thru; and b. The properties to the north and west of the subject site are improved with a commercial center, the properties to the south and east consist of a shopping center; and c. The project, Wlth the exception of parking and landscaping complies with all minimum development City standards; and d. The proposed design incorporates many architectural and landscape design elements consistent with the Development Code objectives to provide compatible building elevations. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-67 CUP 99-10; EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. July 14, 1999 Page 2 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. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence Ihat the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this referen.ce, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore refiect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered lhe information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been reduced to an acceptable level~..by imposition of mitigation measures on the project which are listed below as conditions of approva, I; c. Pursuant Io the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that Ihe proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Furlher, based upon the substantial evidence' contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth, in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the applicalion subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Planninq Division 1) The developer shall provide additional shrubs on the north side of the retaining wall i..a, long 19th Street, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-67 CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. July 14, 1999 Page 3 2) All roof- and ground-mounted equipment shall be fully screened from surrounding property and public rights-of-way. This may require increased parapet height given the natural climb in local terrain to the noah. 3) No outdoor storage of materials/merchandise is permitted, including temporary storage in staging area on south side of building. The garden center is not considered outdoor storage so long as the above noted enhancements are provided. 4) All building materials and colors shall match the existing center. 5) Tree Removal Permit No. 99-17 is approved subject to replacement of trees at a one,to-one ratio. All removed trees shall be replaced at a. one-to-one ratio with the largest nursery grown stock available as determined by the City Planner. 6) All signs shall be designed to conform to the shopping center's Uniform Sign Program. Enqineerinq Division 1) The developer is required to process a Certificate of Compliance (No. 445) for a lot line adjustment between APNs: 202-541-58 and 60. The lot line adjustment shall be recorded, prior to issuance of a building permit. 2) Dedicate additional street right-of-way along Carnelian Street frontage sufficient so that the City can, in the future, install right turn lane for the 19th Street intersection (per Standard Plan No. 119), relocate conflicting traffic signal poles and upgrade access ramp(s). Provide a minimum right-of-way of 7 feet measured from the ultimate face of curb and a corner cu, t-off for a 35-foot curb return, per Standard Plan No's. 100-b and 102,,, This offer of dedication shall be made and approved, prior to the approval of Lot Line Adjustment No. 445 and the issuance of building permits. 3) Dedicate additional street right-of-way along 19th Street for a future bus bay (per Standard Plan No. 119). Provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the ultimate face of curb. Said right-of-way shall extend to the existing project driveway in the event future development within the center warrants a right turn lane into the center. These offers of dedication shall be made and approved, prior to the approval of Lot Line adjustment No. 445 and the issuance of building permits. .~ 4) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 6§kV electrical) on the project side of Carnelian Street shall be under grounded from the first pole north of 19th Street to the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-67 CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. July 14, 1999 Page 4 first pole south of the project's south property line, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing Carnelian Street within the project under grounding limits shall be undergrounded at lhe same time, 5) A signed consent and waiver to join the appropriate landscape and lighting maintenance districts shall be filed with the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of building permits. ' 6} Improvements exist at the southeast comer of Carnelian and 19th Streets, but some do not meet current standards since the center ' was constructed, prior to City incorporation. To meet the Federal Americans with Disabilities ACt (ADA) design and construction requirements for accessibility, the center's nocthed~ drive approach on Carnelian Streel shall be reconstructed per Standard Plan No, 101, Type C. If necessary, a sidewalk easement shall be dedicated as required and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 7) Install 16000 lumen HPSV street light along the Carnelian Street frontage of the project parcel. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid Io the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to bu!lding permit issuance. 8) If additional street trees are necessary, they shall conform to the "Conditional Use Permit 99-10 Street'Tree Requirement Form," dated May 18, 1999, on file in the office of Ihe City Engineer. 9) Public right-of-way improvements adjacent to and fronting the project site shall be protected in-place and replaced as required above to the satisfaction of the City Engineer as follows: a) Security shall be posted and an agreement executed, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the required improvements, prior to the issuance of building permits. b) Provide Street Improvement Plans, prepared by a registered Civil engineer, for the required off-site public improvements. Processing and plan check fees will be required. c) Prior to any work being performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the office of the City Engineer. .~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-67 CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. July 14, 1999 Page 5 Environmental Mitiqation Measures 1) In order to reduce the parking demand for the new drive-thru pharmacy, the proposed 3,500 square foot basement shall only be used for storage purposes. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF JULY 1999. PLANNING CO/JVIMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Lar~,~. McNiel, Chairman A'CrEST:~ I, Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify lhat 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 14th day of July 1999, by th~ following vote-lo-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NACIAS, I~IANNERIN0, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE OVFRHEAD UTILITY PLAN LEGEND: - IDOSTINO u'nuTY POLE (RR~ - - c~u. 0ENOTES COMMUN~C.~'n0N UNr PREPARED DAVID R. GRAY, 8qC. FEE, 2 $ lggg 2510-0 LAS POSAS ROAD 1~255 805-987-3945 805-987-1655 FAX ) SCALE: 1"=100' dO~ NO. 9840 FEBRUARY 1999 SE} 572-F5 II EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. March 14, 2000 Mr. Dan James City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Walgreens Drug Store - SEC 19~h & Carnelian Undergrounding Dear Dan: Thanks again for taking the time to speak with Sharon Douglas, Morrie Brighthill and me earlier this week about the undergrounding for this project. As per our conversation, I am writing to request that the Planning Commission modify or eliminate Engineering Division Stipulation No. 4 of Resolution No. 99-67 (attachment no. 1) by way of the guidelines established in Resolution 87-96 (attachment no. 2). This Engineering Stipulation requires that Evergreen complete the undergrounding of existing electrical and telephone lines in Carnelian Street adjacent to our project. Resolution No. 87-96 states that there are 'certain ci~--umstances under which the Planning Commission may decide that undergrounding is impractical and may instead require payment of an in-lieu of fee for the frontage of the property. Based on our research of the work necessary to complete the undergrounding, I believe we meet the circumstances described in Resolution No. 87-96 as follows: 1. The property frontage to the centerline of 19~h Street is less than three hundred (300) feet. 2. The electrical and telephone lines are not undergrounded adjacent to our project (north or south). 3. There is a heavy concentration of services to other users which include four stree't!crossings. 4. The undergrounding work would cause a disruption of telephone services to'existing users and could require up to six months to complete, and the eledtrical work would require closing the intersection of 19~ Street and Carnelian. Tel. (818) 240-8727 · 200 North Maryland Avenue, Suite 201 · Glendale, Calitomia 91206 · Fax (818) 240-1823 Tel. (602) 808-8600 · 2920 East Camelback Road, Suite 100 · Phoenix, Arizona 85016 · Fax (602) 808-9100 Tel. (206) 341-9419 · 114 Alaskan Way South, Suite 303 · Seattle, Washington 98104 · Fax (206) 341-9520 Additionally, both the Engineering Stipulation and Resolution No. 87-96 state that 66ky or larger electrical lines do not need to be placed underground. This particular project involves a 1,500 pair main telephone trunk line which is the telephone equivalent of a 66kv or larger electrical line. Therefore, an analogy can be made that if the undergrounding of 66ky or larger electrical lines is too costly and unreasonable a requirerdent for a project, .tl3e same conclusion can be drawn with respect to a 1,500 pair main telephone trunk line. I have included copies of letters received from Southern California Edison and GTE Network Services (attachment no. 3) documenting the extraordinary amount of work involved in completing this undergrounding. The cost to complete this work will be nearly one-third the cost to construct our building which seems to be a disproportionate burden on this particular project. Further, the utility companies, by their letters, are discouraging the completion of this work. Thanks again for working with us. Please let me know if there is any additional information I can or should provide that might help our case. Sincerely, Heather Balzer Evergreen Devco, Inc. enclosures 13LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-67 ~;UP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. July 14, 1999 3 2) All roof- and ground-mounted equipment shall be fully screened from surrounding property and public rights-of-way. This may require increased parapet height given the natural climb in local terrain to the north. 3)' No outdoor {forage of materials/merchandise is permitted, including temporary storage in staging area on south side of building. The garden center is not considered outdoor storage so long as the above noted enhancements are provided. 4) All building materials and colors shall match the existing center. 5) Tree Removal Permit No. 99-17 is approved subject to replacement of trees at a one-to-one ratio. All removed trees shall be replaced at a one-to-one ratio with the largest nursery grown stock available as determined by the City Planner. 6) All signs shall be designed to conform to the shopping center's Uniform Sign Program. En ineerin Division The developer is required to process a Certificate of Compliance (No. 445) for a lot line adjustment between APNs: 202-541-58 and 60, The lot line adjustment shall be recorded, prior to issuance of a building permit. Dedicate additional street right-of-way along Carnelian Street [rontage sufficient so that the City can, in the future, install right turn lane for the lgth Street intersection (per Standard Plan No. 119), relocate conflicting traffic signal poles and upgrade access ramp(s). Provide a minimum right-of-way of 7 feet measured from the ultimate face of curb and a corner cut-off for a 35-foot curb return, per Standard Plan No's. 100-b and 102. This offer of dedication shall be made and approved, prior to the approval of Lot Line Adjustment No. 445 and the issuance of building permits. ~J~ Dedicate additional street right-of-way along 19th Street for a future bus bay (per Standard Plan No. 119).' Provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the ultimate face of curb. Said right-of-way shall extend to the existing project driveway in the event future development within the center warrants a right turn lane into, the center. These offers of dedication shall be made and approved, prior to the approval of Lot Line adjustment No. 445 and the issuance of building permits. 4) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for the 66kV electrical) on the project side of Carnelian Street shall be under grounded from the first pole north of 19th Street to the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-67 CUP 99~10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. July 14, 1999' Page ~, first pole south of the project's south property line, pdor to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing Carnelian Street within the project under grounding limits shall be undergrounded at the same time. 5) A signed consent and waiver to join the appropriate landscape and lighting~'~aintenance districts shall be filed with the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of building permits. 6) Improvements exist at the southeast corner of Carnelian and 19th Streets, but some do not meet current standards since the center was constructed, prior to City incorporation. To meet the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) design and construction requirements for accessibility, the center's northerly drive approach on Carnelian Street shall be reconstructed per Standard Plan No. 101, Type C. If necessary, a sidewalk easement shall be dedicated as required and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 7) Install 16000 lumen HPSV street light along the Carnelian Street frontage of the project parcel. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to building permit issuance. 8) If additional street trees are necessary, they shall conform to the "Conditional Use Permit 99-10 Street Tree Requirement Form," dated May 18, 1999. on file in the office of the City Engineer. g) Public right-ot'-way improvements adjacent to and fronting the project site shall be protected in-place and replaced as required above to the satisfaction of the City Engineer as follows: a) Security shall be pOSted and an agreement executed, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney, guaranteeing completion of the required improvements, prior to the issuance of building permits. b) Provide Street Improvement Plans, prepared by a registered Civil engineer, for the required off-site public improvements. Processing and plan check i~ees will be required. c) Prior to any work being performed in the street right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the office of the City Engineer. ~OEa~O~OING O~ EXISTING ~ERN~O UTILITIES AaO REP~LING RESOLbTI~ NO. 8~-77 WISEREAS, the Plan~tng Commission of the CtLj' of Rancho Cucamogga ~HERERS, ~ne Planntng C~sston ~ the Clc~ of Rancho Cuc~onga .~shts L~ r~oue unsightl~ o~lsting overhead utfltt~ 11nes In oeder to almore aesthetic and destraole working and 11vtng enviro~e~t ~(thtn the City: ~ gHEREAS, 't ts necessary to'estaMIsh a poltc~ to tnfo~ o~ner~ lnd aaveloper~ of :he C1:~ goal. ~ N~. TNER[FOR[, be It resolved an~ established that all develo~nts, e~ept thuse contalne~ In Section 7 and any others spec1Fica11~ watved b~ ire Plbnnlng C~mtssfcn. shall be res~nslble for ~dergro~d.ing 611 existing overhead utility ltne~ including the r~val o~ the relate~ supporting poles a~acent to and withi~ t~ limits ~ a. eevel~ent as roll.s: ~.~ L(nes on the project s~,Oe of the street*: a. Said lines shall bt under~oun~ed at the developer's e~ense. b. In tho~e tire.stances where the Planning C~mlsslon OeclOes that undergrounOlng ts ImpPactical at present for Sud~ reasons as ~ short , l~gth of undergrodndtng (less t~on ~00 feet ~d not undergrounded a~acent), a heavy concentration O~ services to ot~r users, disruption CO existing lmarov~ents, etc., the ~veloper shall pay an In-lieu Fee fur t~ fall ~ount ~r Section 6. c. The Developer shall be eltgible for reimbu~ent of one-half the of un~rground(ng fr~ f~ure Oevelo~ments ~. they occur on the opaost:e side ef the street. : 2. L(nes ~ the opposite side o~ the street f,r~ the project: The Oevelope' s~a~l aay a ~ee'to the C(t~ far one-~alf :he ~unt per Section 6. 3, Lines' on ~th Sl~S of the steeett The Oeveloper shall comply '~'1 a~ve ang be elt~fb'~retmbursment or ~a~ additional fees so that he bears a total exaense e~ivalent to ane-h41f the total cost undergroundlng the lines on both sides af the 4. Pol~ lines ~ntmtn~ng~v or lar~er eJectrical lines: All lines sn411 ~er~oun~d aF~-~eu fees pe[u tn accorda~c~ section l, ~ or above, except for 66 KV Or larger electrical lines. 5.~ L 1rat t S__OF...P...e.s..~e~s I OI 1 I t ~ esL a. In-lieu fees sh~11 be basra upon the length et' t~e property ~lmj eec'eloped rrm property line to propert)' line (the center of adjacent sat'oats for corner properties), b.- iJr. dergr'ou, ding sh~11 include t~e nnttre project frontage and o~ten~ : ~o: (I) ~he first e~isttng Pole off.site frae :he project boun~arte'- tatters Die' street for corner proaertiesl0 12) a ne~ aole erected at project, boundary (acro~s the streel, for turner properties), or ~3} a.n existing pole wltnln $ fee: of a aroJect b~undary, e~cept at. e cor,ne~'. . ~,' .:er Amount: The ~unt for In-lieu fees shall equal the length (per Sectiun 5. nj tines the untt a~oun, t as established by the C1t.v ~ basra upon Information supplied b.~ the uttllt.Y canp&nies a.~¢ as updatna ; periodically as deemed necassar)'. : .£xemptio.'.s: The following types of projects s~,sll be exeel4 iron this po1 a. The adc~ltton of functional e;utpment to existing clevelc~ent~, such as: Ioe~lr, g ;oL~s~ sllos, satellite dlshes~ anL~-nnas, water tanks, conditioners, cooling to,ers, enclosure of an outduor storage area, I)ar~tng and loading areas, btoc~ ~alls and fences, etc. b. 3utlding oddtttcr, s or ne~ free standing bulldlng~ of less than 25; of the floor are~ of :he extst:ng building(s) on the same assessor's I~ar~l, or S, O00 square feet, ~,tchever ts less. c. [~terior uogracling or repair of extsting develo~ents, such as: reroef tag. ac:at ti~ of trellis, a~nlngs, lanclscalal no, equipment screen:no, roi)elating anti exterior ftnSshes, etc. d. Interior ten,tit ~epr¢~enen%s and nonoCOPstru~Lfon :UPs. e. The construc:~oq oea Slngle fa:ntl.y residence on an ez~s%ing f. ~:zlstlng overfeed utlllt)' 1tries locatecl In trails, alle.vs, and easments wtth a heavy concentration of services to adJacen~ clevelol~aents, and t~e uttllty lines are SO0' or note fro~ the riSC of wa)' line of a Speci,.1 Boulevard. g. Res?denttal subdivision.· of four or fewer single f~.tly resloentla! parcels, uhete the utilit)' i~nas eztend at least &O0' off star from both the project boundaries and the ad.~acenC prop~rt~ is not 11kely to contribute to future undergroundtng. A11 references to Streets shall a~so mean elle)'$, railroad or Channel ri~hts-o(-wa)', etc. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS loth DAY OF ~ 1987, ~l. AtttC[NG COH~.SIQi OF ?~ CZTY O~ ~C~O I, Brsd ~11er, Deputy Secretary of the Plannlng C~sslon of ~he City of R~cn~ Cuc~ong~, 8~ her,~y cer~lfy that t~e foregoing Resolution tegu1~ly tntrod~c.d, psssed. ,nd a~op~e~ by ~ Planning C~tsston C'ty of R~ChO Cut.riga, at ~ regular meattng of t~ Planning C~,',,,ts~ton h~ld ~n t~ I0 day af Oune, 1987, by th~ fo]l~tng voCe-to-~t: ~YE~: COMM~S~I~: ~M~RIC~, CH~A, MCNIEL ~D[S: CO~Z SS 1~: TOLSTOY ABSENT: COH~SSZ~ERS: NO~ A~STAI'N~ CO~iSS]ONERS: BLA~SL~Y March 7, 2000 Evergreen Devco Inc. Attn. Heather Balzer 2920 E. Camel Back P,d. Phoenix, AZ 85016 RE: 'ih= Undergrounding of Edison Utility Poles at 6701 Carnelian, Rancho CucamonEa Dear Heath=r, In regards to the underirounding of the Edison ulilky poles fronting your project, for thc Wal~reens in Rancho Cucamonga, 1 am office op/n/on as your F~/son £1e~hical Distribution Planner, that the Edison fees alone will be in excess of $120,000. The job will enta/l crossing Carnelian in two locations, crossing 19~' St. in two locations, the installation to a 7 ½ X 14' underground vault on Camehan, the installation of two transformers, as well as the installation of two pedestals to serve traffic control and irrigation. The intersection at Carnelian and 19~' St- will have to be closed during. construction. My in/gal estimate does not include the undergrounding of the main line telephone system or cable t.4. system attached to the subject po/es. If you have any questions, please contact me at (909) 357-~240. 'Sincerely, David Service Planner GTE Networ~ ldO0 E. p,hlllws BIwL March 7, ~000 Ev~rgreer~ D~vco. Inc. 2920 Camelback Road, Suite 100 Phoenix, AZ 85016 Attention: Ms. Heather Balzer Oear Ms. Balzer, GTE has received a request Io underground several secilo~s of aerial telep~:~no facilities fro~ting a proposed Walgreen store on the South East comer of 19Th Street and Carnelian Avenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. My research I~as determined that approximately t500 wo~ing lines are invoNecl with a consicleral~le amount of these lines being special circuits. These circuits will require all new re-designs. Not only is the prOceSs costly, proDalply exceeding $100,000. it is very lime consuming, taking el~out six months to a yeer to c~mplete. Add to this the cost of installing a sul~structure system (ertywhere from $30,000 to ~0,000) and you cen 5e~ the total expense involved. If I can I~e of any further assistance, you can contact me at 909146g-6327. Sincerely, Steve Hock Senior Designer- Access Design SH: dfa CI7~( ':RANCHO CUCAMONGA Comho,~nity Development Department ·UNIFORM 10500 Civic Center Drive APPLICATION Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2750 Part Legal OwneKs Name (if different fro/n above) Phone Number: Address Type of Review Requested (Please Check All Applicable Boxes) O Community Plan Amendment 0 Hillside Development >4 DU 0 Tentative Parcel Map 0 Conditional Use Permil 0 Hillside Development ~ 4 DU 0 Tentative Tract Map O Conditional Use Permit 0 Landmark Alteration Permit 0 Use Determination (Non. Construction) 0 LofLineAdjustment 0 VacationofPubticRight*of-Wayor O DewDesignReview-Comm/Indu$ O MinorDevelopmentReview Easement 0 Der/Design Review-Residential 0 Minor Exception 0 .Vatfance~ ~ ~ I . /~ 0 DevelopmentOistdctAmendrnenl 0 PrelirrdnaryReview / ~'*,e.~" _~.,~.~"'~/ O Entertainment Pen'nit O Specific Plan Amendment /' ~ ,' ~.~ .,~ [3 GeneralPIonAmendment /" ()t ?~/~/'0 c/ Detailed Desc~fptlon of Propos.ed Project (A~ach Additional SheeC1 If Necessat),) I certify that I am presently the legal owner of the above-desc6bed properly. Further, I acknowledge the tiling of this application and certify that all of the above information is true and correct. (If the undersigned is different from the legal property owner, a letter of authorfzation must accompany this form.) Date Signature Pn'nt Name and 7~lle Date/Time Received Received By Fees Received Receipt No. Fire Receipt No. RESOLUTION NO. 87-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTABLISHING A REVISED POLICY FOR THE UNDERGROUNDING OF EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES AND REPEAL,ING RESOLUTION NO. 86-77 WHEREAS, the Planning COmmission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga wishes to repeal Resolution No. 86-77 which was adopted on the 28th day of May, 1986 and establish the revised policy contained herein; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Wi~hes to remove unsightly existing overhead utility lines in order to promote a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within the City; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish a policy to inform property owners and developers of the City 9oal. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved and established that all developments, except those contained in Section 7 and any others specifically waived by the Planning Commission, shall be responsible for undergroundin9 all existing overhead utility lines including the removal of the related supporting poles adjacent to and within the limits of a development as follows: 1. Lines'on the project side of the street*: a. Said lines shall be undergrounded at the developer's expense. b. In those circumstances where the Planning Commission decides that undergrounding is impractical at present for such reasons as a short length of undergrounding (less than 300 feet and not undergrounded adjacent), a heavy concentration of services to other users, disruption to existing improvements, etc., the Developer shall pay an in-lieu fee for the full amount per Section 6. c. The Developer shall be eligible for reimbursement of one-half the cost of undergrounding from future developments as they occur on the opposite side of the street. 2. Lines on the opposite side of the street from the projectE .The_Developer shall pay a fee to the City for one-half the amount per Section 6. 3. Lines on both sides of the street:- .The Develope~ shall comply with Section ) above and be eligible for ~eimbursement or pay additional fees so that he bears a total expense equivalent to one-half the total cost of undergrounding the lines on both sides of the street. 4. Pole lines containin~ 66KV or lar~er electrical lines: All lines shall be undergrounded or in-lieu fees paid in accordance with section l, 2 or 3, above, except for 66 KV or larger electrical lines. 5. Limits of Responsibilities: a. In-lieu fees shall be based upon the length of the property being developed from property line to property line {the center of'adjacent streets for corner properties). b. Undergrounding shall include the entire project frontage ahd extend to: (1) the first existing pole off-site fr~n the project boundaries (across the street for corner properties), (2) a new pole erected at a project boundary (across the street foF corner properties), or {3) an existing pole within 5 feet of a project boundary, except at a corner. 6. Fee Amount: The amount for in-lieu fees shall equal the length (per . Section 5. al times the unit amount as established by the City Council based upon information supplied by the utility companies and as updated periodically as deemed necessary. 7. Exemptions: The following types of projects shall be exempt from this policy: a. The addition of functional equipment to existing developments, such as: loading docks, silos, satellite dishes, antennas, water tanks, air conditioners, cooling towers, enclosure of an outdoor storage area, parking and loading areas, block walls and fences, etc. b. Building additions or new free standing buildings of less than 25% of the floor area of the existing building(s) on the same assessor's parcel, or 5,000 square feet, whichever is less. c. Exterior upgrading or repair of existing developments, such as: reroofing, addition of trellis, awnings, landscaping, equipment screening, repainting and exterior finishes, etc. .d. Interi~r tenant improvements and non-construction CUPs. e. The construction of a single family residence on an existing parcel. f. Existing overhead utility lines located in trails, alleys, and. utility easements with a heavy concentration of services to adjacent developments, and the utility lines are 500' or more from the right of way line of a Special Boulevard. g. Residential subdivisions of four or fewer single family residential parcels, where the utility lines extend at least 600' offsite from both the project boundaries and the adjacent property is not likely to contribute to future undergrounding. * All references to streets shall also mean alleys, railroad or channel rights-of-way, etc. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS loth DAY OF J~E 1987. PLANNIN~,ISSI~ OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Lar~y T~. M~i~_l- Chairman ATTEST: ,~~ . . /r a'd-B:ly ,~'~)eJ~r~ Se cr e t ary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby cert. ify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regu.larly 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 10 day of June, 1987, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: 'EMERICK, CHITIEA, MCNIEL HOES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY ABSENT: COMMISSI ONERS: NONE ABSTA I'~:' COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DENYING A REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION OF A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-10, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CARNELIAN AND 19TH STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 202-541-60 A. Recitals. 1. On Mamh 21, 2000, a request was filed by Evergreen Devco, Inc., to modify the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines on Carnelian Street from the first pole north of 19th Street to the first pole south of the project's south property line. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject request for a modification of a condition of approval is referred to as "the Application" and Evergreen Devco, Inc., is referred to as "the Applicant." 2. On July 14, 1999, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 99-67, thereby approving, subject to specified conditions, Conditional Use Permit No. 99-10, which provides for the construction and operation of a drive-thru pharmacy on 1.15 acres of land within the Neighborhood Commercial District. 3. On April 26, and continued to May 10, and May 24, 2000, 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 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 R~citals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on April 26, and continued to May 10, and May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The requirement to underground the existing overhead utility lines on Carnelian Street from the first pole north of the 19th Street to the first pole south of the project's south properly line, is consistent with current Planning Commission policy (Resolution No. 87-96) and is necessary to promote a more aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within the City; and b. The current policy applies universally to all applications for development within the City; and ~C~ ~ ~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. May 24, 2000 Page 2 c. The applicant had full knowledge and disclosure of the recommended condition pdor to the City Planning Commission's approval of the application; and d. The applicant made no attempt to timely appeal the condition following the City Planning Commission's approval. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above-referenced public headng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The deletion of the condition to underground the overhead utility lines on Carnelian Street would not be consistent with City policy (Planning Condition Resolution No. 87-96); and b. To modify the condition and replace the actual undergrounding with an in-lieu fee would not be consistent with the City's goal of promoting an aesthetic and desirable working and living environment within the City. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby denies the requested condition modification and reaffirms Resolution Nos. 99-67 and 87-96. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF MAY 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman A'I-rEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Bulier, 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~'~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MODIFYING A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 99-10, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CARNELIAN AND 19TH STREETS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF APN: 202-541-60 A. Recitals. 1. On March 21, 2000, a request was filed by Evergreen Devco, Inc., to modify the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of existing overhead utility lines on Carnelian Street from the first pole north of 19th Street to the first pole south of the project's south property line. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject request for a modification of a condition of approval is referred to as "the Application" and Evergreen Devco, Inc., is referred to as "the Applicant." 2. On July 14, 1999, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 99-67, thereby approving, subject to specified conditions, Conditional Use Permit No. 99-10, which provides for the construction and operation of a drive-thru pharmacy on 1.15 acres of land within the Neighborhood Commemial District. 3. On April 26, and continued to May 10, and May 24, 2000, 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 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, Pad A., of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on Apdl 26, and continued to May 10, and May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The removal of the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of the existing overhead utility lines on Carnelian Street fronting and adjacent to the project site will not cause significant inconsistencies with current City policies; and b. The removal of the condition of approval requiring the undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities is not likely to cause public health and safety problems; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. May 24, 2000 Page 2 c. Modifying the condition of approval from requiring the undergrounding to having the applicant pay an in-lieu fee to the City for the cost of undergrounding is consistent with City policy, Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96. 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 paragraph 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That Conditional Use Permit No. 99-10 is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and specific plans; and b. The deletion of the condition to underground the overhead utility lines on Carnelian Street complies with certain circumstances of and is in compliance with City policy; and c. The modification of the condition to underground and require that the applicant pay an in-lieu fee is in compliance with City policy; and d. Deleting and modifying the undergrounding conditions will not likely cause serious public health and safety problems. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby approves the requested condition modification and reaffirms Resolution Nos. 87-97 and 99-67 subject to this approval and paragraph 5 below. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraph 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby modifies Resolution No. 99-67 by changing condition noted on paragraph B.5 - Engineering Division item No. 4) to read as follows: 4) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical, except for 66 kV Electrical) on the project side of Camelian Street shall be paid prior to the issuance of the building permits. The fee shall be the full amount of the City-adopted unit cost times the length from the center of 19th Street to the southerly project boundary. The applicant may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-haft the City-adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposite side of the street. If the applicant fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the project's required public improvements (of[site) being accepted by the City, all rights of the applicant to reimbursements shall terminate. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 99-10 - EVERGREEN DEVCO, INC. May 24, 2000 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF MAY 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Athalon Properties, Inc. 9227 Haven Avenue- Suite 225 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Phone 909 944 0600 Fax 909 945 5919 EMA1L CMClaug431 (~aol.com October 25, 1999 Mr. Brad Buller City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 R l= O le I ¥ I~ D Via Fax 909 477 2847 OCT ~ ~ 1999 Re ISPA 99-05 City of Rancho Cucamoncj ~ning Division Dear Mr. Buller, Athalon Properties, Inc. (API) is the owner of the Athalon Centre located at the northeast comer of 6th Street and Haven AVenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. It has been brought to our attention that ISPA 99-05 is being processed for a modification to the Haven Overlay District, as it affects the vacant land at the northwest comer of 6th and Haven. Said modification would allow, if approved, a service station and possibly a fast food restaurant, either free standing or within the service station as is common in most new service stations today. I have attempted to contact the property owner to obtain information concerning the proposed pro9ject. None of my 5 phone calls nor my one letter over the past 1.5 months have been returned. As a consequence, I am limited in my knowledge ab°ut the l:n'oject lo infommfion provided by your planning department. We object to the change in approved uses under the Haven Overlay District because of the negative impact on traffic and property values within the region. Because of the Haven Overlay District zoning, the City has attempted to upgrade the area. Those of us who have invested here over the last 10 years relied on this zoning designation to make our investment. There is already substantial traffic congestion along Haven, and especially at 6h Street. The addition of these high traffic uses will not only depreciate the ,£'rom:GhadesJMcLau~hlin To:Mr. B~d ~uller D~te:JO/25/99 Time:4:" '$PM Page3of3 quality of the neighbor hood, but will also draw a significant amount of traffic from surrounding areas. In addition to owning the property, I am a daily commuter on the 10, 15, and 60 freeways.' As a result I am a regular seeker of service station facilities. I can tell you that it is much easier to use such facilities when they are located close to the freeways rather than in an isolated business areas such as central Haven Avenue. I can also advise you that such facilities also attract a sigrdicant number of non-business types of travelers, including trucks and motorcycles. This is not the business environment which we bargained for when we invested on Haven Avenue. I am available to meet with you or the developers of the proposed project. Smcerely, Charles J. McLaughlin President wordfileXarical\icc\cityofrc_isp9905_ 1 MAY.-2Y O0(TUE) 11:32 S T TEL:949 598 4567 P. O01 7~-075 Amber Street PalmD~'rt, CA 92260 May 23, 2000 Ci~ P~nner Th~ City of Rancho C'ueamonga 105~ Ci~c C~a~ ~ ~ C~ CA 91729 ~: ~ P~c ~elop~nt Appl~ions No. C~ 99-53 ~ BPA 99-05 ~ ~. B~; ~s ~ ~ ~ m ~ pm~ ~l!pe ~on on ~e No~ ~ of H~n As my ~, N~ M~naal~ de~led ~ obj~tb~ ~ her ~t~ m you ~fl ~eem~r l~ 1999, we ~ obje~ m ~s pmj~ ~, C~e ~L-,,~h~ ~ ~ ~ to you o~ a n~ of~u~n~ ~ pl~d on t~i. ~. S~ ~ C~ of~ ~it~ ~u~n~ m ~. MeLaughlln's o~ne. ~ ~e,~s wo~ ~ ~ ~ws: 1. ~py-No~fmp~, ~oftop~e~. ~o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~t is ~t o~ ~ ~ of pumps ~om ~ ~t m bb~ ~ v~w offs ~m ~ 4, Music - C~cal m~k p~d ~ ~o~bo~ ~ ~bm inelud~ ~ ~ioe ~a, No ~ of~ ~ ~ ~k~ "o~ ~on", "o~" or ~ ~m. , MAY,-2Y 00{TUE) 11:32 STERLING NATIONAL BriNK TEL:949 598 4567 P. 002 Mr. Brad Buller Page 2 I personally d~ove to and inspected thc newest stnte oftbo art gasoline stmions that have recently opened. I found these stntinns 1o hnw ineo~omted tbo nbo~ requirements. All the stations wer~ located in commercial areas, Non~ were loca~ed in an ama zoned office us~ such as Haven Avcnu~ or Ma~ Art~r Boulevard in Newport Beach. I distin~iy remember the Planning Commitme flash/amd Haven Avtnam ~ Mae Arthur Boulevard more than lg ~ars ago. Thee are no gasoline stations along the ofl~ corridor of Ma~ Arthur in Newport Beach lo this date. Based on the office zoning of the Haven Avenue Corridor I would uk~ to add ong additional r~n which is item No. 6. 6. No mini-gro~e~d sram ,~1 or drive-thriVe-in fas~ food facility such as B]imp~ Quiznos, subway, Taco Bell etc. No alcoholic beverages sold on premises to ensm~ the larestig~, of I-laven Avenue This facility should represent tho lat~ innovation i~ quality oonsh-u~tion for service stations s.d guarantee high maintens~e. It should bo a state ofth~ art facility in ~n ami dgsign dug 1o its k~stfon in an office oorridor. Sloe. iai efforts should bo enforged to da~- loitm, ing and ~in~. Thank you for considering my points. I hope the City of Rancho C~.w_~monga upholds tho status of Raven Avenue that was ~xeated mor~ than 18 yoara ago by implementing the slzietest of guidel_'_m~s on tk!~ project. Sincerely, RECU~VED F~E[~ ! 7J ~ Nina Mandala 73-075 Amber Street ~ ~,~-hc, Cucamong Palm Desert, CA 92260 - , '.}~vision December 10, ]999 Mr. Brad Buller City Planner The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Dear Mr. Buller: ! recently learned of some disturbing information regarding the property located on the Northwest comer of Haven Avenue and Sixth Street. The subject property is across Haven Avenue from my twenty acre parcel, and I am therefore, highly concerned as to the type of project proposed. It is my understanding that Rancho Pacific Development has proposed a gasoline station to be built on a portion of land that is known as the Haven Avenue Overlay District. As an owner of Haven Avenue property for fifty;five years, I feel this is a great injustice for what I have strived to achieve with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. I can recall attending several city planning meetings in 1981 with my daughter, Rosalie Mandala, in which we supported the City in its endeavor to attain the highest level of zoning for Haven Avenue. During those meetings, a certain developer solicited us to speak out against the Haven Avenue Overlay District, but instead, we envisioned a higher standard and expressed our firm commitment to the City and the Overlay District. The comer of Sixth and Haven was always considered by the City as one of the most important comers along the Haven Corridor. It is pivotal in the development of the Haven Avenue Overlay District to its highest potential. To consider anything less, especially a gasoline station, would severely compromise the integrity of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The City of Rancho Cucamonga must consider the fact it is fortunate to have two of the most important highways east of Orange and San Diego Counties. Those two streets are Haven Avenue and Foothill Boulevard. The prestige of Haven Avenue would certainly be diminished by the traffic congestion, noise and pollution of a gasoline station at such a premier comer. As a Haven Avenue property owner that has weathered a severe recession, and also held to a higher standard of zoning, I feel it is unfair for the City to allow a change in zoning for one individual or company. A change in zoning bythe City for one individual would certainly open the door for proposed changes by future developers. Mr. Brad Buller Page 2 I hereby request a copy of the plans submitted by Rancho Pacific Development for Application Numbers CUP 99-53 and BPA 99-05. Please place my name on the Special Notice List of any Staffor Hearing Application. I also authorize my daughter, Rosalie Mandala C/O American Sterling Bank, 1 Sterling, Irvine, CA 92618, to be placed on the Notice List of any Staff or Hearing Application. In conclusion, I sincerely hope the City of Rancho Cucamonga realizes the value of Sixth and Haven to its highest potential with the focus of an impending economic boom along the Haven Avenue Corridor. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Nina Mandala NM:rmm Phone (909) 788-6100 Riverside Commercial Investors FAX (909) 784-1524 THE LORING BUILDING 3685 MAIN STREET · SUITE 220 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92501 RECE;VED March 27, 2000 APR ~) 5 2000 City of Rancho Oucamonc Mr. Brad Buller '- ~ Division City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 RE: ISPA 99-05 Dear Mr. Bullet, We are the owners of the property at the southwest comer of Haven and Sixth Street. We are in support of the proposed amendment to the Industrial area Specific Plan within the Haven Overlay District Area. We can be reached at (909) 788-6100. Sincerely, Cabot Industrial Trust ' Charles Associates PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES May 22, 2000 R E C E l V E D Charles J. McLaughlin, President MAY ff. 3 2000 Athalon Properties, Inc. 9227 Haven Avenue, Suite 225 City nf Rancho Cucamong Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 - Division Re: Rancho Pacific Project Issues Correspondence Follow-up NWC Sixth Street and Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga Dear Mr. McLaughlin: Please be advised that our firm has been retained to represent the property owner and project interests concerning the referenced matter. A copy of your April 24, 2000 correspondence to Mr. Brad Buller has been referred to our office for appropriate review and follow-up as may be appropriate. We have spoken with our client concerning your prior contact and discussion with him as well as the points outlined in your correspondence, and the following is offered for your review and consideration: · At this time, we must respectfully decline your request to provide you With direct payment as reimbursement o4 costs you indicate were incurred with the development of your project. As we are very familiar with the City reimbursement requirements, we are prepared to make the apprepdate financial reimbursement that will be conditioned as part of our proposed project approval, ff you wish to have this matter considered further, we are requesting that you provide our office with documentation of these reimbursable expenses so we can review this information with our client and verify these documents with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. · In our discussion with City staff, we have become aware that you may have previously viewed very preliminary project design materials we provided for preliminary review and discussion at the City staff level. We are pleased with our latest plan design, with this plan incorporating quality building materials and architectural features that we believe will be very complimentary to the existing businesses in the Haven Overlay District. Please be advised that our proposed project is respectful of the Haven Overlay District while offering automotive fueling services that are absent in the Haven Corridor. We remain available to meet with you should you wish to review our most recent project design that has been filed with City Planning. We believe your review will determine that our project is intended to be a quality addition to the Haven Overlay District as well as being complimentary to buildings such as yours~ while providing services currently not available for building tenants on Haven Avenue. Office 909·481·1822 800.240·1822 Fax 909·481·1824 City Center · 10681 Foothill Blvd., Suite 395 · Rancho Cucamonga, CA · 91730 A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION Please feel free to contact me at your earliest opportunity should you have any questions or need of additional information concerning this matter. Sincerely, Charles J. Buquet Charles Joseph Associates Cc: Brad Buller, City Planner Doug Fenn, City Planning Bill Angel, Rancho Pacific Bruce Ann Hahn, Rancho Pacific Athalon Properties, Inc. 6227 Haven Avenue Suite 225 Rancho Cncamongn, (18. 61730 Phone 909 944 0600 Fax 969 945 5919 E-Mall Cmolaug431@ael~om May 24, 2000 Mr. Brad Buller City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department Via fax (909) Re: Rancho Pacific Application, NWC 6th and Haven Ave May 24, 2000 Planning Commission Hearing Dear Mr. Buller, As a follow-up to my letter of May 4, 2000 concerning the subject application, please pray/de me with the following: 1) A list of all applications submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for gas/service stations or retail uses along Haven Avenue bom the north side of 4th street to 19th street. Please also advise me of the disposition of each of those applications. For any applications please provide me with a copy of the Staff Report or any other internal report which dealt with the application. 2) A copy of the Staff Report on this application. I feel that I should receive this report no later than 48 hours prior to the hearing. If the final report is not available at that time, I would like to receive the latest version of the drag report on May 22, 2000. Please send this to me via fax at the above number. 3) If staff is recommending approval of this application, please send me via fax a copy of the Conditions of Approval. I feel that I should receive these conditions no later than 48 hours prior to the hearing. If the final report is not available at that time, I would like to receive the latest version of the draft report on May 22, 2000. Please send this to me via fax at the above number. Please call me if you have any questions concerning my requests. As the property owner most affected by this application, I feel that I should receive all of the above documents. Sincerely, Charles J. McLaughlin President d\wor d fi I e~icc\utilagmt~nwc6thhaven\cityr ¢ ranchonaoific_2 THE C I ~ Y OF I~ANCHO CU CAMON GA Slaf:f Rq rt DATE: May 24, 2000 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Douglas Fenn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 99-05 - CHARLES JOSEPH AND ASSOCIATES - A request to add Automotive Fueling Services as a conditionally permitted use in the Haven Overlay District. BACKGROUND: At the July 23, 1997, meeting, the Planning Commission initiated an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to conditionally permit "Automobile Fueling Service" in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. This was in response to the applicanrs request to develop an automobile fueling station at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route. The Planning Commission directed the applicant to file an application, including a demand study to justify the need for more automobile fueling stations on Haven Avenue. ANALYSIS: Currently the applicant desires to develop a professional center project (Rancho Pacific Professional Center) which would consist of an automotive fueling service and convenience center; a 3,500 square foot restaurant; and a three-story, 32,000 square foot office building in the Haven Avenue Overlay District, located on the northwest comer of Haven Avenue and Sixth Street. The amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan, as identified in the demand study, is to create a new land use type, "Automotive Fueling Services," in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Automobile Fuelin.q Services: Activities typically include, but are not limited to, the principal sale of petroleum products and the retail sale, from the premises, of convenience items and food and beverage products for motoring consumers. This use would not include the incidental sales of tires, batteries, replacement items, and lubricating services, and the pedormance of minor repairs such as tune-ups, tire changes, and brake work. Automobile Service Stations are currently a conditionally permitted use within 13 of the 18 Subareas (i.e., Subareas 1,2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 18). The difference between the proposal of Automotive Fueling Service and Automobile Service Station is that the service station includes car repair and incidental sales of tires, batteries, oil, etc. The Haven Avenue corridor, south of Foothill Boulevard, is the only major arterial in Rancho Cucamonga where automobile service stations are not conditionally permitted (see Exhibit "B"). ITEM B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA 99-05 - CHARLES JOSEPH AND ASSOCIATES May 24, 2000 Page 2 The Haven Avenue Overlay District was created in 1985 for the following purpose: "Encourage long-range master planned development along the Haven Avenue corridor which enhances Rancho Cucamonga's image by providing an intensive, high-quality gateway into the City and by promoting a distinctive, attractive, and pleasant office park atmosphere in a campus-like setting with high prestige identity." The Haven Oveday District extends approximately 400 feet east and west of Haven Avenue from the southern City limit on Fourth Street to Foothill Boulevard in the north (see Exhibit "A"). It is intended to provide a visual barder between Haven Avenue and the Industrial zones to the east and west and to ensure that Haven Avenue, as a gateway to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, will have an attractive and professional urban appearance. Landscaping and amhitectural standards set by the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the gateway avenues are stringent and are strictly applied. Accordingly, the primary land use is Office with limited commercial retail or services uses (see Exhibit "B"). Service stations were not permitted based upon concerns that "corporate design" would not be appropriate. In the ensuing years, Rancho Cucamonga has been successful in fostering attractive service stations that reflect the uniqueness of our community. The existing station/car wash at Haven Avenue and Jersey Street has been a good neighbor and received a Design Award in 1987. Demand Study Recommendations: The applicant has prepared a demand study which concludes that a gas station is needed on the west side of Haven Avenue to support southbound traffic. A gas station exists on the east side of Haven Avenue, which serves northbound traffic. The following demand study recommendations are summarized below: 1) "... Automotive Fueling Services should be prohibited at Haven Avenue Overlay District Urban Center intersections. This will ensure that the City's vision of the unique character, setting and uses anticipated at the Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue and Fourth Street and Haven Avenue Urban Center designations will not be compromised or conflicted as to District entry statement potentiaL.." · Staff concurs with this recommendation. 2) "Due to the current and protected traffic volumes on Haven Avenue, Automobile Fueling Services should only be considered at signalized intersections for optimum traffic safety and traffic controL.." · Staff concurs with recommendation. 3) "... The intersection of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue would be strategically located in the southern portion of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, and at the right juncture for optimal capture for southbound commuters. An Automotive Fueling Service use at this intersection would provide an appropriate level of services at a conveniently accessible location for the greatest number of users, without providing any conflict with the District's southern Urban Center designation..." PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA 99-05 - CHARLES JOSEPH AND ASSOCIATES May 24,2000 Page 3 · Staff believes that this site may be a viable location for an Automobile Fueling Service use; however, there may be other viable locations within the Haven Oveday District area. For example, the same applicant originally requested a similar request to develop an automobile fueling station at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Arrow Route. 4) "The intersection of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue is the only intersection within the Haven Avenue Overlay District having access to a 120-foot right-of-way. Industrial project development on Sixth Street both west and east of Haven Avenue is expected to generate considerable traffic volumes at this intersection. Particularly significant is the Edison relocation of their Inland Empire Headquarters to the Empire Lakes Industrial Center, which is located on the south side of Sixth Street, east of Haven Avenue. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is also exploring the feasibility of construction of a Sixth Street off-ramp on the Interstate 15 Freeway, which if successful, will serve to double the projected Post-2010 Average Daily Trip (ADT) Volumes identified in the Austin-Foust Traffic Study. By locating an Automotive Fueling use at Sixth Street and Haven Avenue, this will only serve to enhance the potential for optimum "sales tax capture." · Staff's comment is the same as #3 above. 5) "... The existing approved driveway location north of the intersection will provide for safe access to an Automobile Fueling Services, particularly due to this use being a proposed development component of a business and professional center planned at that location. Also, by being a component of a larger development project, issues such as a use and design compatibility will be integrated into the overall project, rather than as a small, usually 1.5-acre, stand-alone prototypical project an oil company would otherwise design and present." · Staff concurs with the concept that the proposed Automotive Fueling Services will be a part of a larger professional office complex. If the concept of an Automotive Fueling Service is approved to be conditionally permitted, then staff is of the opinion that an Automobile Fueling Service use must be in conjunction with a office complex project and not developed as a stand-alone project. This would be in harmony with the overall concept and intent of the Haven Overlay District. Staff believes that the proposed automobile fueling station is compatible and supportive to the primary office function of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, particularly when developed in conjunction with a larger master planned project. Further, the Automobile Fueling Service use is consistent with the General Plan goal to reduce vehicle trips by encouraging a mix of different, but compatible, land uses and activities. With the criteria of development outlined in the attached (Exhibit "D"), the proliferation of the use is unlikely. As a conditional use, Automobile Fueling Services will require approval of a Conditional Use Permit, which involves a public hearing and the ability to attach conditions regarding the operation. Through the Conditional Use Permit process, each proposed site would be considered based upon its own merits and consistency with the development criteria proposed by this amendment. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ISPA 99-05 - CHARLES JOSEPH AND ASSOCIATES May 24, 2000 Page 4 PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Staff proposes that Section 17.30.080-A.5.F. be revised to include the following criteria of development: 1) Automotive Fueling Services are stdctly prohibited within the urban centers of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, as shown in Figure 17.30.080-A. 2) No Automotive Fueling Service use shall be closer than ~-mile of another Automotive Fueling Service use or similar type use, as measured from the nearest property line. 3) Automotive Fueling Services shall be designed to reflect the architectural standard and guidelines for professional office buildings to be developed within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. No corporate "prototype" architectural design will be permitted. 4) Automotive Fueling Services must be developed and constructed as part of, and concurrently with, a professional office complex. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The proposed amendment is not defined as a project by the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15378 and is therefore exempt from environmental review per CEQA 15061 b.1. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were sent to adjacent property owners within 300 feet of the project site. Staff has also included a letter from an adjacent property who has concerns regarding the Amendment (Exhibit "H"). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 99-05 to the City Council through the adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectfully submitted, Brad Bullet City Planner BB:D~ma Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Haven Avenue Overlay District Exhibit "B" - Existing Use Regulations for Industrial Districts .' Exhibit "C" - Proposed Use "Automobile Fueling Services" to Use Regulations for Industrial Districts Exhibit "D" - Revised Development Code Criteria Exhibit "E" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "F" - Site Plan Exhibit "G" - Applicant's Letter Exhibit "H" - Athalon Properties Letter Exhibit "1" Applicant's Demand Study Resolution Recommending Approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 99-05 dlIAV..EN AVENUE ' )vERLAY DISTRICT Revised 4'11192 ........... Urban Center CIRCULATION ~" 120' R.O.%~. ---- 100' R.O.W. ~ 88' or less R.O.W. RAIL SERVICE .... : Existing ~-*-~-+~-- Proposed o o o o Pedestrian · · · · Bicycle :-. ~r~ Regional ..' Multi-Uae ". ~ Special Streetscnpe/ ~ landscaping Power Une/ Utility Easement · ,-."'-. Creek8 & Channel8 oo ~-~ BHdge · -~ Access Points ~ 1pa~ ~ Fire Station Acres ~ IV-2 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17.30.030 Table 17.30.030 Continued - Use Regulations for Industrial Districts CC,".; r.; ;.. ;~C IAL 18 Adult Entertainment A A A A A A A A A A AgdcuRural/Nursery Supplies & Services P P P I P P P P P Animal Care C C C C C C C C ~,utomotive Fleet Storage C C C C P C C P ~utomotiveRental p p p p p P P P P ~,u[6~u;;ve/LiglltTrucX Repair-Minor p p p p p p p p p ~utomotive/Truc~Repair. Major P C'P 'P P P C C C ~,utomotive Sales and Leasing C I C C =,,utomotive Se~ice Court p P P P C P ~p P I P Automotive Service Station C C C C C C C C C C C C BuildingCg,,~,=~.J.u~'$ Office & Yards p p p p p p p p p p p Building Contractor's Storage Yard p I P Building MaintenanceServices P P P P P P P P P P P P Building & Light Equipment Supplies & Sales P C P C C P P C P C C p Business Supply Retail&Services p' p p p p Ip p p p p p p p Business Support Services P' P C P P C P P P C P Communication Services P P P P PI P P P p p p p p p p p Convenience Sales & Services C Ente,'~=;,.,~.[ C C C C C C C C Extensive Iml~act Commercial C C C C Fast FoodSales C. C C C C C C C Financial, Insurance & Real Estate Services P P P I P P P P C P C C P P ~'~ Food & Beverage Sales C* C C C C C C C C C Funeral & Crematory Services C C Heavy Equipment Sales & Rentals U,I Hotel/Motel p P P I P C Incloor WholesaleARetail Commercial C C C C C C C Laundry Services p p p p p p p p Vledical/Health Care Services p p p p p p p p p p p p =ersonalServices C° C P P PiP P C P P P Petroleum Products Storage C C C C C C RecrealionFacilities C C C C C C C P C C P P P Repair Services P P C P P P P P P P P C Restaurants p p p! p p p p jp Restaurants wilh Ear or Entertainment C C I C C C C C Specialty Building Supplies & Home Improvement P P C Warehouse-Style Retail Merchandising *' C NOTES: IP - Industrial Park P - Permitted Use HO - Haven Avenue Overlay District C - Conditionally Permitted Use Gl - General Industrial - Non-Marked uses not permitted MI/HI - Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial ~ - Adult Entertainment Zoning Permit Required HI - Heavy Industrial MU/OS - Mixed Use/Open Space - Ancillary uses limited to 20 percent of the floor area per Section 17.30,080.5.b. '° - Refer to Subarea 12 Special Considerations for additional restrictions Rancho Cucarnonf, a Develoigment Code Section 17.30. 030 Table '17.30.030 Continued - Ose Regulations for Industrial Oistricte LAND USE IP Gl Gl gl Gl Gl IP IP Gl MI/HI Gl Gl IP Gl Gl HI IP IP MU/OS USETYPES SUBAREAS HO I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 COMMERCIAL Adult Entertainment AIA A A A AIA A A A Agdcultural/Numery Supplies & Services P P P P P P P P knimalCare C C C C C C C C Automotive Fleet Storage C C C i C P C C P ~utomofive Fuelin[I Services C Automotive Rental P P P P P P P ' P P Automotive/Light Truck Repair- Minor P P P P P P P P P Automotive/Truck Repair-Major P C p p p P C C C Automotive Sales and Leasing C C C Automotive Service Court P P P P C P P P P Automotive ServiceStation C C C C C C C C C C C C Z Building Contractor's Office & Yards P P P P P P P P P P P Building Contractor's Storage Yard P P Building Maintenance Services p p p, p p p P P P P P P 14. !Bui[din~ & Li[tht Equipment Supplies & Sales P C P C C P P C P C C P 3usiness Supply Retail & Services P* P P P P P P P P P P P P ~usiness Support Services P' P C P P C p P P C P P P P P P 3ommunicaflon Services P P P 2,onvenienceSales&Services C* C C P P C C C C C C Entertainment C C C C C C C! C Extensive Impact Commercial C C C C Fast FoodSales C' C C C C C C C Financial. Insurance & Real Estate Sentices p p p p p P P C P C C P P O Food & Beverage Sales C* C C C C C C C C C Funeral & Crematory Services C C Heav'/Equipment Sales & Rentals C C C C C P C C C C P Hotel/Motel p p p P C Indcor Wholesale/Retail Commercial C C C C C C C Laundry Services P P P P P P P P Medical/Health Care Services P P P P P P P P P P P P Personal Services C* C p p p p P C P P P Petroleum Products Storage C C C C C C Recreation Facilities C C C C C C C P C C!P P P Repair Services P P C p p p P P P P P C Restaurants P P P P P P P ' P Restaurants with Baror Entertainment ; C C C C C C C Specialty Building Supplies & Home Improvement P ,P C Warehouse-Style Retail Merchandising ** C .NOTES: IP Industrial Park p - Permitted Use HO Haven Avenue Oveday District C - Conditionally Permitted Use Gl General Industrial [] - Non-Marked uses not permitted MI/HI Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial A - Adult Entertainment Zoning Permit Required HI Heavy Industrial MU/OS - Mixed Use/Open Space Ancillary uses limited to 20 percent of the floor area per Section 17.30.080,5,b. ** - Refer to Subarea 12 Special Considerations for additional restrictions '~-'/ 17,30-8 6/99 Rancho Cucamonsa Development Code Section 17.30.080 a finding that such a use will be consistent with the stated design goal for the Haven Avenue Corridor and all other provisions of the Overlay District. b. Select ancillary research services and commercial and business support service uses shall not exceed 20 percent of the floor area in any Master Planned development. Concentration of such uses in any building or along the street frontage is not permitted. c. See Table 17.30.030 for a list of the permitted or conditionally permitted uses for the Haven Avenue Overlay District. All other uses are prohibited. d. Fast food services are specifically excluded as a primary use. This would preclude the development of typical free-standing fast food restaurants, most of which require drive-through facilities, in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. However, fast food could be permitted as an ancillary or secondary use, subject to'a Conditional Use Permit, as a part of a larger project, provided such use not be located directly adjacent to Haven Avenue. e. Accessory/Ancillary Use Restrictions. The purpose of this section is to set maximum development provisions for accessory/ancillary uses which are not normally permitted in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The following provisions shall apply in the Haven Avenue Overlay District: (1) The total of all accessory/ancillary uses not listed as permitted or conditionally permitted uses* are limited to 20 percent of the total building and business area. The ancillary commercial and business support service uses listed in Section 5.b may exceed the 20 percent business area limitation. (2) Accessory/ancillary uses must be located within main buildings housing permitted principal uses. No outdoor accessory/ancillary uses are permitted. (3) No accessory/ancillary manufacturing uses are permitted in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Only uses defined and listed in Section 17.30.030.D can be considered as accessory or ancillary uses. f. Automotive Fuelinft Services Criteria for Development. (1) Automotive Fueling Services are strictly prohibited within the urban centers of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, as shown in Figure 17.30.080-A. (2) No Automotive Fueling Service use shall be closer than ~/2-mile of another Automotive Fueling Service use or similar type use, as measured from the nearest property line. (3) Automotive Fueling Services shall be designed to reflect the architectural standard and guidelines for professional office buildings to be developed within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. No corporate "prototype" architectural design will be permitted. 17.30-54 6/99 Rancho Cucamon~,a Development Code Section 17.30.080 (4) Automotive Fueling Services must be developed and constructed as part of, and concurrently with, a professional office complex. 6. Master Planned Development. The intent of this section is to provide for integrated development at the earliest possible time in the review process. Through the Master Plan process, there are opportunities to coordinate the efforts of single or multiple property owners and discourage piecemeal development. Finally, master planning of defined areas will avoid development of single parcels of land in a manner which would prevent or preclude future development of adjacent parcels in the best way feasible. It is not the intention of the master planning process to cast future development patterns in stone. Rather, it is an attempt to discover problems before they develop, to deal with issues while they can be solved, and to take advantage of opportunities while they exist. The standards and guidelines which follow are intended to apply to all projects and should not be constrained by parcel lines or specific site boundaries. a. A Conceptual Master Plan shall be submitted for Planning Commission approval, together with any development proposal, including subdivision or parcel map applications. Such Master Plan shall address relationships to other parcels within the Master Plan area. b. At minimum, Master Plans shall indicate conceptual building locations, overall circulation, points of ingress and egress to both public and private streets, parking lot layouts, conceptual grading and drainage, areas to be used for landscaping and plazas, pedestrian circulation, and common signing. Areas intended for common use, such as shared access, reciprocal parking, or pedestrian plazas shall also be identified. In addition, a statement of architectural intent and/or conceptual elevations shall be submitted to indicate how the architectural concepts including style, form, bulk, height, orientation, and materials relate to other buildings or projects within the planning area as well as to the overall design goal for Haven Avenue. c. The Master Plan boundaries indicated in Figure17.30.080-B are logical planning boundaries based upon physical constraints and property ownership. These boundaries may be modified when it is determined that the Master Plan is consistent with the intent and purpose ofthe Haven Avenue Overlay District. The City Planner may require master planning of property outside the Overlay District, adjacent to a project proposal, where necessary to assure integrated development and promote the goal of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. d. No parcel map or subdivision map shall be accepted or approved without concurrent submittal and approval of a Master Plan to assure integrated development consistent with the goal of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. e. Architecture within a Master Planned development shall have a compatible design style, with variation, in the building style, form, and materials in accordance with the architectural standards of the Overlay District. f. Lot Size. Minimum parcel size shall be 2 acres with a minimum parcel depth of 225 feet within a Master Plan development. A 300-foot minimum lot width shall also be required, consistent with the access control policies. The Planning Commission may waive these requirements when it is determined that the parcel is part of a Master Plan which is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Overlay District. All lots of record are al lowed to develop according to the requirements of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. ~)q 17.30-55 6/99 Haven Avenue -~: ............................................. Rancho Site Plan Charles ]oseph Associates .~ PUBLIC/PRIVA1E SECTOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES October 12, 1999 Brad Buller, City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Re: Request for Initiation of text changes to add "Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales" as a Conditionally Permitted Use in the Haven Avenue Overlay Distdct at NWC Sixth Street and Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. Dear Brad: Our firm represents a client who proposes to design and develop a professional and business center project that would be comprised of an Automotive Service Station, together with Business Support Services and Convenience Sales and Services at the NWC Sixth/Haven Avenue. Of the three aforementioned uses, Business Support Services and Convenience Sales Services are presently conditionally permitted uses In the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Automotive Service Station is not. We are requesting processing of an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to add "Automotive Service Station" as a conditionally permitted use in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. This is consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission July 23, 1997, action to direct staff to process an amendment to the to the Industrial Area Specific Plan upon receipt of an application and fees. Our evaluation and study of automotive service station uses in the City, on Haven Avenue, and in the Haven Avenue Overlay District has determined that there is an identified need for development of an Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales use on the southern Southbound portion of Haven Avenue. Our proposed project will address the needs identified in the Study, and will provide users adequate level of service at a conveniently accessible location, while Providing optimal sales tax capture. This project will also contribute to the functional efficiency of the City and the Haven Avenue Corridor. Our project will be designed and constructed to project a favorable image of the City to visitors. It will contribute to the City's objective of attracting and retaining businesses and professionals, and will lend life and vitality to the part of the City that is at present deserted after office hours. At the basis of all, the proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan that encourages mixing different but compatible and complementary land uses. Office 909'481- 1822 800'240. 1822 Fax 909'481 · 1824 0 City Center- 10681 Foothill Blvd., Suite 395' Rancho Cucamonga, CA-91730 1 ~L~ ~1~ % A CAUFORNIA CORPORATION · Finally, as we point out the existing needs and present the rationales for justification of the requested text changes to add =automotive service station" to the Haven Avenue Overlay District, we are strongly convinced that the City's evaluation will conclude with the same determination as the Study. We are looking forward to adding a high quality development project as part of the City's Haven Avenue Overlay District business inventory that will serve to assist the City with meeting its goals and objectives while addressing the needs identified and discussed in the Study text and exhibits. We thank you in advance for your consideration and courteous assistance with our amendment application process. Please feel free to contact me at your earliest opportunity should you have any queStions or need of additiona! information or assistance with this matter. Sincerely, Charles J. Buquet Charles Joseph Associates Attachment - Haven Avenue Overlay District Amendment Study REC~fVED Athalon Prol~rties, inc. city of Rancho CucamonC~ 9227 llaven Av~mue- Suite ?.25 Division Rancho Cucamol~a, Ca. 91730 Phone 909 944 0600 Fax 909 945 5919 EMA~T. CMClaug431 ~..'.,aol.com April 24, 2000 Mr. Brad Bull~ City of Rancho Cucamm~ga Department of Planning Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Via Fax 909 Re Prolx)sedRanchoPacilic Project, N.W.C. 6th andIlaven Rancho Cncamonga, Ca. Dear Mr. Bullet, Alhalon Properties, hie (Athalon). is the o~2~er of the project at the North East Cc,-ncr of 6th and Havc~ in Rancho Cucamonga. We arc lcxatttxt directly across the street fi-om the proposed proj~t, and are therefore the most impacted by what is built at thc Rancho Pacific projccl. Wc have requested complete plan~ trcma the developer: but tie has refbsed to provide any infbnnation on the proposed project. Mx' last 4 phone calls have gone unrcmmcci. However, from another source, I have been able to ohtain the attached partial plan, and must assume that it is thc most current scl of plans available. It is our understanding that a General Plan amendment, and/or a zone change are being requested Ibr this project to allow thc inclusion ol'a service station. Athalon objects to ~y change in use regulations which would allow the inclusitm ol' a service station, as outlined in ()ur previous letter to you and the City.. We have invested alraost $10 million in our project based on the current ZOrl~lg o£a~ o_f the property surrottlltting tls, including thc Rancho Pacific hind. In addition, we have inx~ested more than $ l million to protect our interests during the prolonged rcccsskm o1' thc 1990's. II c~rdc~ lo get our project approved, wc had to toe the line with the current zoning and special restrictions h~aposed by the Haven Overlay District requirements. It is incomprehensible that the City would now allow ~ change in use t~)r a single parcel which would substantially degrade the l~dt, nce of the properties in the I-hven Overlay District. If the City does decide to abuse the rest of the Haven Avenue property ox~mers by approving the Rancho Pacffic project, we wotfld expect the CiB' to im~sc cc~min restricticms as condititms of approval on the project, similar W conditions imposed on other project, including ours, as follows: 1 ) Si gnage All other buildings on llaven hax~e strict sign restriclions. Those issues are not normally addressed in land use approvals. These restrictions should be imlx)sed at the time of land u.qe consideration so that the3' do not automalica]ly follow a land use approx.-al: Signage on the ser~4ce station building should be limited in si?~, color, and placement along Haven. We do not warn bright, multiple use, lighted signs facing 1 [aven. You should also expect that there will be multiple u.se~ in the servSce station btfilding, snch as fast tbod restaurants. Each of those users will want their owx~ sign identification. Limitations similar to existing structures would be appropriate. For example, on my building at 9267 Haven, we have been limited to two lighted signs, top of building. 'lhere should be no pole signs t3..pical of ser~4ee stations. 1~ is now accepted that ground level montancnt signs arc acccptablc for this tvpc o£busincss, located at the driveway ent~.' to the project, along 6th street. 2) Access Rancho Pacific should be required'to install a median along 6th street, similar to fl~e one east ofllaven along 6th street. There should not be a median cut to allow traffic at this mid block location. We were denied a request for a median cut tbr the reason that traffic coming offofllaven was la)o intense, making it unsafe. 'ltmt was in 1995. With traffic counts much higher today, tha't reasoning is even more applicable. 3) Architectural 3 'lhe proposed heax~' use of stucco on the east and south face of the sen:ice statkm building is in direct c~mtmst to the requiremenC~ imlx~sed tm other buildings in the Haven Overlay District. Once you allow such a degraded standar~ all future buildings will be using fids building as justifit~tfion for ti relaxation of the Haven Overlay District standards, and the entire street will suffer. It is a very smMI addiliontd construclicm cost to upgrade the l~ce of the building dkectly abutting Haven and 6th street. 4) Operational One of thc main concc.m~ with a so, vice station is Iht t3T~2 of user attracted. lhfless file Ci~' is going to provide 24 hour police protection, it would be appropriate to limit th~, hom-s e..f opera, t~.n: to 6AM until tOP.M,..Uvfiess this is done, I predict we x~411 see a substantial increase in the crime late in the immediate area witlfin 1 year of opening. 5) Construction Since the serxfce station element has file most negative aspects to it, file other t~vo buildings should be built first. It is being presented that these two buildings will pmx4de shelter I¥om the view ol'the sen'ice s 'ration. IF this c~mdifi{m is not inaposed, then it ~x411 be possible for Rancho Pacific to build the serx4ce station, then not build the two off, ce buildings. Subsequently, the3, or t~nother user xxfill be in requesting more retail uses, claitmg they should be allowed such uses lyozausc thc service stalitm is alrcedy on thc prtrpcrty as an acceptable usc. 6) Landscaping is beh~g presented as an effective shield against some of the negative impacts of this use. Please insure that thc initial installation provides this protection. A) Minimum-ts 6 foot high landscape material (at initial installation) should be required between Imilding A (retail) and building B. B) Landscaping along 6th street and at the corner should be a minimum of 6 feet m shield the direct x4ew of the service station area. Char]es J. Mcl .~dag. h]in President ccBruce Ann I~thr~. R~mcho Pacific 909 944 5997 xvord£ile~trical\ice\ciB,RC_mnchopa cific_ 1 HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY Prepared by: ChuckBuquet Charles Joseph Associates PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR MANAGEMF~NT SF.B. VICF~ Charles loseph Associates October 12, 1999 Brad Buller, City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Re: Request for Initiation of text changes to add "Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales" as a Conditionally Permitted Use in the Haven Avenue Overlay Distdct at NWC Sixth Street and Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. Dear Brad: Our firm represents a client who proposes to design and develop a professional and business center project that would be comprised of an Automotive Service Station, together with Business Support Services and Convenience Sales and Services at the NWC Sixth/Haven Avenue. Of the three aforementioned uses, Business Support Services and Convenience Sales Services are presently conditionally permitted uses In the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Automotive Service Station is not. We are requesting processing of an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to add "Automotive Service Station" as a conditionally permitted use in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. This is consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission July 23, 1997, action to direct staff to process an amendment to the to the Industrial Area Specific Plan upon receipt of an application and fees. Our evaluation and study of automotive service station uses in the City, on Haven Avenue, and in the Haven Avenue Overlay Distdct has determined that there is an identified need for development of an Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales use on the southem southbound portion of Haven Avenue. Our proposed project will address the needs identified in the Study, and will provide users adequate level of service at a conveniently accessible location, while providing optimal sales tax capture. This project will also contribute to the functional efficiency .of the City and the Haven Avenue Corridor. Our project will be designed and constructed to project a favorable image of the City to visitors. It will contribute to the City's objective of attracting and retaining businesses and professionals, and will lend life and vitality to the part of the City that is at present deserted after office hours. At the basis of all, the proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan that encourages mixing different but compatible and complementary land uses. Office 909'481 · 1822 800'240- 1822 Fax 909-481 · 1824 City Center' 10681 Foothill Blvd., Suite 395' Rancho Cucamonga, CA-91730 1 A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION Finally, as we point out the existing needs and present the rationales for justification of the requested text changes to add "automotive service station' to the Haven Avenue Overlay District, we are strongly convinced that the City's evaluation will conclude with the same determination as the Study. We are looking forward to adding a high quality development project as part of the City's Haven Avenue Overlay District business inventory that will serve to assist the City with meeting its goals and objectives while addressing the needs identified and discussed in the Study text and exhibits. We thank you in advance for your consideration and courteous assistance with our amendment application process. Please feel free to contact me at your earliest opportunity should you have any questions or need of additional information or assistance with this matter. Sincerely, Chades J. Buquet Charles Joseph Associates Attachment - Haven Avenue Overlay District Amendment Study HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY 1. General: The Haven Avenue Overlay District was adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga as recognition of the Citywide significance of Haven Avenue as the major entry into the City. The Haven Avenue Overlay District is located on both the east and west sides of Haven Avenue extending form Foothill Boulevard south to Fourth Street. The stated purpose of the Haven Overlay District is "to establish development standards which address the unique setting and character of the Haven Avenue Corridor". Exhibit A included with this Study depicts the Haven Avenue Overlay District area. This Study was performed'as part of an assessment to determine the public necessity and benefit of allowing Automotive Service Station uses to be located within the Haven Overlay District under the provisions of conditional use approval that would be subject to very specific criteria. 2. Issues According to the Industrial Area Specific Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Table 111-2, Land Use Definitions, Business Support Services, Convenience Sales and Services and Automotive Service Station activities are defined as follows: Business Support Services: Activities typically include, but are not limited to: services which support the activity of firms, such as, clerical, employment, protective, or minor processing, including blueprint services, and multi-copying of pamphlets and small reports for another firm. Activities not included in this category are the printing of books and services of a personal nature. Convenience Sales and Services: Activities typically include, but are not limited to, the retail sales from the premises of frequently needed small personal convenience items and professional services which are used frequently. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: drug stores, stores selling toiletries, tobacco, and magazines, beauty and barber shops, and apparel laundering and dry cleaning agencies. Automotive Service Station: Activities typically include, but are not limited to, the sale from the premises of goods and the provision of service normally required in the day-to-day operation of motor vehicles, including the principal sale of petroleum products, the incidental sale of tires, batteries, replacement items, and lubricating services, and the performance of minor repairs, such as tune-up, tire change, and brake work. Of the three aforementioned uses, Business Support Services and Convenience Sales and Services are presently conditionally permitted uses in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Automotive Service Station is not. Our research and evaluation has determined that an amendment to the text to add "Automotive Service Station" as a Conditionally Permitted Use within the Haven Avenue Overlay District under specific approval criteda for southbound Haven Avenue at Sixth Street is appropriate. 3. Need and Justification for the Proposed Amendment · The proposed amendment promotes functional efficiency of the City Haven Avenue serves as a principal link to and from the International Airport and the Interstate 10 Freeway. Also, the Haven Avenue Overlay District has developed over the last decade and a half as the major anchor of offices and professional services in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Yet, there are only three Automotive Service Stations across the entire length of the Haven Avenue - one at the NEC Jersey/Haven, and the others at Lemon/Haven. Of the three, at the NEC Jersey/Haven station, the emphasis is on Car Wash Services, and the other Service Stations are located at the northern edge of the City. Furthermore, two of the existing Automotive Service Stations are on the eastern side of Haven Avenue. There is no Automotive Service Station that serves southbound traffic south of Lemon Avenue on the western side of Haven Avenue within the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Limits. The development of an office and business services project that incorporates an automotive service station as a design- compatible element at the subject location eliminates the uneven spatial distribution of the services and promotes functional efficiency of the City. · Automotive Service Station industry changes have resulted in a focus on the construction and operation of "automotive fueling services and convenience sales", rather than traditional automotive service stations. Over the past fifteen years, the automotive service industry has seen a transition from traditional automotive service stations as defined in the Industrial Area Specific Plan to automotive fueling services and convenience sales. This change is evident when reviewing the Fueling Services Locations map prepared and included as Exhibit B of this study. Review of this exhibit will determine that the six locations shown as service stations are sites that were initially developed in the City approximately fifteen years ago. The remaining sites are comprised of service stations that eliminated automotive services, convenience markets that installed a gas pump island, or new projects that were designed and constructed as fueling services and convenience sales, with some having a form of car wash services. The Fueling Services Locations inventory found the following uses currently operating or under construction in the City of Rancho Cucamonga: · 6 Service Stations · 14 Convenience · 4 Convenience/Car Wash · 2 CarWash Automotive Services industry changes would indicate it very unlikely that an Automotive Service Station as defined in the Industrial Area Specific Plan would be contemplated or proposed for development in the Haven Avenue Overlay District within the reasonably foreseeable future. Other than for the fueling services, convenience sales and services is a conditionally permitted use in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. With today's convenience-oriented commuter, convenience in fueling services should be an important consideration with placement of such services, particularly when this can be accomplished in a manner that is compatible and complimentary to existing land use and design considerations. · The proposed use at Haven Avenue and Sixth Street will offer an appropriate level of services at a conveniently accessible location. The proposed use at Haven Avenue and Sixth Street would be strategically located in the southern portion of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, in close proximity to the General Industrial uses to the west and the east, and at the right juncture for optimal purchase capture for southbound commuters. This will enable such a use to provide an appropriate level of services at conveniently accessible location for the greatest number of users, without providing any conflict with the District's southern Urban Center designation. Haven Avenue currently carries the greatest number of vehicles of all the north/south streets located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Commuters polled as part of this study indicated their strong preference to purchase gasoline and related items as part of their commute to work, rather than on their way home following a long day at work and in traffic. The absence of gasoline-related services on southbound Haven Avenue north of Fourth Street has contributed to the station located at Haven Avenue just north of the Interstate 10 being identified as one of the top gasoline sales producers in San Bemardino County. According to data provided by City of Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Engineering, Haven Avenue between Jersey Boulevard and Sixth Street has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Count of over 38,000 vehicles, and an ADT of almost 40,000 vehicles between Sixth Street and Fourth Street. Of these, 18,100 ADT are for southbound Haven Avenue from Jersey Boulevard to Sixth Street, and 18,600 ADT are for southbound Haven Avenue from Sixth Street to Fourth Street. According to a traffic study by Austin-Foust Associates that is on file with City Traffic Engineering, Haven Avenue Post-2010 ADT Volumes are projected at almost 70,000 vehicles. Exhibit C of this study shows the Haven Avenue Average Daily Traffic Count that currently exists, and the Post-2010 ADT Volumes indicated in the Austin-Foust study. Exhibit D of this study shows the Haven Avenue Intersections current and Post-2010 ADT Volumes from Foothill Boulevard to Fourth Street. Review of this data will indicate that the greatest degree of increase in ADT will occur at the Haven Avenue intersections of Jersey Boulevard, Sixth Street, and Fourth Street over the next ten years. · The proposed project sen/es the City's objective of attracting and retaining professionals and businesses to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Providing conveniently accessible automotive service stations, convenience stores, and other complementary support services to the present land uses in the Haven Avenue Overlay District enhances the efficiency and effectiveness of the professionals and businesses. It also increases the satisfaction of commuters who reside in Rancho Cucamonga, and projects a favorable image of the City to visitors, whose introduction to the City is often limited to the business and government facilities currently located in the Haven Overlay district. All these serve the City's objective of retaining and attracting professionals and businesses. · The proposed project is in conformance to the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and the objectives of the Haven Avenue Ove#ay District. The proposed land use is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan that encourages a mix of different but compatible and complementary land uses. Functionally, it provides complementary services to the surrounding office and industrial uses, solves the shortage of automotive service stations on Haven Avenue, and fills the void and offers a level of social place by lending life and vitality to the vicinity that is at present deserted after office hours. Architecturally, in recognition of the special significance the Haven Avenue Corridor occupies in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, it will bring in high quality, modem, and progressive design and architectural themes compatible and complementary to the existing and intended land uses in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. An additional design and compatibility benefit consideration is that the proposed use would be part of a professional and business center project that is located in a Haven Avenue Overlay District Master Plan Area. Exhibit E included in this Study depicts the District Master Plan Areas. · The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public welfare, health and safety. In addition to the compatibility of use, architectural harmony, and aesthetic appeal, the proposed project will be designed cognizant of the City's concerns regarding the possible impacts of any project on the public welfare, health and safety. Thus, the proposed project will address all public welfare, health and safety concerns to the highest available standard. As to possible impact upon patterns of circulation and existing transportation systems, the proposed location does not raise the concern that may rightly be raised in such major arterial intersections like Haven Avenue and Fourth Street or Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue. Sixth Street, west of Haven Avenue is a secondary road that primarily serves traffic that has its origin or destination locally. Sixth Street east of Haven, despite having a 120' right-of-way, currently serves traffic that has its origin or destination locally, however, this is expected to change dramatically in the near future. Exhibit F of this Study depicts the Haven Avenue Overlay Distdct Circulation. · The proposed use will capture a substantial amount of sales revenue for the City that is currently being lost to other municipalities. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has recently commenced a City General Plan Update. A significant component of this process has been the preliminary development of an Economic Development Strategy to capture the sales tax leakage in the categories of apparel, eating and drinking, furniture and appliances, building materials, automotive sales, service stations and other retail establishments. Exhibit G of this study provides Retail Leakage Per Capita 1992 that indicates an approximate $225.00 per capita service station leakage at that time. Exhibit H of this study provides Retail Leakage Per Capita 1997 data that indicates that service station leakage per capita had reduced to approximately $190.00 per capita. While the identified reduction indicates an improvement in meeting Rancho Cucamonga commuter service station demand, the 1997 data represents an annual $22,990,000.00 service station leakage that is costing the City of Rancho Cucamonga approximately $229,900.00 in direct sales tax revenue that is lost annually. This direct sales tax revenue loss does not include sales tax revenues that are received from the County, State and Federal agencies that are allocated back to municipalities based upon point of origin. Our study has determined that a service station located at Haven Avenue and Sixth Street will generate approximately $15,000,000.00 in annual gross sales, which will result in $150,000.00 in annual direct sales tax revenue to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The proposed service station will serve to capture additional sales tax revenue for the City that presently goes to the neighboring City of Ontario, as a result of a lack of such convenient services on southbound Haven Avenue within the Rancho Cucamonga City Limits. 4. Employment/Development Fees When completed, the overall proposed project would be instrumental in the creation of permanent employment for approximately 170 people. In addition, Exhibit I of this study outlines the one-time development fees of approximately $364,390.00 that the proposed project is anticipated to generate. Projected Number of Jobs and Wa.qes Upper Manag~ent 15 35 67,200 1,008,000 10,080,000 Middle Manag~t 97 15 28,800 2,793,600 27,936,000 R~ail S~ 32 7 13,440 430,080 4,300,800 C~ 26 10 19,200 499,200 4,992,000 TOTAL: 170 $16.75 $32,160 ~,730,880 $47,308,800 Proposed Project Development Fees NCY/DE~ARTME~:~ ~ ~ City Planning 7,268.00 City Engineering 234,863.91 City Building and Safety 14,730.62 City Fire District 2,538.00 Cucamonga County Water Distdct 52,175.00 Cucamonga School District 36,067.27 Chaffey Joint Union High School District 16,726.85 TOTAL: $364,389.65 5. Property Tax Revenue The estimated property value of the overall proposed project is anticipated to be approximately $9.5 million. As a result, this project will raise the assessed property tax due to the City from the current amount of $7,397.00 annually to $106,476.00, resulting in a net revenue increase of $99,079.00 in annual property taxes. City Property Tax Revenue from the Proposed Project Property Tax Revenue Assessed Tax on the Property at present 7,397.00 Expected Property tax on Estimated Property Value of $9.5 Million @ 106,476.00 1.1208% Net Property Tax Increment at Year 1 $99~079.00 6. Haven Avenue and Sixth Street Location The proposed project site, known by Assessor's Parcel Number 0209-262~19 and 20, is located at NWC Sixth Street and Haven Avenue. It is a four-acm property that is surrounded by the Haven Plaza to the north, Falken Tim Warehouse/Distribution to the west, Sixth Street to the South, and Haven Avenue to the east. The site is located within a District Master Plan Area. A site location map is included as Exhibit J of this Study. ~ 8 · Zoning: The site is within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Land uses in the areas immediately on the east and west side of the Haven Avenue corridor are governed by the Industrial Area Specific Plan for Subarea 6. · Existing land uses surrounding the site: To the north is the Haven Plaza, which is comprised of the California Athletic Club, a travel office, personnel services, and other similar businesses and offices. The western neighbor is the Falken Tire Warehouse/Distribution facility, which is south of Petco, another warehouse/distribution facility, which is also located on the western side of Haven Plaza. South, across Sixth Street, is a large vacant field. East, across Haven Avenue are offices and professional services. The SEC of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue is a non-conforming use of building materials production and supply. Our client, Rancho Pacific Development, proposes to develop a project that would be comprised of automotive fueling services and convenience sales, office/professional and related business support services at the NWC of Haven Avenue and Sixth Street. STUDY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The foregoing Haven Avenue Overlay District Amendment Study has determined that there is public necessity and benefit to providing automotive fueling services for southbound Haven Avenue based upon the data outlined and provided with the study text. Due to the unique setting and character of the Haven Avenue Corridor, and based upon previous Planning Commission discussion and consensus, conditional use approval of automotive fueling services sites would be appropriate subject to very specific cdteda. The recommended Automotive Fueling Services approval cdteda should be as follows: · The existing Industrial Area Specific Plan Table 111-2, Land Use Definitions text should be modified to include Automotive Fueling Services as a land use. The suggested text modifications should generally state ~Activities typically include, but are not limited to, the principal sale of petroleum products and the retail sale from the premises convenience items and food and beverage products for motoring consumers. This use would not include the incidental sale of tires, batteries, replacement items, and lubricating services, and the performance of minor repairs, such as tune-up, tire change, and brake work. · The existing Haven Avenue Overlay District text should be modified to include Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales as a Conditionally Permitted Use when consistent with the following specific approval criteria. · Southbound Haven Avenue Location. As the Study data identified the current need for Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales for southbound Haven Avenue, approval consideration should be limited to properties located on the West Side of Haven Avenue. · Urban Centerlntersection Prohibition. Based upon previous Planning Commission discussion and consensus, Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales should be prohibited at Haven Avenue Overlay District Urban Center intersections. This will ensure that the City's vision of the unique character, setting and uses anticipated at the Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue and Fourth Street and Haven Avenue Urban Center designations will not be compromised or conflicted as to District entry statement potential. The Planning Commission has been consistent with its resistance to approval of any automotive service station use at any City entry intersection. · S~qnalized Intersection. Due to the current and projected traffic volumes on Haven Avenue, Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales should only be considered at signalized intersections for optimum traffic safety and traffic control. As such, mid-block Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales sites would only serve to exacerbate intersection traffic safety conflicts that would result from such a siting. · Southemmost Si,qnalized non-Urban Center Intersection to promote greatest degree of Usales tax capture". As the Study data and text indicates, the City is currently in need of an Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales site on southbound Haven Avenue in order to capture sales tax that is being realized by the City of Ontario. The intersection of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue would be strategically located in the southern portion of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, and at the right juncture for optimal purchase capture for southbound commuters. An Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales use at this intersection would provide an appropriate level of services at a conveniently accessible location for the greatest number of users, without providing any conflict with the District's southern Urban Center designation. Haven Avenue currently carries the greatest number of vehicles of all the north/south streets located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and is very likely a significant contributor to the annual $22,990,000.00 service station leakage that is costing the City approximately $229,900.00 in lost direct sales tax revenue annually. · S~qnalized Intersection having access to a 120' R~qht of Way. The intersection of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue is the only intersection within the Haven Avenue Overlay District having access to a 120' Right of Way. Industrial project development on Sixth Street both west and east of Haven Avenue is expected to generate considerable traffic volume at this intersection. Particularly significant is the Edison relocation of their Inland Empire Headquarters to the Empire Lakes Industrial Center, which is located on the south side of Sixth Street, east of Haven Avenue. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is also exploring the feasibility of construction of a Sixth Street off-ramp on the Interstate 15 Freeway, which if successful, will serve to double the projected Post-2010 Average Daily Trip (ADT) Volumes identified in the Austin-Foust Traffic Study. By locating an Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales use at Sixth Street and Haven Avenue, this will only serve to enhance the potential for optimum "sales tax capture" discussed eadier in the Study. · Northwest Comer of S~qnalized Intersection Preferred for Optimum Traffic Safety. The NWC of Sixth Street and Haven Avenue has been identified as preferred for optimum traffic safety consideration for southbound Haven Avenue commuters. Southbound commuters will be inclined to slow to enter the Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales and accompanying business and professional center driveway located north of the intersection. Such a use at the SWC would increase the commuter inclination to race through the intersection to access a ddveway for such a located project, or possibly run the risk of being rear-ended by other vehicles attempting to get through the intersection before a signal change. The existing approved driveway location north of the intersection will provide for safe access to an Automotive Fueling Services and Convenience Sales use, particularly due to this use being a proposed development component of a business and professional center planned at that location. Also, by being a component of a larger development project, issues such as use and design compatibility will be integrated into the overall project, rather than as a small, usually 1.5-acre, stand-alone pretotypical gas station project an oil company would otherwise design and present. SUMMARY The Haven Avenue Overlay District Amendment Study and proposed project and use are generally consistent with the July 23, 1997, Planning Commission review of a request by Charles Joseph Associates to consider initiation of text changes to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to add "Automobile Service Station" as a conditionally permitted use in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The Planning Commission action at that meeting was to direct staff to process an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan upon receipt of an application and fees. A copy of the Planning Commission minutes from the July 23, 1997 meeting are included as Exhibit K of this Study. HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT A Haven Avenue Overlay District FIG. W-I' AVEN AVENUE vE'RLAY DISTRICT Revised 411192 .............. Urban Center CIRCULATION ~m, 1~o' R.O.~9. ~ 100' R.O.W. ~: 88' er le88 R.O.W. RAIL SERVICE +~-+++- Proposed ~ ~ RR O O O O Pe~lontrlan eeeo Sicycle ;r ~ Regional .:~ Multi-Use ~ .:: ~ Special Streetscape/ ~ Lan~lscaplng · ~ ,,, Power Line/ Utility Easement ---o-'- Creeks & Channels ~'~ BHdge "~ Access Polnt~ ~ 1park ~ Fire Station Acres Oo~ · ,v-2 400 800 1600 HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT B Fueling Services Location Map ~ ~ ~ iCity of Rafi~hO CUCamonga '" HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT C Haven Avenue Average Daily Traffic Count Haven~venue Average Daily Traffic Count 70,000 60,000 40,000 20,000__-- t8,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 southbound on Haven ~* 2010 Total Projected Traffic northbound on Haven HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT D Haven Avenue Intersections Average Daily Traffic Count Haven Avenuemntersactlons Average Daily Traffic Count 65,000 55,000 45,000 35,000 25,000 10,000 10,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 2,00¢ on 4th St. on 6th St. on Jersey on Arrow on Foothill Blvd. East of Haven ~ * 2010 Total Projected Traffic West of Haven HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT E Master Plan Areas FIG.' IV-2 FOOTHILL · MASTER PLAN AREAS Revised 4/1/92 ~ MASTER PLAN AREAS CIRCULATION ~ 120' R.O.V~. ~ 100' R.O.W. '--"---' 88' or leas R.O.W. 2ath RAIL SERVICE · ..... · . I EXisting +~+++' Proposed TRAILS/ROUTES AT · SF 0 0 0 0 Pedestrian I · ··· Bicycle ~r-~ Regional Multi-Use 7th ~ Special Streetacape/ ~ Landscaping Power Line/ Utilit~ Easement ---'"'-' Creeks & Channels ~ ' Bridge '~ Access Poin~ ~ lpark {~} Fir~ Station Acres IV-8 ~ 0 400 800 1600 HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT F Overlay District Circulation FIGURE IV-8 C~.UL~O~ ARR¢ RAIL SERVICE ...... EXISTING TRAILS/ROUTES (FR('~oOSE~ LOCA110H) FIRE ~TATION j Note: Parcel lines and lot configurations are shown as approximations only. 1The sites shown may not be currentiy owned nor is the location site specific. The depiction of a site is an indication of a projected future need that may be adjusted over time as the City develops. '~L0 HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT G Retail Leakage Per Capita, 1992 Retail Leakage Per Capita Los Angeles Region Benchmark Rancho Cucemonga, 1992 ($700) (~00) Apparel Gen. Mdse. Drug SL Food SL Liquor SL Eat/Drfnk Furn/Appl. Bldg. Mbf. Auto $e~/.$ta, O~her HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT H Retail Leakage Per Capita~ 1997 Retail Leakage Per Capita Loe Angeles Region Benchmark Rancho Cucemonga, 1997 $20050 ($20O) ($1 ($1.200) Appaf~ C-en. Mdse Drag St, Food St. Uquo~ St. Eat/Drink Fum./Appl Bldg. Mtd. Auto Serv. Sta. Othe~ HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT I Development Fees RANCHO PACIFIC PROJECT S/re: NWC 6th Street and Haven Lot Size: 174,238 sf (4.0 acres) BulldableArea: 145,046 sf Building A: I story 3,200 sf convenience store/gas dispensing location* *gas dispensing location with canopy located North of Building A 3,880 sf Building B: 3 story 36,000 sf office building Building C: 2 story 6,500 sf office building Type of Construction: Frame w/stucco Built-out C' Develo ment Fees ,~ Building & Safety Fees: Building ^: Plan Check Fee $ 491.25 Building Permit Fee $ 655.00 Gas/Canopy: Plan Check Fee $ 380.63 Building Permit Fee $ 507.50 Building B: Plan Check Fee $ 4,468.12 Building Permit Fee $ 5,957.50 Building C: Plan Check Fee $ 973.12 Building Permit Fee $ I r297.50 To~al: $ 14,730.62 School Dle'd'lct Fees: Rancho Cucamonga School District $ 36,067.27 charley Joint Unified High School District $ 16~726.85 Total: $ 62,794.12 'Fire Deparlment Fees: Gas Dispensing Canopy $ 66.00 Storage Tank ($147 per tank) $ 441.00 Buildings ($677 per bulMing X 3) $ 2,031.00 Microfilm Fee ( $1.00 per page) $ Total: $2,538.00 Cucamonga County Water District Fees: Water Develo merit Fees WEDU $4,500 X 4.0 Acres $ 18,000.00 (2.0 x 2250) WEDU per landscpaed acre (6.7 x 22 $15,075 X 1 acre $ 15,075.00 Sewer Develo ment Fees Fueling sen~tces/convenlence $5,600.00 Office/professional buildings $ 13r500'00 Total: $ 62,t75.00 Planning Fees: Rase Fee $ 2,865~00 Initial Study $225 + $22 per acre (4.0) $ 313.00 CUP $ 2,921.00 ( + $292 per acre) $ 1~168.00 Total: $ 7,268.00 Engineering Fees: Land Use Fees: Fueling Area $8,550.25 X 6 (pumps only) $ 51,301.50 Convenience/Fast food $ 54,071.32 Office/Business Building B $ 73,874.16 Office/Business Building C $ 13,338.39 Undergrounding Fees: $21,149.27 X 10 % per yr. (July 19, 1989) $ 42r298.54 Total: $ 234,883.91 HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT J Site Location Map HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT AMENDMENT STUDY EXHIBIT K Planning Commission Minutes Chairman Barker agafn closed the public hearing. Chairman Barker felt the applicant had a project if there is acceptable secondary access. He thought points 2 and 8 were not adequate. Mr. Hanson suggested adding a condition that emergency access plans must be approved prior to recordation of the final map. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that the access should be available 24 hours per day, so that it would be available during the work day when Caltrans is working. ' Motion: Moved by Bethel, seconded by Tolstoy, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the resolution approving Tentative Tract 15798 with modifications to require approval of emergency access plans regarding secondary access to be approved by the City Planner. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MAClAS, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL - carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTR B. CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATIIER - A request to consider initiation of text changes to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to add "Automobile Service Station" as a conditionally permitted use in the Haven Avenue Overlay District. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Bethel stated that the existing facility at Haven Avenue and Jersey Street is acceptable because it is virtually invisible. He feared approving the text changes would allow stations which will not be so hidden. Chairman Barker invited public comment. Charles J. Buquet, Charles Joseph Associates, 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the applicant has a number of existing Arco stations in southern California. He said the applicant would meet City standards with regards to design and he showed a plan. He indicated they would use the existing driveways. He said it is a 2-acre site and they propose an Arco facility with business support services. He did not feel it is feasible to have office development on a 2-acre parcel and said that the proposal would allow development at its highest and best use. He stated the City would still have control over development under a conditional use permit process. Mr. Buquet provided a copy of a letter from Brad Umansky of Lee & Associates which concluded that there was a Iow probability of office development on the site and that a service station would be an asset. John Kofdarali, 1201 Dove Street, Suite 520, Newport Beach, stated they intend to build a facility that is unlike previous Arco stations and said they would work with staff to build a facility which fits the city. Commissioner Tolstoy recalled that when an office building was proposed for this site, plans called ~'or driveway access to the office building to the south. Mr. Coleman confirmed that was correct and said the current plan still calls for providing that access. Planning Commission Minutes -5- July 23, 1997 Srad Buller, City Planner, commented that anyone wishing to initiate an amenclment to Me text must obtain approval from the City to submit an application. He stated that although it was interesting to look at the proposed facility, the question at this time was whether it would be a possibility that the use would be acceptable and whether the project proponent can submit an application. m~ssioner Tolstoy stated the question is whether the Commission wishes to have the Haven ~emnue Overlay District revisited and he said he was willing to allow the proponent to move forward with an application. However, he said the Commission needs to assure itself that a service station has a positive location. He felt unacceptable locations would be near the intersections of Foothill Boulevard and Haven Avenue and Fourth Street and Haven Avenue. He felt r~erely s~ing stations 300 feet from the intersections would be unacceptable. He thought the design presented was acceptable, but not appropriate for Haven Avenue. He also disputed the contention that a service station would be the highest and best use for the property. Commissioner Macias felt the concept wan'ants consideration to wor~ with the applicant to look at the feasibility. He observed he is a commuter and said he believes there is a need for stations on Haven Avenue. He agreed that the drawing was inadequate. He supported allowing the proponent to move forward with an application to change the text but stated the applicant should understand that he felt a proposed station would have to be above and beyond the drawing provided. Commissioner Bethel felt "no building" zones might be considered. He feared the application may open the gates and said he did not support the request. Chairman Barker said he was very concerned regarding opening a can of worms. He said he was willing to look at the Haven Avenue Overlay District. He indicated it would be necessary for the applicant to convince him that approving the amendment would not open the door to a line of service stations, but he did not know how it would be possible to develop criteria which would not give special consideration to the first applicant. Buller said it would be staff's approach to look at the entire corridor. He indicated the applicant be asked to provide information regarding need and appropriate corners. He said the Commission was not consenting to anything site specific or regarding design and the minutes would reflect the concerns raised by the Commission. Commissioner Tolstoy felt it is always a good idea to look at a plan adopted many years ago but it may be determined that the Commission wishes to reaffirm that service stations are not desirable on Haven Avenue. Commissioner Bethel concurred. Chairman Barker felt it would be good to revisit the corridor. Motion: Moved by Tolstoy, seconded by Macias, to direct staff to process an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan upon receipt of an application and fees. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MAClAS, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL - carded Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that various types of service stations be COnsidered; i.e.. with and without fast food. The Planning Commission recessed from 8:42 p.m. to 8:49 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes -6- ~ July 23, 1997 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 99-05, TO ADD AUTOMOTIVE FUELING SERVICE AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN THE HAVEN OVERLAY DISTRICT IN THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Chades Joseph and Associates has filed an application for Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 99-05 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 23rd day of July 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga initiated this amendment through minute action. 3. On the 24th day of May 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 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 forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property within the City; and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and c. The proposed amendment will allow refinement of the list of conditional uses in the Haven Overlay District, within the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 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 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Industrial Area Specific Plan or the General Plan and will provide for development within the Haven Avenue Overlay District and the General Plan and with related development; and b. The amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION ISPA 99-05 - CHARLES JOSEPH AND ASSOCIATES May 24, 2000 Page 2 c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the purposes of the Haven Avenue Oveday District; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the amendment identified in this Resolution is not defined as a project and is therefore exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Sections 15061b.1 and 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application, and recommends approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 99-05, as attached, Exhibit "A". 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF MAY 2000. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Bullet, Secretary I, Brad Bullet, 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Rancho Cucamon$a Develo?ment Code Section 17.30.030 Table 17.30.030 Continued - Use Regulations for Industrial Districts LANDUSE IP Gl Gl Gl Gl Gl iP tP Gl MI/HI GIIGIIIP]GIIGIIHIIIPIIP MU/OS USETYPES SUBAREAS HO I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13114115116117 18 COMMERCIAL ,Adult Entertainment A A AI A A A A A A A ~,gricultural/Nursery Supplies & Services p p p p p I P P I P ~,nimalCare C C C C C C C C Automotive Fleet Storage C C C C P C C P $,utomofive Fuelin~l Services C Autorsotive Rental P P P P P P P P P AutomotiveJUghtTmckRepair-Minor P P P P P P P P P AutomotivefTruck Repair - Major P C p p p P C C ! C Automotive Sales and Leasing C C C Automotive Service Court P P P P C ' P P P P Automotive ServiceStation C C C~ C C C C C C'C C C Building Contractor's Office &Yards P P P P P P P P P P P Building Contractor's Storage Yard P P Building Maintenance Services P P P P P P P P P P P P It. Buildin~i& Light Equiprsent Supplies & Bales P C P C C P P C P C C P Business Supply Retail & Services P Business Support Services P* P C P P C P P P C P P P P P P ComrsunicetionServices P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P. P Convenience Sales & Services C' C C p pi C C C C C lC UJ =ntertainrsent C...~_~ C C C C C C C __ -~xtensive Impact Commercfial C C Fast FoodSales C* C C C C C C C Financial, Insurance& Real Estate Services p p p p p p P C P C C P P Food & Beverage Sales C' C C C C C C C C C I- Funeral & Crematory Services C C Heav~ Equipment Sales & Rentals C C C C Hotet/Motal P P P P C Indoor Wholesale/Retail Commercial C C C C C C C Laundry Services P P P P P P P P ' Medical/Health Care Services P , P P P P P P P P P P P Personal Services C* C p p p P P C P ,P P Petroleum Products Storage C ~ C C C C C Recreation Facilities C C C C C C~C P C C P P P Repair Services P P C p p p p p p P P C Restaurants P P P P P P P P Restaurants with Bar or Entertainment C C ! C C C C C Specialty Building Supplies & Home trsproversent P P C Warehouse-St~e Retail Merchandising '* C .NOTES: IP Industrial Park P - Permitted Use HO Haven Avenue Overlay District C - Conditionally Permitted Use Gl General Industrial [] - Non-Marked uses not permitted MI/HI Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial A - Adult Entertainment Zoning Permit Required -~1 Heavy Industrial MU/OS - Mixed Use/Open Space Ancillary uses limited to 20 percent of the floor area per Section 17.30.080.5.b. ** - Refer to Subarea 12 Special Considerations for additional restrictions Rancho Cucamon~,a Develo~oment Code Section 17.30.080 a finding that such a use will be consistent with the stated design goal for the Haven Avenue Corridor and all other provisions of the Oveday District. b. Select ancillary reseamh services and commercial and business support service uses shall not exceed 20 percent of the floor area in any Master Planned development. Concentration of such uses in any building or along the street frontage is not permitted. c. See Table 17.30.030 for a list of the permitted or conditionally permitted uses for the Haven Avenue Overlay District. All other uses are prohibited. d. Fast food services are specifically excluded as a primary use. This would preclude the development of typical free-standing fast food restaurants, most of which require drive-through facilities, in the Haven Avenue Oveday District. However, fast food could be permitted as an ancillary or secondary use, subject to a Conditional Use Permit, as a part of a larger project, provided such use not be located directly adjacent to Haven Avenue. e. Accessory/Ancillary Use Restrictions The purpose of this section is to set maximum development provisions for accessory/ancillary uses which are not normally permitted in the Haven Avenue Oveday District. The following provisions shall apply in the Haven Avenue Overlay District: (1) The total of all accessory/ancillary uses not listed as permitted or conditionally permitted uses* are limited to 20 percent of the total building and business area. The ancillary commercial and business support service uses listed in Section 5.b may exceed the 20 percent business area limitation. (2) Accessory/ancillary uses must be located within main buildings housing permitted principal uses. No outdoor accessory/ancillary uses are permitted. (3) No accessory/ancillary manufacturing uses are permitted in the Haven Avenue Oveday District. Only uses defined and listed in Section 17.30.030.D can be considered as accessory or ancillary uses. f. Automotive Fueling Services Criteria for Development. (1) Automotive Fueling Services are strictly prohibited within the urban centers of the Haven Avenue Overlay District, as shown in Figure 17.30.080-A. (2) No Automotive Fueling Service use shall be closer than % m-mile of another Automotive Fueling Service use or similar type use, as measured from the nearest property line. (3) Automotive Fueling Services shall be designed to reflect the architectural standard and guidelines for professional office buildings to be developed within the Haven Avenue Overlay District. No corporate "prototype" architectural design will be permitted. 17.30-54 6/99 Rancho Cucamon~a Development Code Section 17.30.080 (4) Automotive Fueling Services must be developed and constructed as part of, and concurrently with, a professional office complex. 6. Master Planned Development. The intent of this section is to provide for integrated development at the earliest possible time in the review process. Through the Master Plan process, there are opportunities to coordinate the efforts of single or multiple property owners and discourage piecemeal development. Finally, master planning of defined areas will avoid development of single parcels of land in a manner which would prevent or preclude future development of adjacent parcels in the best way feasible. It is not the intention of the master planning process to cast future development patlems in stone. Rather, it is an attempt to discover problems before they develop, to deal with issues while they can be solved, and to take advantage of opportunities while they exist. The standards and guidelines which follow are intended to apply to all projects and should not be constrained by parcel lines or specific site boundaries. a. A Conceptual Master Plan shall be submitted for Planning Commission approval, together with any development proposal, including subdivision or parcel map applications. Such Master Plan shall address relationships to other parcels within the Master Plan area. b. At minimum, Master Plans shall indicate conceptual building locations, overall circulation, points of ingress and egress to both public and private streets, parking lot layouts, conceptual grading and drainage, areas to be used for landscaping and plazas, pedestrian circulation, and common signing. Areas intended for common use, such as shared access, reciprocal parking, or pedestrian plazas shall also be identified. In addition, a statement of architectural intent and/or conceptual elevations shall be submitted to indicate how the architectural concepts including style, form, bulk, height, orientation, and materials relate to other buildings or projects within the planning area as well as to the overall design goal for Haven Avenue. c. The Master Plan boundaries indicated in FigurelT.30.080-B are logical planning boundaries based upon physical constraints and properly ownership. These boundaries may be modified when it is determined that the Master Plan is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. The City Planner may require master planning of property outside the Overlay District, adjacent to a project proposal, where necessary to assure integrated development and promote the goal of the Haven Avenue Oveday District. d. No parcel map or subdivision map shall be accepted or approved without concurrent submittal and approval of a Master Plan to assure integrated development consistent with the goal of the Haven Avenue Oveday District. e. Architecture within a Master Planned development shall have a compatible design style, with variation, in the building style, form, and materials in accordance with the architectural standards of the Oveday District. f. Lot Size. Minimum parcel size shall be 2 acres with a minimum parcel depth of 225 feet within a Master Plan development. A 300-foot minimum lot width shall also be required, consistent with the access control policies. The Planning Commission may waive these requirements when it is determined that the parcel is part of a Master Plan which is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Overlay District. All lots of record are allowed to develop according to the requirements of the Haven Avenue Overlay District. THE CITY OF I~AN CliO CKICAI~ONGA Staff Report DATE: Ma~/24, 2000 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDEMENT 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A proposal to add a Mixed Use zoning district with accompanying definitions, processing provisions, and development standards to the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This proposal to add a Mixed Use distdct to the Development Code is a direct result of the current request to change the land use designations on the old packinghouse site at Amethyst Avenue (General Plan Amendment 00-01A and Development Code Amendment 00-01). In order to provide sections in the Development Code for the requested Mixed Use district, it was necessary for City staff to request authorization to proceed with a Development Code Amendment. On April 12, 2000, the Planning Commission authorized City staff to initiate a Development Code Amendment for this purpose. The City's General Plan has a Mixed Use category which has zoning implementation for a few sites throughout the Terra Vista Community Plan and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. The Amethyst Avenue site's zoning regulation is through the Development Code, which does not have a Mixed Use category. Of additional interest, the General Plan Update consultants have recommended the expanded use of Mixed Use districts at selective areas of importance in the overall General Plan land use patterns, In this Development Code Amendment, staff has incorporated some of the proposed outline form of the consultant's General Plan Update drafts. ANALYSIS: A. General: The specific wording of the proposed amendment is contained in the accompanying Exhibit ("A") and Resolution Of Approval. Briefly, the amendment provides the following text additions: 1. Establishes Planning Commission review for all Mixed Use projects (Section 17.06.010oC.l.h). Staff believes that all Mixed Use districts must be under Planning Commission review in order to ensure the appropriate application of the varying development standards of each use and.activity. ITEM C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 24,2000 Page 2 2. Definition of the Mixed Use land use activity (Section 17.08.020.G). This provision sets the intent of the Mixed Use category. 3. Provides a section for each Mixed Use district's description (Section 17.08,030.F). IBecause each Mixed Use property will be tailored to have a different mix of uses, each area that is so designated must have a detailed description of the permitted pementages of each use. The individual site description shall be adopted with each individual Development District Amendment. 4. Establishes a basis for Mixed Use district development standards (Section 17.08,040.A.3). This section provides the basis for applying the varying development standards existing within the Development Code for each use and activity. B. Environmental: The Development District Amendment is exempt from environmental assessment by Section 15061 (b) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines CORRESPONDENCE: This item was adver[ised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper with a 1/8 page legal adverlisement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for Development Code Amendment 00-01 by the adoption of the attached Resolution and accompanying Exhibit. Respectfully submitted, IBrad IBullor City Planner BIB:AW\ma Attachments: Exhibit "A" - DeYeiopment Code Mixod Use Standards Resolution of Approval DEVELOPMENT CODE MIXED USE STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01: All recommended text additions are shown in bold print. The existing text is included with regular print to show the context in which the new provisions are to be placed. · The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.06.010.C.l.h to the Land Development section of the Development Code: C. Authority 1. Planninq Commission Review. Development/Design Review applications which meet any of the following criteria shall require review and consideration by the Planning Commission: a. Any project being proposed along a Special Boulevard as defined by the General Plan, except for structures within projects .with an approved master plan as provided for in subsection b below. b. All projects which are master planned. Once the master plan, including architectural guidelines, has been approved by the Planning Commission, individual structures may be approved by the City Planner. c. All residential subdivisions. d. All shopping centers, except individual structures may be approved by the City Planner where a master plan, including architectural guidelines, has been ~pproved by the Planning Commission. e. Any project requiring an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Environmental Impact Statement (ELS). f. All projects of more than ten acres of land. g. Certain projects within a hillside area are subject to review pUrSuant to Section 17.24.020-B. h. All projects within Mixed Used Districts. · The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.08.020.G to the Residential section of the Development. Code: These districts have been created to implement the goals, objectives and land use designations of the General Plan. In addition, each district is designed to implement the density limits of each district. A. Very Low Residential District (VL). This district is intended as an area for very Iow density single family residential use, with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet and a maximum residential density of up to 2 units per gross acre. B. Low Residential District {L). This district is intended as an area for single family residential use, with a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet and a maximum residential density of 4 units per gross acre. "A " DEVELOPMENT CODE MIXED USE STANDARDS '2- C. Low-Medium Residential District (LM). This.district is intended as an area for Iow- medium density single family or multiple family use with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby single family detached neighborhoods. Residential densities are expected to range from 4 to 8 units per gross acre maximum. D. Medium Residential District (M). This district is intended as an area for medium density multiple family use, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential densities are expected to range from 8-14 units per gross acre maximum. E. Medium-Hiqh District (MH). This district is intended as an area for medium-high density multiple family use, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential densities are expected to range from 14 to 24 units per gross acre maximum. F. Hiqh Residential District (H). This district is intended as an area for high density multiple family use, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development. Residential densities are expected to range from 24 to 30 units per gross acre. G. Mixed Use (MU). This district is intended as an area for a mix of residential and non-residential uses, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development, as well as internal compatibility among the varying uses. Each location of this district is identified in Section 17.08.030F with percent ranges for each permitted use that is identified. Each use that is so identified is identical to · the use definition listed elsewhere in the Development Code. · The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.08.030.F to the residential section of the Development Code: F. Mixed Use Districts. These districts have been created to implement the goals, objectives, and land use designations of the General Plan. Each location where a Mixed Use District is established will have the specific land uses that may be authorized for development listed in this section. · The following, shown in bold print, shall be added as Section 17.08.040.A.3 to the residential section of the Development Code: A. Development Standards. The development standards for residential development are arranged into two categories: (1) basic development standards, and (2) optional development standards. These standards are used in conjunction with the Absolute Policies and Design Guidelines during the residential land development/design review process as discussed in Chapter 17.06. Each residential development must conform to either the basic standards or the optional standards'. DEVELOPMENT CODE MIXED USE STANDARDS 1. Basic Development Standards. These standards are intended to provide basic standards which will ensure good quality and compatible projects. A residential development over four units per acre is generally limited to the mid-point of the density range for which it is designated. These standards, as well as the density limitation, are intended to create a development which will be compatible and provide for proper transitions from more sensitive or less intense residential development. 2. Optional Development Standards. These standards are intended to provide high standards for the development of projects of superior quality and compatibility. The optional standards allow development at the higher end of the designated density range. However, the standards and development expectations have been increased above and beyond the basic standards in order to ensure proper transitions and buffers from lower intense residential uses. The ultimate density allowed in any residential district shall be determined through the residential land development design review process and public hearings as described in Chapter 17.06. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to reasonably condition any residential development to ensure proper transition and compatibility to adjacent residential developments; existing or proposed. 3. Mixed Use Development Standards. For the purposes of establishing guidance for the application of individual land use regulations and development standards, all Mixed Use District development proposals are subject to master planning procedures as outlined in Section 17.20.030. Existing development standards for each land use category, as provided in Sections 17.08 through 17.24, shall be the basis of standards for each category within a mixed use development plan, but they may be modified by the City during the Master Plan review process. Development agreements between the property owners and the City may be used as implementation measures for any amended standards or review procedures. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01, TO ESTABLISH A MIXED USE DISTRICT, WITH ACCOMPANYING DEFINITIONS, PROCESSING PROVISIONS, AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BY AMENDING SECTIONS 17.08.010.C.1, 17.08.020, 17.08.030 AND 17.O8.040.A OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. 'The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Development Code Amendment 00-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 24th day of May 2000, 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. 3. 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 forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located within the City; and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment. 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 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows; a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development by permitting joint development of varying uses already listed in the General Plan; and b. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code by allowing the innovative use of existing development standards to expand the range of uses within a development project; and c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity by mandating the continued use of existing development procedures and standards for Mixed Use districts; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION DCA 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 24, 2000 Page 2 d. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and is consistent with the objectives the Development Code by continuing a policy of encouraging quality development through the innovative application of existing design standards. 4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has been prepared and reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and further, specifically finds that based upon substantial evidence, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendment will have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed amendment is exempt pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b) (3). 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of DeveloPment Code Amendment 00-01 by the adoption of the attached City Council Ordinance. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24th DAY OF MAY 2000. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Bullet, Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 00-01, TO ESTABLISH MIXED USE DISTRICTS, WITH ACCOMPANYING DEFINITIONS, PROCESSING PROVISIONS, AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BY AMENDING SECTIONS 17.06.010.C.1, 17.08.020, 17.08.030 AND 17.08.040.A OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly-noticed public hearing with respect to the above-referenced Development Code Amendment and, following the conclusion thereof, adopted its Resolution No. , recommending that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt said amendment. 2. On ,2000, the City Council of the~City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted and concluded a duly-noticed public hearing concerning the subject amendment to the Development Code. 3. 'All legal prerequisites pdor to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. SECTION 2: This City Council hereby finds and determines that the subject amendment identified in this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Chapter 3 of Division 6 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. .SECTION 3: The following sections hereby are amended to read, in words and figures, as written below: 1. The following shall be added as Section 17.06.010.C.l.h to the Land Development section of the Development Code: "h. All projects within Mixed Used Districts." 2. The following shall be added as Section 17.08.020.G to the Residential section of the Development Code: "G. Mixed Use (MU). This distdct is intended as an area for a mix of residential and non-residential uses, with site development regulations that assure development compatible with nearby lower density residential development, as well as internal compatibility among the varying uses. Each location of this distdct is identified in Section 17.08.030F with percent ranges for each permitted use that is identified. Each use that is so identified is identical to the use definition listed elsewhere in the Development Code." CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 00-01- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 24, 2000 Page 2 3. The following shall be added as Section 17.08.030.F to the residential section of the Development Code: "F. Mixed Use Districts - These districts have been created to implement the goals, objectives, and land use designations of the General Plan. Each location where a Mixed Use District is established will have the specific land uses that may be authorized for development listed in this section,u 4. The following shall be added as Section 17.08.040.A.3 to the residential section of the Development Code: "3. Mixed Use Development Standards. For the purposes of establishing guidance for the application of individual land use regulations and development standards, all Mixed Use District development proposals are subject to master planning procedures as outlined in Section 17.20.030. Existing development standards for each land use category, as provided in Sections 17.08 through 17.24, shall be the basis of standards for each category within a mixed use development plan, but they may be modified by the City during the Master Plan review process. Development agreements between the property owners and the City may be used as implementation measures for any amended standards or review procedures." SECTION 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or word of this Ordinance is, for any mason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or work thereof, regardless of the fact that amy one or mom sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation. SECTION 5: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin a newspaper'of general cimulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and cimulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia. TH E C I T Y OF I~A N C Ii 0 CUCAHONGA DATE: May 24, 2000 TO:. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the General Plan land use designation from Commercial and Medium- High Resider~tial (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The City will also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01, Development District Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A request to change the Development District zoning designation from General Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use, and the establishment of a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD), including deviation from certain development standards for the residential portion of the base district, on 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive. The City will also consider Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Office as alternatives for the entire site - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-01A, and Development Agreement 00-01. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-01 NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP. - A Development Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Northtown Housing Development Corp. for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 27.020.040 of the Development Code) including deviation from certain development standards for 80 senior apartment units and one manager unit on a Mixed Use site of 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive - APN: 202-151-12. Related files: Development Code Amendment 00-01, General Plan Amendment 00-01A, and Development District Amendment 00-01. ITEMS D,E&F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 2 PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Proiect Density: The applications are a request to change the land use General Plan and Development District designations to Mixed Use categories that would permit the development of the subject site to all Medium-High Residential, all Office, or a mix of the two. The site is presently divided between Medium-High Residential (.95 acres - 29.3 percent) and Commemial (2.29 acres - 70.7 percent) designations. With the amended land use designations, the applicant is also requesting a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) be applied to the Medium Residential component to permit the development of senior apartments and one manager unit to occupy the entire site. Under the Medium-High component (100 percent of the site), 45 to 77 multiple family units could be permitted. With a density bonus (up to 25 percent) that can be authorized with a SHOD, the unit count could be as high as 96 units. B. Surroundinq Land Use and ZoninR: North Alta Loma Elementary School - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) South & East - Small commercial shops, unused railroad corridor, water storage facility and multiple family residential complex - General Commercial and Medium High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) West Small commercial shops and a single-family rbsidential neighborhood - General Commercial and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) C. General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) North Elementary school South Railroad and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) East Railroad and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) West Commercial and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) D. Site Characteristics: The site is mostly level, slopping gently to the south, and it has several trees in the northeast and southeast corners of the site. The site has been cleared under a previous demolition permit of an old citrus packinghouse. ANALYSIS: A. General: The request proposes to change a 3.24 acres parcel that is roughly divided between Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) to Mixed Use. The Mixed Use designation for this property is drafted to permit 0-100 percent Commercial and 0-100 percent Medium-High Residential. As stated above, the maximum residential units count for the site under the proposed land use is 77 and 95 with a SHOD. The current amount of multiple family land within the site would allow for 13 units under the base designation and 16 units with a SHOD. The current designations do not permit the development of the entire site for multiple family uses. B. Appropriateness of Existinq Land Use Desi.qnations: The front two-third's of the site is designated Commercial, which is complementary with existing commercial sites along both sides of Amethyst Street. Expansion of this portion with retail shops would enhance the historic downtown Alta Loma with new commercial growth. The commercial portion, however, blocks the Medium-High Residential portion from any street frontage. This arrangement could make the development of the easterly portion difficult with no inherent development standards to work with the two dissimilar uses. D. ,F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 3 C. Appropriateness of Proposed Desiqnation: The division of the proposed Mixed Use District is 0-100 percent Office and 0-100 percent Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre). From the non-residential standpoint, the Office portion offers a reduction in land use intensity with most retail uses permitted being only in support of office activities. The multiple family portion will expand significantly in area and, as a result, in the number of potential units. The intensity of residential development (units per acre) will not be affected. The application of development standards will be guided by those amendments enacted by the accompanying Development Code Amendment 00-01. D. Senior Housinq Overlay District and Development Aqreement: It is the applicant's intent to fully develop the property with a 100 percent senior housing project. The Development Agreement has be drafted to satisfying minimum income levels of 80 percent of the median annual income, of the SHOD provisions. In a separate Regulatory Agreement with the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, the property owner has agreed to Iow cost housing levels that exceed (providing 30, 45, and 50 percent of the Annual Median Income levels) the housing provisions of the Development Code. Reference to this Regulatory Agreement will be included in the SHOD Development Agreement. With this proposal, the Office option would not be a part of the development. With this intent, a request for a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) has been included in order for the future development to benefit from revised standards that are appropriate for senior housing projects. The senior housing project will exceed the density limits but will be within the SHOD's 25 percent bonus limit. Staff is recommending between .7 and I parking space per senior units and 2 spaces for the manager's unit. Reductions in open space, setbacks from drive aisles, etc., are in keeping with previous SHOD agreements, as well as providing for retention of the affordable housing features. The application of SHOD standards will only affect the residential portion of the Mixed Use category. Refer to the Development Agreement Resolution and its attachments to review the specifics of the agreement. The site satisfies the location requirements of the SHOD by having, within walking distance, various services such as food shopping, drug stores, banks, medical and dental facilities, and public transit. These facilities are located at intersections of Base Line Road and Amethyst Street, and Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road. The Development Agreement is still being revised and the applicant has requested that it be reviewed on June 14, 2000. Because of proposed changes, the item will be re-advertised for the June 14 meeting. E. Alternatives: The alternatives listed for review are the two land uses, Medium-High 'Residential and Office, that being considered in the Mixed Use scenario. With only Medium-High Residential (minimum lot size of 3 acres), the site could be developed as a senior housing project as outlined in Item's "A" and "D" and with a SHOD. A total Office designation could result in a development of approximately 35,000 square feet of floor area without the possibility of any residential component. With the site a significant distance off Base Line Road it does not seem likely that this amount of office space will be possible without a great deal more commercial activity in the area. In addition, with a large part of the site tucked some 700 feet off Amethyst Street, the site's viability for this amount of office development is questionable. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 00-0lA, DCA 00-01, DA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 4 The main benefits for the Mixed Use designation are as follows: 1. The "hard dividing line" between a multiple family project and office project is not required in the Mixed Use. Architects will be required to design internal compatibility between the two uses and associated site facilities, which can make the concerns of multiple uses more acceptable. 2. The mix of varying uses would allow the developer to provide the most viable blend of activities on the site. F. Environmental Assessment: Parts I and II of the Initial Study have been completed. Staff has determined that no significant impacts would result from changing the land use designations as requested in the application. Environmental issues will need to be analyzed when formal development proposals are submitted in the future for the senior housing project. When specific development projects are proposed, existing environmental review requirements will be initiated to ensure adequate analysis of impacts. Any significant impacts noted will be mitigated through the City's development review process. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius, and including an expanded area beyond the 300-foot radius, of the project site. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A neighborhood meeting was held on the evening of May 16, 2000, at the Lions West Community Center. The applicant invited those property owners listed for the public hearing notice. Three area property owners were in attendance along with the project architect, applicant representative, RDA and Planning staff members, and Mayor Pro Tem Diane Williams. Questions that where raised regarded the cost of the property and project, rental rates, who would manage the senior project, and whether the City will make any money from the project. RDA staff addressed these questions. No one spoke against the project concept. Concerns were brought up regarding potential increase in traffic congestion near the elementary school. The amhitect stated that special design considerations will be studied for the project's access points when the precise site plan is proposed through the City's design review process. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission receive testimony and discuss General Plan Amendment 00-0lA and Development District Amendment 00-0lA and continue those items to June 14, 2000, for action in conjunction with the Development Agreement. Staff also recommends that the Commission continue Development Agreement 00-01 to be re-advertised for June 14, 2000. City Planner Attachments: Exhibit "A" - General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit "B" - Development District Map Exhibit "C" - Initial Study Resolution Recommending of Approval General Plan Amendment 00-0lA Resolution Recommending Approval of Development District Amendment 00-01 rn -=. GPA 00-0lA- Existing General Plan Land Use GPA 00-01~ Medium-High RDA Senior Housing Site Elementary School Residential :::::::::: . . ::::: ....... [ .ow.es,de.t,a, I ...L:.....: ..... i i i iii iii! ............. Ii i i i i ~*::'.;iiii{,~L;L:L:1 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Lomlia Dr. ~ RDA slle :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Commercial * Medium'Hi0h GP L,nd Use Designations :::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::: ~**, · · Residential ~ COMMERCI~ .............. .*** .:,:~ ~ ELEMENT~Y SCHOOL ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -**:" ~*~ ~HIGH ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: [~ A High ~ MEDIUM ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~. ~ Residential ~ MEDIUM HIGH .................... ~ MIXED USE ~ NEIGHBORH~D COMMERCIAL ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~[[~: Basolino Rd. ~ ~ ~ ========================================================================================================================== ................. ~,~,,,. rn _x=. DDA 00-01 - Existing Development District Map :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .~ Lomita Dr. ~ RDA site ~ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ~ OFFICE/PROFESSIONAL Baseline Rd. no scale N IVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM c, ,o,R.nchoCuc.mo.go (Part I - Initial Study) Planning Division (909) 477-2750 The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed project so that the City may review the project pursuant to City policies, ordinances, and guidelines; the California Environmental Quality Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information requested in this application be provided in full. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing infon~nation. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: ~ ~3 /~ (~ - D I /~~ (~ D /~ o° - o l i Df c)o -o l Project Title: Senior Apartment Project Name & Address of project owner(s): Redevelopment Agency, City of Rancho Cucamonqat MS. Linda Daniels, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonaao CA 91730 Name&Addre$$ofdeveloperorprojeclspon$oc Northtown Rousing Development Corp., Mr. Nacho Gracia, 9999 Feron Blvd., Ste. A, Rancho Cucamonaa. CA 91730 ContactPer~on&Address: Peter J. Pttassi, AIA, Architect 8439 White Oak Ave. t Ste. 105 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone Number: (909) 980-1361 Name & Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): Same a s above Telephone Numbec INITSTDI.WPD-4/96 ~)~ ~_, .~ r7 Page1 Information indicated by asterisk (*) is not required of non-construction CUP's unless othen, vise requested by staff. '1) Provide a full scale (8-1,'2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaffes. 2) Provide a set of color photographs which show representative views iht_..9 the site from the north, south, east and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points which serve the site; and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location (descdbe): East side of Amethyst Street, north of Baseline Road 4) Assessor's Parcel Number~ (attach additional sheet if necessary): 202-14 ! - 12 '5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): 3.24 acres · 6) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications): 3.24 a c res 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary: This application will remove the existing "GC" and "MH" designations from the site and establish a Mixed Use land use and zoning category, permitting a potential mix of multi[~le family, (0 to 100% land ratio) and office (0 to 100% land ratio) uses over the entire site. A "SHOD" will also be requested for any residential portior 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental on t ~ agencies in order to fully implement the project: s i t e . Design Review Approval, Grading Plan, Building Permits, STreet Improvement Permits. De~c~be the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site (including age and condition) and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features desc/~bed. In addition, site all sources of information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and areheological surveys, traffic studies): The site has been cleared under previous permit for demol{t~nn of the old packing house. There are several trees in the northeast and southwest corners of the site. These will be retained if possible. Desc~e~ekn~wnc~ura~and/~rh~a~a~ec~f~es~.$~a#s~urees~f~rmati~n~pub~hedrep~and oralh~to~: The site was home to the Alta Loma Citrus Heights Packing House which provided sorting, packing, and shipping of citrus from local growers. 11) Desc~be any n~ise s~uroes and their ~eve~s that n~w a~ect the site (airoraft~ readway n~ise~ etc.) and h~w they wi~~ a~ect proposed uses: None o INITSTD1.WPD-4/96 '~-~ ~.-.) ~ C~ Page3 Desc~e~epmposedpmject~ Thisshou~pmvideana~qua~sc~nof~es~sofultima~usewhich will ms~ fmm ~e pmsed p~jecL ~dica~ ~ ~em am pmposed phases ~r ~velopmen~ ~e ex~nt of ~velopment ~ occur with ea~ phas~ and ~e anticipa~d comp~tion of ea~ ~cmmenL A~ch additional sheet(s) ff necessa~ With this application it is the applicant's intention to eventually develop senior apartments. The General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment will allow this type of development for the entire site, or any portion thereof. The combined applicat~ons include a request for a "Senior Housing Overlay District" for any residential portion of the site. The Mixed Use cateQories, as presently drafted (0-100% mu]t{n]~ family and 0-100% office), will also permit the use of the property for office development. Desc~be ~e surr~unding pmpe~ies~ ~c~uding ~ati~n ~n p~an~ and an~a~ and a~ c~um~ h~a~ ~r scen~ a~ects~ Indica~ ~e type of ~nd use ~siden~L comme~ia~ etc.), ~nsi~ of ~nd use (one-~mily, ~adment house~ sh~ ~padment s~ms, e~.) and scale of ~velopment ~e~h~ ~n~ge, se~a~ mar ~ e~,): This site is in the historic "downtown" of old Alta Loma. It is a mixed use area with single family homes, small businesses, and Alta Loma Elementary School. 14) ~thepmp~sedp~ectchangethepa~em~sca~e~rcha~cter~f~esum~undinggenem~ama~fthepmject? No, the pattern will be enhanced. Senior citizens will be located in an established area with access to transportation, local retail sites, and services. co~mercial character by following-the City's development ~eview nearby developed areas. An office development on this site 9ould still has retail shops and offices in use. 15) IndiCate the type of shor~-tenw and long-term noise to be generated, including soume and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing are proposed? No significant noise sources will be created with this proposal. '16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic traes: None. 17) indicateanybodiesofwater(includingdomesticwatersupplies)intowhichthesitedrains: Drainage will be accommodated by local storm drains. 18) Indicate expectedamount ofwaterusage. (See AtfachmentA forusage estimates). Forfuffhercladfication, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at 987-2591. a. Residential(gat/day). 32,400 Peak use (gal/Day) 64,800 ~ 100% or b. Commercia~nd.(gaYday/ac) 9720 gal/day Peakuse(gat/min/ac)19,440 gal/day ~ 100% 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal __ Septic Tank x Sewer. If septic tanks ara proposed, attach percolation tests, ff discharge to a sanitaq/ sev~age system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). Forfurther cladfication, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Distr~ct at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal~day) 16,200 gal/day b. Commercial/Ind. (gat/day/ac) 6,480 gal/day RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of rasidential units: Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: A~ached ~dica~ whe~eruni~am mntalor~rsaleuni~: 80 rental senior apartments with I manager,s apartment 21) Anticipated range of sale pdces and/or mnts: Sale Price(s) Rent (permonth) $. 220.00 to ~. 476.00 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: 72 1 bedroom, 1 bath units 8 2 bedroom, 2 bath units 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: We assume 1.5 persons/bedroom 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project Contact the appropriate School Distrfcts as shown in Attachmenl B: a. Elementary: N. A. b. Junior High: c. Senior High COMMERCIAL~ INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Descdbe type ~f use(s) and rnaj~r functi~n(s) ~f c~rnmeroia~~ indust#a~ ~r instituti~na~ uses: The site could be developed as an office use with on site parkinq. 2~ ~talfloorareaofcoreree~ia~bdustdal, or~stituEonalusesbytype: Approximately 50,000-60,000 sq. ft. of office space could possibly be accommodated with on site parking. 27) Indicate hours of operation: Normal Business Hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. would be anticipated. 28) Number of employees: Total: Office use could support 125-140 occur)ants Maximum Shift: Time of Maximum Shift: 29) PmWdebreakd~wn~fanticipatedj~bc~assi~cati~ns~inc~udingwageandsa~atymnges~aswellasanindicati~n~ftherate of hire for each classification (attach additional sheet if necessaG'): Unknown at this time. 30) Estimation of the nurnber of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: Unknown at this time. '31) For commercial and industdal uses only, indicate the source, type and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572.6283): No sianifi~ant sour~. ALL PROJECTS 32) Havethewater, sewer, fire, andfloodcontr°lagenciesservingthepr°jectbeenc°ntactedt°determinetheirabilityt°pr°vide adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. Ail services are available and able to serve the site. ~)"' - ~J~.~ ~'~ ~'"~ Page7 INITSTDI.WPD -4/96 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's; radioactive substances; Pesticides and herbicides; fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the mate~als and descdbe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, if known, None which we are aware of at this time. 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above ? ff yes, provide an inventory of all such matedals to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No I hereby certify that the statements furnished above ~ ~=d-~h~bits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of !~ abih'ty, t~ ~ fact~ st~teroents, and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief.~/furlher u~d~r~ !hat/~dd,~tional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be ma~y the Cit~ ~ Tit ,.~-~( ~'~''''~'~Archi tet ~ City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project Files: General Plan Amendment 00-01A, Development District Amendment 00-01, Development Agreement 00-01 2. Related Files: Development Code Amendment 00-01 3. Description of Project: A request to change the General Plan and Development District land use designations from Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commercial to Mixed Use with allowances for 0-100 percent Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) 0-100 percent Office land use development with a Senior Housing Overlay District for 3.24 acres of land located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of Lomita Drive and accompanying Development Agreement - APN: 202-151-12. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Northtown Housing Development Corp. 9999 Feron Boulevard, #A Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 5. General Plan Designation: Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commercial 6. Zoning: Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commercial 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: On the north side there is an existing elementary school, on the east there is multiple family housing, and an unused rail line, on the south there is an unused reil line, commercial shops and water storage facilities, and to the west there is a old single family neighborhood and commercial shops. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Ddve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Alan Warren, AICP (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Pa~e 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (x) Land Use and Planning (x) Transportation/Circulation (x) Public Services (x) Population and Housing (x) Biological Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems (x) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources (x)Aesthetics (x) Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resoumes (x) Air Quality (x) Noise (x) Recreation ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (x) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the eadier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pumuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: ,~/ AlarVWarren; AICP Associate Planner April 27, 2000 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. Significant Impact Less Potentially Unless Than 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) (x) ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) (x) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) (x) d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) (x) ( ) Comments: a-d) The application is requesting land use changes for a 3.24 acre parcel that is presently designated with a split land use and zoning designations of Medium High and Commemial. The GPA and DDA actions will permit these uses to be developed on the property, but without a hard line delineating the potential separation of the uses. The applicant's intent is to develop 100 percent of the site as a senior housing project with 80 senior units and one manager unit. The Mixed Use designation is new to the immediate area; however, the allowance for Medium-High Residential uses and Office uses is not too much different from the nearby single-family, multiple family, and historic Alta Loma commemial activities. The potential mix of multiple family and office uses on the same site can present inherent design difficulties when trying to provide compatible land use relationships. The City's design review process will provide the avenue to ensure that appropriate design criteria is used in the approved project plan. If developed at 100 percent senior housing, then the compatibility concerns will be significantly reduced. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 4 b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ( ) (x) ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a-b) No construction approval will result from this application. The application has been made in anticipation of the owner's submitting a senior housing project. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. The proposed project will result in 80 senior housing units and one manager's unit in the Medium-High Density Residential District (14-24 dwelling units per acre). The proposed project expands the potential residential use of the site to the full 3.24 acres. Through the GPA process and the residential nature of the nearby area, this project will not result in a significant increase in population not otherwise planned by the City in its forecasts. c) The site is currently void of any structures. No existing housing is located on-site. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) e) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GpA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 5 Comments: a-c) No known faults pass through the site, it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault. The Red Hill Fault, or Etiwanda Avenue Fault, passes within 4 miles east of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 3 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0 - 7.0 earthquakes, respectively. Aisc, the San Jacinto Fault, capable of producing up to Mw7.5 earthquakes is 7 miles northeast of the site and the San Andreas Fault, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 12.5 miles northeast of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhedng to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less than significant. d) The site is not located near a large body of water. e) The site is relatively flat, and it is not near any slopes vulnerable to mass-wasting events. f-h) The site is relatively flat so grading will be minimal. Grading will even out the site and create the necessary slope gradient to allow proper site drainage and avoid erosion. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Building and Safety Division will require a soils report. New structures are required to meet current earthquake standards as required by the Uniform Building Code. The impact is not considered significant. i) The site contains no unique geologic or physical features. It was once the site of a major packinghouse that was built during the expansion of the area's citrus growing industry. Significant tin,act L~ss Potentially Unless Than Issues and Supporling Infom3ation Sources: Sigalfic~nt Mitigation Significant NO 4. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( ) ( ) (x) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) ( ) (x) f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ,~_, ~.~ I ~() ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA O0-01A, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Page 6 g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) (x) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) (x) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) Development with impervious surfaces will affect the rate and amount of surface water runoff. This land use amendment should not significantly affect the amount of change anticipated in previous environmental analysis of the existing land use plans. b) The site is not located within any lO0-year flood plain. A lO0-year flood area is about a 1/2 mile north of the site that is partially contained within an under ground drain and surface drainage channel. The lO0-year flood area does not extend to the site. c-e) The project site is not located near a body of water. Storm-water runoff will be conveyed to the existing public storm drain system as approved by the City Engineer. f-i) The project will not interfere with groundwater management practices in the area because the site is not used for groundwater recharging. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposah a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) (x) ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) (x) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) (x) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a-b) Development will affect the amount of air pollution in the general area. This land use amendment should not significantly affect the amount of change anticipated in previous environmental analysis of the existing land use plans. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Pa~e 7 c-d) After the land use amendment is approved, it is the applicant's intent to propose a project to construct 80 senior residences and one manager unit on 3.24 acres. This will not generate emissions that could cause climatic changes or objectionable odors. 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ) (x) ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ) ( ) (x) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) ) ( ) (x) d) insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ) ( ) (x) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Comments: a) As a result of development, additional vehicle and pedestrian traffic will occur because the site is presently vacant. Similar increases would also occur if the property were to develop under the existing land use categories. No significant increase in traffic is anticipated from development under the amended land use categories. Similar increases would also occur if the property were to develop under the existing land use categories. No significant increase in traffic is anticipated from development under the amended land use categories. Since vehicle traffic is generally less for a senior housing project, the new traffic levels should actually be less than under any multiple family/commercial development authorized under the present land use categories. b-f) The future senior housing development proposal will be required to meet the City's existing street development policies and no significant impacts are anticipated. g) No rail impacts are anticipated. The site is, however, adjacent to a former rail line that is owned by SANBAG, the local council of governments. This land is being held by SANBAG as a potential light rail transit route if such a transportation service is warranted in the future. If the rail line is revitalized, the City will work with SANBAG to ensure that design features are incorporated in to the transit system that mitigates significant impacts to the adjoining properties. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 8 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) The site is not identified on the City's special habitat areas map for special environmental analysis. b-c) The site is an abandoned citrus packinghouse site with some mature trees along the northem boundary to the east. During the Design Review process for the proposed senior housing project the health of the trees should be investigated and efforts should be made to retain them within the ultimate project design d) There is no riparian or wetland habitat on-site. e) The project site is cut off from healthy, undisturbed native habitats and bands of non- native vegetation. It is not in a migration corridor. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposah a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 9 Comments: a-b) The project will not conflict with any energy conservation plans nor be wasteful. c) The project site is not located near any known mineral resource. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ( ) ( (x) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ( ) ( (x) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ( ) ( ) (x) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ( ) ( ) (x) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a, c-d) An environmental closure report was generated for the site when the citrus packing house was demolished. The analysis of the soil samples "indicated that no local, State or Federal hazardous waste levels were encountered on the soil during the (consultants) investigation." b) Any future development will be required to be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles. e) The site is net located in a fire hazard area. Potentially UnleSs Than 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01'A, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Page 10 Comments: a) The site is presently vacant and generates no noise levels. After development with a housing project, noises associated with single family housing projects is expected. This level is expected to be less than significant to the surrounding area's ambient noise levels. b) Any future residential project could be affected by noise generated from a reused rail road right-of-way that borders the south property line. Through the City's Design Review process, mitigation measures will be required of any multiple-family project developed under the Medium-High Residential standards. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a-e) The project site is in an area originally zoned Medium-High Residential and Commercial. The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan for services was based on the assumption this pamel would have 14-24 dwellings per acre for about half of the site and commemial on the remaining portion. The project site, if changed as proposed, will result in 100 pement of the site as an 81 unit senior housing project that should not significantly affect public service needs. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project. No mitigation is required. Fire and Police protection - Additional protection will be required for the increased population and number of homes. However, as the project requires fewer resources than are accommodated within the General Plan, the impact is less than significant. Schools - Most any multiple family projects will generate additional students. The number of students generated by a senior project of 81 total units, however, should be significantly less, if not zero than the amount generated by a multiple family development under the existing land use categories. The eventual senior housing project will incrementally decrease the need for schools while still providing for increased population growth. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fees established by the school district, the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 11 Parks - The proposed project will incrementally increase the need for park and recreation services through the potential for increased population growth. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council, the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Public facilities -The proposed project will incrementally increase traffic on adjacent streets. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council, the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Significant ~mpact Less Pote~ially UnleSS Than 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) ( ) ( (x) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( (x) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( (x) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( (x) Comments: a-g) The residential development anticipated to be built after the land use change will include the construction of 80 senior units and one manager's unit. The proposed development will extend as necessary existing systems and utilities available in the immediate area. The proposed project will not require major modifications or alterations to the existing utility systems. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposah a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 12 Comments: a-b) The surrounding area is developed and includes other residential neighborhoods. Any future housing development will blend with existing surroundings. c) Any future project will create new light and glare, as the site is currently vacant. Low pressure sodium vapor lights should be used to minimize excess glare while creating safe lighting conditions. Landscaping will be in accordance with City landscaping requirements for residential neighborhoods and will buffer the site. The impact is not considered significant. 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposah a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) (x) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) (x) c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) (x) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) (x) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a-e) The site is on an alluvial fan, an environment not generally associated with fossils. An archeological survey performed for the Victoria Community Plan showed very little likelihood that any archeological sites are in the area. As the site is relatively small and vacant, and has been previously disturbed, the likelihood of affecting historical or cultural resources is minimal and impacts are not considered significant. 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) Any proposed residential project will incrementally increase the need for park and recreation services through population growth. The developer of any residential Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0iA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Parle 13 project will pay the appropriate fees in accordance with Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council. b) There is no impact to existing recreational opportunities as the site and property surrounding the project area is designated for residential development. 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ( ) ( ) ( (x) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( (x) Comments: a) The project site does not contain Natural Resources as identified on Figure V-3 of the General Plan. Additionally, the site does not contain any Coastal Sage Scrub, Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, or Delhi-Sands flowering-loving fly habitat. No sensitive species were detected on-site and it is unlikely any will move onto the site due to the lack of natural habitat. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lA, DDA 00-01, DA 00-01 Page 14 b) During construction of any future development, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be emitted from grading the site. Nonetheless, dust emissions could be sufficient to warrant the use of water or other dust palliatives at this site. Sources of emissions during this phase include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed sudaces. NOxand PM~0 levels may be exceeded during this phase. Possible mitigation measures will be investigated during the environmental review of the Development Review process. c) The developer of any residential project will be required to pay development impact fees established by the City Council, the rates of which have been set to mitigate the potential impacts to fire protection service, police protection services, parks and recreational facilities, and other governmental services to less than significant. To the extent that a project may impact utility resources provided by private utility companies, potential impacts upon such services will be mitigated by payment of rates and fees set by each utility agency. The project will also pay transportation impact fees to mitigate incremental impacts to the traffic system. d) Any proposed multiple family project on the 3.24 acres would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Therefore impacts are less than significant. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (x) Genera! Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981 ) (x)Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (x) Environmental Closure Report Former Alta Loma Packing House, 7125 Amethyst Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, California, October 5, 1999 of Rancho Cucamonga City NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 2f092 of the Public Resources Code. Project FileNo.: General Plan Amendment 00-0lA, Development Distdct Amendment 00-01, and Development Agreement 00-01 Public Review Period Closes: May 24, 2000 Project Name: Project Applicant: Charles Joseph Associates Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the east side of Amethyst Avenue, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of Lomita Ddve and accompanying Development Agreement - APN: 202-151-12. Project Description: A request to change the General Plan and Development District land use designa§ons from Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Commercial to Mixed Use with allowances for 0-100 percent Medium-High (14-24 dwelling units per acre) 0-100 percent Office land use development with a Senior Housing Overlay District for 3.24 acres of land. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: [] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. I-I The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lA, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT AND MAP PROVISIONS FROM MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE WITH LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND OFFICE USES FOR 3.24 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF AMETHYST STREET, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LA GRANDE STREET AND NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LOMITA DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 202-151-12. A. Recitals. 1. Nor[htown Housing Development Corporation has filed an application for General Plan Amendment No. 00-0lA as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. 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 for[h in the Recitals, Par[ A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 3.24 acres of land, basically a triangular configuration, located on the east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive, which is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated elementary school and is developed with the Alta Loma Elementary School. The proper[ies to the west are designated Commercial and are developed with small retail shops. The proper[ies to the east and south are designated railroad and Medium-High Residential and are vacant and developed with an apartment complexes; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 2 c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Pla~ and will provide for development within the distdct in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area as evidenced by its frontage on a public street, its size exceeding minimum size requirements for the land use designation, and the evidence of similar uses existing in the immediate area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the existing multiple family and small commercial activities in the immediate area; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan which contains provisions for Mixed Use land use designations. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 3 public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of General Plan Amendment No. 00-0lA to establish a Mixed Use designation for the site identified in this Resolution and shown in Exhibit "A" of this Resolution, and to add the following text to the General Plan Land Use Element, page 111-18, as a second paragraph to the Mixed Use land use description: "The City has identified the following areas for special mixed use consideration: Historic Alta Loma-Amethyst site- This is a relatively small (3.24 acres), but significant, site within the historic Alta Loma commercial area. Once the location of a large citrus packinghouse, the site, now vacant, is strategically located on the east side of Amethyst Street between the neighborhood elementary school and original commercial center. This vacant parcel presents an opportunity to bring new activity into the historic town center either with new commercial office ventures, or with new multiple family developments, possibly aimed to provide housing for our growing senior citizen population. The following table specifies the uses and range of development that is anticipated to bring positive aspects to revitalize the area: Percent Acreage Land Use Mix Range Range Medium-High Residential 0% - 100% 0 - 3.24 acres (14-24 dwelling units per acre) Office 0% - 100% 0 - 3.24 acres The land use categories proposed within the mixed use area shall be of the character and intensity as defined in the corresponding sections of the Land Use Element." 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF May 2000. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 00-0lA - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 4 I, Brad Buller, Secretar,j 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: m -=. GPA 00-0lA- General Plan Land Use Map ~ ~ ~: ::::::~ ~::...:..~ ~ ........................... ~:~::~:~::~: i i i ii iii GPA 00-0lA Elementary School Medium-High :: :::::::::::: Change to Mixed Use Residential Ea. ~3~Ahde St. ::::::::: :::: t~t *t* :::::::::] I:::: :: :: :: :: :::: ::::::::: ::::::: :: :~tttttttttttttt~ ~ RDA site ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ~ ~ GP ~nd Use Designations [i ..... ~ COMMERCIAL ::::~ ~ ::::~::::::~:.~ ~ M~ium-High ~ ELEMENT~YSCHOOL (~ ==== ======== == == = = = = = == == == == = == == == == = = = = Residentia, ~ HIGH ti* ================================ ~ ~MEDIUM ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: . .t ~LOW ~ ..: ..................... ~tt~ High ~~ Residential ~ MEDIUM HIGH ~ MIXED USE ~ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ~ OFFICE Nei~h~ffi~ ~mmercial ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Baseline Rd. no scale RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-01, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE FROM MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE WITH A SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR 3.24 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF AMETHYST STREET, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LA GRANDE STREET AND NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LOMITA DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 202-151-12. A. Recitals. 1. The Northtown Housing Development Corporation has filed an application for Development District Amendment No. 00-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment application and issued Resolution No. 00-._, recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 00-0lA be approved. 3. On May 24, 2000, 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 forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 3.24 acres of land, basically a triangular configuration, located on the east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive, which is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as General Commercial and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DDA 00-01.- NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 2 b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with the Alta Loma Elementary School. The properties to the west are designated General Commercial and are developed with small retail shops. The properties to the east and south are designated Medium-High Residential and are vacant and developed with apartment complexes; and c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area as evidenced by its frontage on a public street, its size exceeding minimum size requirements for the land use designation, and the evidence of conveniently located commercial facilities for a senior population in the immediate area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the existing multiple family and small commercial activities in the immediate area; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan which contains provisions for Mixed Use land use designations. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with ail written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which, have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DDA 00-01.- NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 3 c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the Califomia Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Development District Amendment No. 00-01 to establish a Mixed Use Distdct at the site described in this Resolution, and as described in the wdtten text of and shown in Exhibit "A" of the attached draft City Council ordinance. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF MAY 2000. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman A'I-rEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 00-01, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP AND DEVELOPMENT CODE FROM MEDIUM-HIGH RESIDENTIAL (14-24 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MIXED USE WITH A SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT FOR 3.24 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATEDON THE EAST SIDE OF AMETHYST STREET, SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LA GRANDE STREET AND NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION WITH LOMITA DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 202-151- 12. A. Recitals. 1. The Northtown Housing Development Corporation has filed an application for Development District Amendment No. 00-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development District Amendment is referred to as 'the application." 2. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on an associated General Plan Amendment application and issued Resolution No. 00- , recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment No. 00-0'IA be approved. 3. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and recommended approval of the application by the adoption of Resolution No. 00- 4. On June 21, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment application and issued Resolution No. 00- , approving the associated General Plan Amendment No. 00-0lA. 5. On June 21, 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted as duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 6. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows: SECTION 1: This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. SECTION 2: Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on June 21, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DDA 00-01 - NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 2 a) The application applies to approximately 3.24 acres of land, basically a triangular configuration, located on the east side of Amethyst Street, south of the intersection with La Grande Street and north of the intersection with Lomita Drive, which is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as General Commercial General and Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre); and b) The property to the north of the subject site is designated Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with the Alta Loma Elementary School. The properties to the west are designated General Commercial and are developed with small retail shops. The properties to the east and south are designated Medium-High Residential and are vacant and developed with apartment complexes; and c) This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d) This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e) This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. SECTION 3: Based upon 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 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a) That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area as evidenced by its frontage on a public street, its size exceeding minimum size requirements for the land use designation, and the evidence of conveniently located commercial facilities for a senior population in the immediate area; and b) That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the existing multiple family and small commercial activities in the immediate area; and c) That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan which contains provisions for Mixed Use land use designations. SECTION 4: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DDA 00-01- NORTHTOWN HOUSING DEV. CORP. May 24, 2000 Page 3 a) That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b) That based upon the changes and alterations which, have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c) Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public hearing, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. SECTION 5: Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Development District Amendment No. 00-01 to establish a Mixed Use Distdct at the site described in this Ordinance, as shown in Exhibit "A" of this Ordinance, and described with the following text to be added to the Development Code as Section 17.08.030.F.1: "1. Historic Alta Loma - Amethyst Site: This 3.24 acre site is located on the east side of Amethyst Street, generally between the "T" intersections extensions of Lomita Ddve and La Grande Street, in the original Alta Loma downtown. The following table specifies the uses and range of development that may be permitted on the site: Percent Acreage Land Use Mix Range Range Medium-High Residential 0% - 100% 0 - 3.24 acres (14-24 dwelling units per acre) Office 0% - 100% 0 - 3.24 acres The land use categories within the mixed use area shall be of the character and intensity as defined in Development Code Chapters 17.08 and 17.10. Ali uses that may be authorized under the Office designation are subject to Conditional Use Permit approval. The corresponding development standards, as listed in Chapters 17.08 and 17.10, for each permitted land use shall be applicable to development within the Mixed Use District." SECTION 6: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. i-n ~ DDA 00-01 - Development District Map i iiiiiiiiiiiiii!i! DDA 00-01 ::iii:: Medium-High iii:: La Grande St. ~ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .......... ~RDAsite komita ~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ;tttt={{={~*/ ~ COMMERCIAL GENE~L ~ MEDIUM HIGH ~ MIXED USE ~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~::" :~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~::" ~ Basolino United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office 2730 Loker Avenue West Carlsbad, California 92008 REC . /ED MAY 1 9 2000 Allen Warren Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga [q~t¥ l~ 1~ Z000 10500 Civic Center Drive P.O. Box 807 pit ::~r~:'ho Cucamong Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 '}i~ision Re: General Plan Amendment 00-0lB and Victoria Community Plan Amendment 00-01, City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bemardino County, California Dear Mr. Warren: This letter provides our comments on General Plan Amendment 00-0lB and Victoria Community Plan Amendment 00-01 for the proposed change of land use from medium residential to low- medium residential and subsequent development on 22.9 acres of land within the Victoria Community Plan. The proposed project is located north of Base Line Road and west of Victoria Park Lane in Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. We are concerned about the potential impacts of the proposed project to federally endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodornys merriarni parvus, "SBKR") and threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica, "gnatcatcher") that occur within the vicinity of the project. We provide the following comments in keeping with our agency's mission to work "with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people." Moreover, we provide comments on public notices issued for a Federal permit or license affecting the Nation's waters pursuant to the Clean Water Act. We also administer the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Section 7 of the Act requires Federal agencies to consult with us, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), should it be determined that their actions may affect federally listed species. Section 9 of the Act prohibits the "take" (e.g., harm, harassment, pursuit, injury, kill) of federally listed wildlife. "Harm" is further defined to include habitat modification or degradation where it kills or injures wildlife by impairing essential behavioral patterns including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Take incidental to otherwise lawful activities can be authorized under sections 7 (Federal consultations) and 10 (habitat conservation plans) of the Act. According to the San Bemardino Natural History Museum records, SBKR are known to occur within the vicinity of the proposed project. Gnatcatchers have also been recorded within the proposed project vicinity as recent as this year. As a result, the zone change and subsequent development of the proposed project may result in take of f&derally listed wildlife. According to the negative declaration, the site has abandoned vineyards and some trees. Many such vineyards within the Rancho Cucamonga area are overgrown with sage scrub and provide Allen Warren 2 habitat for the gnatcatcher. If sage scrub occurs within these vineyards, we recommend that protocol surveys be conducted by a permitted biologist for the gnatcatcher prior to final approval of the proposed project. Moreover, trapping for the SBKR should be conducted to determine whether incidental take authorization under the Act is necessary for one or both of these federally listed species prior to any site disturbance. Issues related to potential significant impacts to biological resources on the proposed project site need to be adequately addressed. Due to urban and industrial development SBKR and gnatcatcher have declined throughout this area of San Bernardino County. The continued loss of SBKR- or gnatcatcher-occupied and suitable habitat should be considered significant under the California Environmental Quality Act and City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) should require proper avoidance measures or mitigation for the loss of these resoumes. The proposed project may significantly reduce the numbers and restrict the range of the SBKR and gnatcatcher now and in the future. We urge the City to address these potentially significant impacts to biological resources. We are concerned about potential impacts of the proposed project to raptors that use the area as foraging habitat, which may have significant cumulative effects to migratory and resident raptors. As a result, we recommend that cumulative impacts to raptors be addressed through participation and implementation of the Valley Wide Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan as outlined in the 1995 Memorandum of Understanding among us, the California Department of Fish and Game, and 15 additional local jurisdictions, including the City. In the interim, we recommend that the City require project proponents to mitigate onsite or offsite in a biologically viable manner to preserve or restore the loss of open, mdeml, and vacant land used as foraging habitat by raptors and other sensitive species. The acquisition of mitigation land should be contiguous with other appropriate habitat types, and provide habitat for SBKR, gnatcatcher, and raptors as appropriate. We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed project. Since the proposed project may result in take of federally listed species, we request that these issues be resolved prior to final project approval. We are available to work with you and the project proponent to resolve the federally listed and other sensitive species issues on the project site. Please contact Mary Beth Woulfe of this office at (760) 431-9440, if you have any questions. Sincerely, Jim A. Bartel Assistant Field Supervisor I-6-00-NFTA-337 cc: CDFG, Chino Hills, CA (Attn: Glenn BlackIRobin MaLoney Rames) City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning, CA (Attn: Larry Henderson) Charles Joseph Associates, Rancho Cucamonga, CA THE C I T Y OF i~ANCHO CUCAHONGA Staff Repor DATE: May 24, 2000 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Bullet, City Planner BY: Alan Warren, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-O1B - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to change the General Plan land use designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low- Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 22.9 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of the intersection with Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-881-01. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to change the Victoria Community Plan zoning designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 22.9 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of the intersection with Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-881-01. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: These land use amendments are a request to reduce the residential unit density from 8-14 dwelling units per acre to 4-8 dwelling units per acre. This request is being made in anticipation of the future filing, by the applicant, of a development proposal for a 97-1ot single-family subdivision. Under the existing land use designation, a range of 183-320 units could be considered. With the amended designation, the range of potential units drops to 91-83. At the proposed 97 units, the density will be 4.24 units per acre. B. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: North - Unused railroad corridor and single-family residential neighborhood - Low-Medium, (4-8 dwelling units/acre) within the Victoria Planned Community. South- Base Line Road and the historic Regina Winery facility - High, (24-30 dwelling units/acre) and community facilities within the Victoria Planned Community. East -Vacant, a neighborhood commercial center and an apartment complex - Medium-High, (14-24 dwelling units/acre) and village commercial within the Victoria Planned Community. West - Public storage facility - Low-Medium, (4-8 dwelling units/acre) within the Victoria Planned Community. [TENS G & H PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPAOO-O1B AND VCPA 00-01 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES May 24, 2000 Page 2 C. General Plan Desiqnations: Project Site - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre). North - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units/acre). South - High Residential (24-30 dwelling units/acre). East - Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units/acre) and Neighborhood Commemial. West - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre). D. Site Characteristics: The site is currently an abandoned vineyard. There is a gentle southerly slope to the site, and there are approximately a dozen Eucalyptus trees along the northern property line. The only existing structures on the site are three, old (artesian well) stand pipes that were used to irrigate the old vineyard. Looking north across the property, there is a view of the mountains. Also, along the north property line, there is an unused railroad right-of-way, which is being considered as a portion of the regional trails system by the right-of-way owner, SANBAG. E. Parkinq Calculations: Two covered parking spaces are required for each single-family house. If the anticipated 97-1ot subdivision is developed, the following parking standards would be required: Number of Spaces Type of Use Parkinq Ratio Required Single-family house 2 covered per house 194 covered spaces ANALYSIS: A. General: The proposed land use changes are simply a reduction of the unit densities within the residential category. The existing designation, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre), is the Iow-density multiple-family zone. The Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) is the City's small lot single-family zone. B. Appropriateness of the Existinq Land Use Desiqnation: The site is adjacent (easterly) to an existing apartment complex off Victoda Park Lane and to a neighborhood commercial center, and a public storage facility to the west. The existing designation, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) is a compatible, and traditionally accepted use adjoining multiple-family and Iow-intensity commercial activities. Retention of the existing designation would be compatible with the existing neighboring land uses, including the recent Low-Medium Residential changes to the west (refer to item "C" below). C. Appropriateness of the Proposed Land Use Desiqnation: Recent land use changes and completed developments have ushered in a change to this part of the Victoria Plan. The abandonment of a utility corridor opened up the expansion of Low-Medium Residential along the west side of the Victoria Windrows development from Highland Avenue to Base Line Road. Construction has started and been completed on certain phases of this area. In addition, land owned by the Redevelopment Agency on the north side of Base Line Road, west of Day Creek Boulevard, was previously changed from Medium Residential to Low- Medium Residential. The changing of the subject property to Low-Medium would continue this trend for small lot single-family projects along the north side of Base Line Road. The resultant land use configuration would be single-family development from the Day Creek Channel east to this site, broken only by the existing public storage facility. The existing historic Regina Winery directly south of the site is expected to remain in its present level of operation for some PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPAO0-01B AND VCPA 00-01 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES May 24, 2000 Page 3 time to come, and at this level, the activity should not negatively affect residential activities on the north side of Base Line Road. D. Environmental Assessment: Parts I and II of the Initial Study have been completed. Staff has determined that no significant impacts would result from changing the land use designations as requested in the application. Environmental issues will need to be analyzed when formal development proposals are applied for in the future for the housing project. When specific development projects are proposed, existing environmental review requirements will be initiated to ensure adequate analysis of impacts. Any significant impacts noted will be mitigated through the City's development review process. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site and including an expanded area to within 500 feet along the northerly property line. Circulators of petitions regarding the concerns of Tract 15677 were also mailed notices. NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A Neighborhood meeting was held on the evening of May 16, 2000, in the Tri Communities Room in the City Hall. The applicant invited those property owners listed for the public hearing notice. No members of the public attended the meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City . Council issue a Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment 00-01B and Victoria Community Plan Amendment 00-01 to change the land use designation for the subject property to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:AW\ma Attachments: Exhibit "A" - General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit "B" - Victoria Community Plan Land Use Map Exhibit "C" - Initial Study Parts I and II Resolution Recommending Approval of GPA 00-01B Resolution Recommending Approval of VCPA 00-01 GPA 00-0lB - Existing General Plan Map ::i::i:::: ?:::i:::: ....... Low-Medium I ~ GPASite iii~ :::: GP Land Use Designations i iii ~ COMMERCIAL ~ii::~::~!::~::~i~::~::~ii::~::~i::~::!::~ :::: ~ FLOOD CONTROL/UT~UTY CORRIDOR :::: ~LOW ~ MEDIUM ;;;~;;3:;:;;;;;;;: ~ MEDIUM HIGH ** t * :~:~.~+=~.:____ ~ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL [[.~[+**~,+[ Commercial' no scale N VCPA O0-l~l - Existing Victoria Community Plan Map Low-Mc~:tium Residential i i i ~ VCPA Site ::: VCP Land Use Designations ii i [~ REGIONAL RELATED OFFICE/COMMERCIAL ~ FLOOD CONTROL/U'RLITY CORRIDOR U55] ,ow ~ LOW M£DlU~ ~ MfiBlUM =,~,~ Reoiona, ..,=ted ~ VILLAGE COMMERCIAL no scale N ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM ~.,=oc~o~ (Part I - Initial Study) Planning Di~sion (909) 477-2750 INCOMPLETE APPLICA TIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Pleass note that it is the msponsibility of the applicant to ensum that the applicab'on is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pe~tains: ~ I~F~ C~ -I ~.~ / [/C~/~ 0o-0 I Project D.R. Horton- San Carmela Title: Name & Address ofpreject owner(s): Mark Taylor 6623 N. Scottsdale Road Scottsdale, AZ 85250 Name & Address of developer or project sponsor. Charles Joseph Associates 10681 Foothill Blvd. Suite 395 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person & Address: Charles Buquet same as above Telephone 909-481-1822 Number. Name & Address of person prepa#ng this form (if different from above): same as above Charles Joseph Associates 10681 Foothill Blvd. Ste 395 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone Number. Information indicated by asterisk (*) is not required of non-construction CUP=s unless otherwise requested by staff. 'I) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 11) copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundarfes. 2) Provide a set of color photographs which show representative views into the site from the north, south, east and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points which serve the site; and raprasentative views of significant features from the site. include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Locah'on (desc#be): North of Baseline Road, West of Victoria Park Lane and East of Day Creek Blvd. 4) Assessors Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 0227-881-01 *5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. fl.): 22. g Acras *fi) Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public straets & proposed dedications): 18.3 acres 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site(attach additional sheet fl necessary: We ara requesting a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from 'MB medium density residential to 'LM: Low-Medium residential. In addition, we are filing fora Community Plan Amendment for the proposed density reduction. 8)Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: Building permits, tree removal permit. 9)Describe the physical soriing of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soft stabilfly, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing strocturas on site (including age and cendi~on) and the use of the structuras. A~ach photographs of $ignificent features described. In addition, site all souroes of information (i.e., geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeoiogical surveys, traffic studies): The site is currently an abandoned vineyard. There is a gentle slope to the site. There are approximately a dozen eucalyptus trees along the Northern border of the properly. The only existing structures on the site ara 3 old (artesian well) stand pipes that were used in the irrigation of the old vineyards. Looking Noflh across the property, there is a view of the mountains. Also North of the property is an abandoned Metro Link Co~dor, which is to become a trail. The project is incorporefl'ng a link to the future trail. lO)Describe the known cultural and/or hisiodcal aspects of the site. Site all sources of information (books, published repoffs and ora/history): None known 11) Descdbe any noise sources and their levels that no..._~w affect the site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how they will affect proposed uses: Baseline Road, a sound wall along Baseline Road will be built as specified per noise study. 12)Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate desc#ption of the site in terms of ultimate use which will result from the prosed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of devefapment to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: The proposed project is for 97 Single Family Detached Residential Units with a minimum 5,000 SF. lot. The project requires a General Plan Amendment to change the land use from 'M" Medium density residential (8 - 14 DU's/AC) to 'LM' Low -Medium density residential (4-8 DU's) 5,000 to 6,000 S.F. minimum lot sizes. In addition, a Community Plan Amendment is required far the Victoria Community Plan for the afore mentioned reason. 13) Describe the surrounding preperties, including infarmation on plants and animals and any cultural, histoifcal, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of deveicpment (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): North of the project site is the abandoned Metro Link Con~dor and Single Family Residential Homes. South is Baseline Road and a Commercial Winery. To the East is vacant land and a residential apartment complex. To the West is a Commercial RV storage facility. There are no known plants, animals, and cultural or histortc aspects for the adjacent prepertles. 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale or character of the surrounding general area of the project? The proposed project will not change the paitere scale or character of the area. The proposed project compiles with the Victoda Community Plan. 15)Indicate the ~ype of shod-term and long-term noise to be generated, including source and amounL How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses. What methods of sound proofing are proposed? '16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacemente of mature or scenic trees: There are approximately one dozen Eucalyptus trees along the Northern property line, which will be removed. However, per the Victoria Community Plan, Windrows will be planted in the rear yards of the Northern homes. This will actually plant many more trees then the ones removed. 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains: N/A 18)Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please contact the Cucamonga County Water Distdct at g87-25g 1. a. Residential (gal~day) 58.200/day. 600 P/Unit Peak use (gal'Day) 116,400/day b. Commerciab'lnd. (gal~day/ac) N/A Peak use (gal~rain~ac) NIA lg)lndicate proposed method of sewage disposal. __ Septic Tank__ Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests, ff discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cla#fication, p,~ase contact the Cucamonga County Water Dis~ct at 987-2591. a. Residential (gal~day) 26,190/day, 270 P/Unit b. Commercial/ind. (gal~day/ac) N/A RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: 97 Lots Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Minimum 5,000 s.f., with an average lot size of 7,143 s.f. Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): N/A i Attached (indicate whether units am rental or for sate units): 21)Anticipated range of sate prices and/or mnts: Sale Price(s) $ 250,000.00 to $ 350.000,00 Rent (per raonth) $. to $. 22) Specify number of bedrooras by un# type: AII singte family detatched Plan #1 4 bedrooms 2575-2660 s.f. Plan #2 5-6 bedrooms 2962-3194 s.f. Plan #3 5 bedrooms 3192-3614 s,f. 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: Plan #1 2.30 Plan #2 3.40 Plan #3 3.15 24) Indicate the expected nuraber of school children who will be residing within the projecL' Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachraent B: a. Eteraentaty: 44 b. Junior High: 20 c, Senior High 20 COMMERClAL~ INDUSTRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s) and raajor funcb'on(s) of ooraraemial, industrial or institutional uses: N/A 26) Total floor aroa of coraraeroial, industrial, or ins~ub'onal uses by type: N/A 27) Indicate hours of operation: N/A 28) Number of employees: Total'. N/A Maxireum Shift: Time of Maximum Shift: 2g)Provide breakdown of anticipated job ciassitications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate ot hire for each classification (aflach additional sheet if necessary): N/A 30) Estimation of the nureber of workers to be hirad that currenlly raside in the City: N/A *31)F~r c~mmemia~ and industda~ uses ~n~y~ indicate the s~ume~ ~ype and am~unt ~f air p~lluti~n emissi~ns~ (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (818) 572-6283): N/A ALL PROJECTS 32)Have the water, sewer, fira, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their abilh'y to provide adequate service to the proposed project? ff so, please indicate their response. All agencies contacted have indicated their ability to provide adequate service to the project site. 33) In the known history of this preper~y, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB=s; radioactive substances; pesticides and herbicides;fuels, oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, ancYor discharge on the properly, as well as the dates of use, it known. No 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? ffyes, provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No 1 hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the a~tached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements, and informaUon presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submflted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: March 15,2000 Signature: Title: President I City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project Files: General Plan Amendment 00-01B, Victoria Community Plan Amendment 00-01. 2. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lB - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to change the General Plan land use designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 22.9 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of the intersection with Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-881-01. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to change the Victoria Community Plan zoning designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low- Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 22.9 acres of land located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of the intersection with Victoria Park Lane. APN: 227-881-01. 3. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Charles Joseph Associates 10681 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 395 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 4. General Plan Designation: Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre) 5. Zoning: Victoria Community Plan, Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre) 6. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: To the north, there is an unused rail line right-of-way and a single-family neighborhood (Low Medium Residential); to the east, there is an apartment complex and neighborhood commercial center; to the south, on the opposite side of Base Line Road, there is an historic winery facility; and to the west, there is a public storage facility. 7. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 8. Contact Person and Phone Number: Alan Warren (909) 477-2750 9. Other agencies whose approval is required: None Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Pa~e 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (x) Land Use and Planning (x) Transportation/Circulation ( ) Public Services (x) Population and Housing ( ) Biological Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources (x) Air Quality (x) Noise ( ) Recreation ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (X) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Signed: Alan Warren ~ ~ Associate Planner April 27, 2000 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. 1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposah a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) I Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Pa~e 3 Comments: a - d) The project is a request to change the land use designation for the site from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre)to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units/acre). The area in question has recently seen an expansion of single-family land use decisions and development along the north side of Base Line Road. Specifically, to the west of the public storage facility that borders this site's western boundary, there is a new single-family development. The development occurred after the site, which was previously designated as a utility corridor, was changed to Low-Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units/acre) after the corridor was sold by the utility company. Previous to that action, in 1998, other land use amendments were completed to the west of the future Day Creek Boulevard, which changed approximately 23 acres from Medium to Low-Medium Residential. These recent actions have set a pattern of limiting future multiple-family development north of Base Line Road. Therefore, GPA 00-01B would simply be reinfoming this land use pattern that has been established by these recent actions. As a result, staff does not consider the GPA request as a significant change to the land use pattern in the area, as it is presently developing. Also, the change is within the general residential category and is only one step down in unit density. The overall unit count should drop by 178 units, which could drop the total resident population by as much as 550. Reductions of impacts associated with population levels should be anticipated. The decrease of 178 units is less than 1/2 percent of the City's existing housing inventory, which is not significant. 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposah a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a & b) No construction approval will result from this application. The application has been made in anticipation of an application from the owner for a single-family tract of 97 homes. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. The proposed project will result in 77 single-family residences in the Low-Medium Density Residential Distdct (4-8 dwelling units per acre). No increase in density is proposed. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use density for the site, and will not result in a significant increase in population not otherwise planned for by the City in its forecasts. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Parle 4 c) The site is currently void of any structures. No existing housing is located on-site. 3. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ' ( ) (X) ( ) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) (X) ( ) d) Seiche hazards? ( ) ( ) (X) e) Landslides or mudfiows? ( ) ( ) (X) f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ) (X) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) (X) h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) (X) i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a - c) No known faults pass through the site, it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault. The Red Hill Fault, or Etiwanda Avenue Fault, passes within 2 miles west of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 3 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0 - 7.0 earthquakes, respectively. Also, the San Jacinto Fault, capable of producing up to Mw7.5 earthquakes is 7 miles northeast of the site and the San Andreas Fault, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 12.5 miles northeast of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Liquefaction could occur at the site if a strong earthquake coincided with an extended pedod of heavy rains raising the local water table. Soil type on-site and in the vicinity is Tujunga gravelly loam. These soils are relatively stable but subject to liquefaction when the water table is relatively shallow. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less than significant. d) The site is not located near a large body of water. e) The site is relatively flat, and it is not near any slopes vulnerable to mass-wasting events. f-h) The site is relatively flat so grading will be minimal. Grading will even out the site and create the necessary slope gradient to allow proper site drainage and avoid erosion. Soil type on-site and in the vicinity is Tujunga gravelly loam. This soil is excessively drained, level to moderately sloping soil formed on alluvial fans. It is Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Parle 5 relatively stable but subject to liquefaction when the water table is shallow. The Building and Safety Division will require a soils report, prior to issuance of building permits. New structures are required to meet current earthquake standards as required by the Uniform Building Code. The impact is not considered significant. i) The site contains no unique geologic or physical features. 4. WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) (X) ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) (X) c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) (X) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? ( ) ( ) (X) e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a) Development with impervious surfaces will affect the rate and amount of surface water runoff. This land use amendment should not significantly affect the amount of change anticipated in previous environmental analysis of the existing land use plans. b) The site is located within the 100-year flood plain of Day Creek; however, the Day Creek Channel system is complete and provides adequate flood protection. c-e) The project site is not located near a body of water. Storm water runoff will be conveyed to the existing public storm drain system as approved by the City Engineer. I initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-0lB Parle 6 f-i) The project will not interfere with groundwater management practices in the area because the site is not used for groundwater recharging. 5. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposah a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a & b) Development will affect the amount of air pollution in the general area. This land use amendment should not significantly affect the amount of change anticipated in previous environmental analysis of the existing land use plans. c & d) After the land use amendment is approved, it is the applicant's intent to propose a project to construct 97 single-family residences on 22.9 acres of the Victoria Community Plan area. This will not generate emissions that could cause climatic changes or objectionable odors. Significant 6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Page 7 g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) Comments: a ) As a result of development, additional vehicle and pedestrian traffic will occur because the site is presently vacant. Similar increases would also occur if the property were to develop under the existing land use categories. No significant increase in traffic is anticipated from development under the amended land use categories. The proposed amendment will lower the allowable unit density; hence, the number of vehicle trips and traffic congestion will be reduced. b - f) The future single-family development proposal will be required to meet the City's existing street development policies and no significant impacts are anticipated. g) No rail impacts are anticipated. The site is, however, adjacent to a former rail line that is owned by SANBAG, the local council of governments. This land is being held by SANBAG as a potential light rail transit route if such a transportation service is warranted in the area in the future. If the rail line is revitalized, the City will work with SANBAG to ensure that design features are incorporated into the transit system that mitigates significant impacts to the adjoining properties. 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) (X) ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) (X) ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) ( ) (X) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a) The site is not identified on the City's special habitat areas map for special environmental analysis. / Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Parle 8 b & c) The site is an abandoned vineyard with some trees along the northern boundary that served as windbreaks. Previous analysis of the trees indicated that preservation in place and transplanting were probably not available options. Any development on the site would probably necessitate the removal of the trees. The Design Review process for the proposed single-family tract will review this issue and a possible mitigation measure could be the replanting of Eucalyptus trees to maintain the windrow character, as specified in VTT 15766 Initial Study. d) There is no riparian or wetland habitat on-site. e) The project site is cut off from healthy, undisturbed Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub by development and bands of non-native vegetation. It is not in a migration corridor. 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Result in the less of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a & b) The project will not conflict with any energy conservation plans nor be wasteful. c) The project site is located near the Day Creek alluvial fan, an area classified as a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ-2). An MRZ-2 zone contains deposits of known value and marketability. However, the State Geologist has determined that the area is not a designated area of available resources due to urbanization. 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) I Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Parle 9 Significant b) Possible intederence with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) (X) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) (X) d) Exposure of people to existing soumes of potential health hazards? ( ) (X) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a,c & d) There is no evidence of prior commemial or industrial uses. No evidence of discarded drums, containers, hazardous wastes, or discolored soils have been observed. There was no indication of underground storage tanks or illegal dumping of refuse on-site. b) Any future tract maps will be required to be designed to accommodate emergency vehicles and to be accessible from two access points. e) The site is not located in a fire hazard area. 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) (X) ( b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) (X) ( Comments: a) The site is presently vacant and generates no noise levels. After development with a housing project, noises associated with single-family housing projects is expected. This level is expected to be less than significant to the surrounding area's ambient noise levels. b) Any future residential project will be affected by the traffic noise from Base Line Road. Through the City's Design Review process, mitigation measures similar to those required of VTT 15766 will be required of any single-family project developed under the Low-Medium Residential standards. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Parle 10 Significant 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a - e) The project site is in an area originally zoned Medium Density Residential. The City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan for services was based on the assumption that this parcel would have 8-14 dwellings per acre. The project site has since been incorporated into the Victoria Community Plan and rezoned Low- Medium Density residential. At this density of 4-8 dwellings per acre, the impact on services will be less than planned for. In fact, the preliminary plans call for 4.25 dwellings per acre. Standard Conditions of Approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project. No mitigation is required. Fire and Police Protection - Additional protection will be required for the increased population and number of homes. However, as the project requires fewer resources than are accommodated within the General Plan, the impact is less than significant. Schools - Any single-family project will generate additional students. The number of students generated by a single-family project of 97 units should not be significantly greater than the amount generated by a multiple- family development under the existing land use categories (264 units). The eventual residential tract will incrementally increase the need for schools through the potential for increased population growth. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fees established by the school district, the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Parks - The proposed project will incrementally increase the need for park and recreation services through the potential for increased population growth. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council, the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Public Facilities - The proposed project will incrementally increase traffic on adjacent streets. Consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council, the developer will pay all appropriate development impact fees. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Page 11 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Communication systems? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a -g) The residential development anticipated to be built after the land use change will include the construction of 97 new single-family residences. The proposed development will extend existing systems as necessary and utilities are available in the immediate area. The proposed project will not require major modifications or alterations to the existing utility systems. Impacl S~nificant Pote~flallYlmpact Impact Less Impact 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposah a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a & b) The surrounding area is developed and includes other residential neighborhoods. Any future housing development will blend with existing surroundings. c) Any future project will create new light and glare as the site is currently vacant. Low-pressure sodium vapor lights should be used to minimize excess glare while creating safe lighting conditions. Landscaping will be in accordance with City landscaping requirements for residential neighborhoods and will buffer the site. The impact is not considered significant. I Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Pa~e 12 Significant Impact Less 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resoumes? ( ) ( ) (X) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) (X) c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) (X) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) (X) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a - e) The site is on an alluvial fan, an environment not generally associated with fossils. An archeological survey performed for the Victoria Community Plan showed very little likelihood that any amheological sites are in the area. As the site is relatively small, vacant, and has been previously disturbed, the likelihood of affecting historical or cultural resources is minimal and impacts are not considered significant. S~gnificam 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a) Any proposed residential project will incrementally increase the need for park and recreation services through population growth. The developer of any residential project will pay the appropriate fees in accordance with Development Impact Fee Schedules adopted by the City Council. b) There is no impact to existing recreational opportunities as the site and property surrounding the project area is designated for residential development. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Pa~e 13 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ) (X) b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a) The project site does not contain Natural Resources as identified on Figure V-3 of the General Plan. Additionally, the site does not contain any Coastal Sage Scrub, Riversidian Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, or Delhi-Sands flower-loving fly habitat. No sensitive species were detected on-site and it is unlikely any will move on to the site due to the lack of natural habitat. b) During construction of any future development, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be emitted from grading the site. Nonetheless, dust emissions could be sufficient to warrant the use of water or other dust palliatives at this site. Soumes of emissions during this phase include exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated as a result of construction vehicles and equipment traveling over exposed surfaces. NOx and PM~0 levels may be exceeded dudng this phase. A Mitigation Monitoring Plan was adopted with the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the tract map. Implementation of mitigation measures associated with approval of the map will reduce impacts to less than significant. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga GPA 00-01B Parle 14 c) The developer of any residential project will be required to pay development impact fees established by the City Council, the rates of which have been set to mitigate the potential impacts to fire protection service, police protection services, parks and recreational facilities, and other governmental services to less than significant. To the extent that a project may impact utility resources provided by private utility companies, potential impacts upon such services will be mitigated by payment of rates and fees set by each utility agency. The project will also pay transportation impact fees to mitigate incremental impacts to the traffic system. d) Any proposed single-family project on 22.9 acres would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Therefore impacts are less than significant. EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the' City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (X) General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981 ) (X) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (X) Victoria Planned Community EIR (Certified May 20, 1981) (X) Other: Initial Study - Vesting Tentative Tract 15766 (9/25/96) City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: General Plan Amendment 00-0lB and Victoria Community Plan Amendment 00-O1 Public Review Period Closes: May 24, 2000 Project Name: Project Applicant: Charles Joseph Associates Project Location (also see attached map): Located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of the intersection with Victoria Park Lane - APN: 227-881-01. Project Description: A request to change the General Plan land use designation and the Victoria Community Plan zoning designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for 22.9 acres of land. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: [] The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) Thera is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding ara included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents am available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 00-0lB, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE)TO LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 22.9 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 765 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION WITH VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-881-01. A. Recitals. 1. Chades Joseph Associates has filed an application on behalf of DR Horton and Mark Taylor Corporation for General Plan Amendment 00-01B, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject General Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public headng on the application. 3. 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 forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 22.9 acres of land, a rectilinear configuration, located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of Victoda Park Land, which is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre); and b. The property to the north of the subject site is an unused railroad right-of-way, and beyond that is Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), which is developed with a single-family neighborhood. The property to the west is designated Medium and is developed with a public storage facility. The property to the east is designated Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Neighborhood Commercial and is developed with an apartment complex and a neighborhood retail center. The property to the south is designated High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with the historic Regina Winery; and c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the distdct in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 00-0lB - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 24, 2000 Page 2 d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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 The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area by satisfying the minimum parcel size requirement for the land use designation and continuing the single-family residential development pattern along the north side of Base Line Road; and b. The proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the conclusions listed in the Initial Study Parts I and II; and c. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan by providing a land use pattern that is complementary with nearby parcels of land. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder;, that said (*Mitigated) Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of General Plan Amendment 00-01B designating the subject site as Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA O0-01B - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 24, 2000 Page 3 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF MAY 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary · I, Brad Buller, 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: m GPA00-01B -General Plan Land Use Map ... GP Land Use Designations ~ COMMERCIAL ~ FLOOD CONTROl/UTILITY CORRIDOR ~ HIGH ~ LOW ~ LOW MEDIUM ~ MEDIUM iii~iiiiiii~ ~ ~,u~.,~. :tt!~;;;; Commerd, al ~ NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL no scale N RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 00-01, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR 22.9 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, APPROXIMATELY 765 FEET WEST OF THE INTERSECTION WITH VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-881-01 A. Recitals. 1. Chades Joseph Associates has filed an application on behalf of DR Horton and Mark Taylor Corporation for Victoria Community Plan Amendment 00-01 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated application and issued Resolution No. 00-__, recommending to the City Council that the associated General Plan Amendment 00-0lB be approved. 3. On May 24, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 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 forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on May 24, 2000, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 22.9 acres of land, basically a rectilinear configuration, located on the north side of Base Line Road, approximately 765 feet west of Victoria Park Land, which is presently vacant. Said property is currently designated as Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) within the Victoria Community Plan; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is an unused railroad right-of-way, and beyond that is Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre), which is developed with a single-family neighborhood. The property to the west is designated Medium and is developed with a public storage facility. The property to the east is designated Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Neighborhood Commercial and is developed with an apartment complex / PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VCPA 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 24, 2000 Page 2 and a neighborhood retail center. The property to the south is designated High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) and is developed with the historic Regina Winery; and c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the distdct in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 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. The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed distdct in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area by satisfying the minimum parcel size requirement for the land use designation and continuing the single-family residential development pattern along the north side of Base Line Road; and b. The proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the conclusions listed in the Initial Study Parts 1 and II; and c. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan by providing a land use pattern that is complementary with nearby parcels of land. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering'the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. vcPa 00-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 24, 2000 Page 3 hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of V~ctoda Community Plan Amendment No. 00-01 to change the land use designation to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) within the Victoria Community Plan. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY OF MAY 2000 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman A'I-rEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, 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 May 2000, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~ VCPA00-01 -Victoria Community Plan -'= Land Use Map vc.^ s,te Land Use Designations REGIONAL RELATED OFFICE/COMMERCIAL FLOOD CONTROL/UTILITY CORRIDOR HIGH LOW LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM VILLAGE COMMERCIAL no scale N THE CITY OF ]~AN Cf1 0 C U CAI~IO N GA SlaffReport DATE: May 24, 2000 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman~ Principal Planner SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY REVIEW 00-~)9 - SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION - A courtesy review of the proposed site acquisition of approximately 6 acres of land for an early education center, located in the Estate Residential District (up to 1 dwelling unit per acm) at the northwest corner of Etiwanda Avenue and Summit Avenue - APN: 227-111-05. ABSTRACT: Under State law, the Office of the State Architect has the authority to review and approve school facilities. In order "to promote the safety of pupils and comprehensive community planning," the school district is required to solicit a written report from the Planning Commission prior to acquiring the land. The Planning Commission is required to investigate the site and detail its recommendations, in writing, to the school district. SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: North - Single family residences and vacant land; Estate Residential (up to 1 dwelling unit/acre) South - Single family residences and vacant land; Very-Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units/acre) East - Public Park; Estate Residential (up to 1 dwelling unit/acre) West - Single family residences; Estate Residential (up to 1 dwelling unitJacre) B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Very-Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units/acm) North - Very-Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units/acre) South - Very-Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units/acre) East - Very-Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units/acre) West - Very-Low Residential (1-2 dwelling units/acre) C. Site Characteristics: The site is predominantly vacant with one single family house that is proposed for demolition. There am mature Eucalyptus windrows throughout the property. Rock piles exist along the west project boundary and running east to west through the site. Amber Lane is an asphalt driveway along the northern portion of the site. There is a ITEM I PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PR 00-09 May 24, 2000 Page 2 narrow strip of land, an existing legal non-conforming~ parcel, which separates the proposed school site from Summit Avenue. No access to Summit Avenue is possible without purchasing that property or obtaining that prqperty owner's cooperation. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The San Bernardino County Office of Education (SBCOE) is proposing to purchase property to construct a new early education center. The facility will house approximately 72 special education students, between the ages of 3 months to pre- kindergarten. Some children will be transported by bus. This will be the second public facility of this kind in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest existing early education center is the Mulberry Eady Education Center located at 9521 Business Center Drive in Rancho Cucamonga (6 miles away). The facility will consist of a 14,000 square foot building. There will be no food prepared on the premises. The outdoor playground will provide 75 square feet of playground area per child (same as state requires for private day care facilities). Occasional night time use would be for parental educati~:)n classes. No weekend use is anticipated. ANALYSIS: A. Land Use: The proposed school site is consistent with the General Plan policy to "organize educational, cultural, and recreational activities in close proximity to one another and conveniently accessible to their potential users." The property is located within the Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District (see Exhibit "D") which encourages protection and enhancement of the visual and historical character and quality of Etiwanda Avenue and its immediate surroundings through special setbacks, building orientation, dyer rock curbing, and landscape treatment. A Class I Bike Path is to be provided within the parkway along Etiwanda Avenue. In addition, the Etiwanda Specific Plan calls for preservation of the Eucalyptus trees along Etiwanda Avenue. Although public schools are not subject to the City's zoning regulations, we would encourage the applicant to follow the spidt of these regulations whenever possible. B. Historic Preservation: The existing home is a potential local landmark known as the "Grover Henderson" house. The structure may have been built in 1932; however, no detailed surveys have been completed by staff. The applicant intends to demolish the house and all accessory structures. The historic significance of the home should be evaluated by a cultural resources consultant. If deemed culturally or historically significant, then it should be preserved and used as part of the school facilities. C. Investiqation: The proposed site acquisition does not require Design Review Committee review or Technical Review Committee review; however, the site acquisition was investigated by the Planning Division. The following comments are offered for the Planning Commission's consideration: 1. Make a good faith effort to acquire the pa~;cel to the south (APN: 227-111-06), and obtain a lot merger, in order to provide frontage and access potential on Summit Avenue. ~ Non-conforming means a lot that was legally created which does not meet the current development standards of the City, In this case the parcel width of 50 feet is substandard (Etiwanda Specific Plan requires 120 feet). PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PR 00-09 May 24, 2000 Page 3 2. Prepare an historical/cultural resources study of the potential local landmark "Grover Henderson" house. 3. Decorative metal fencing, rather than chain link, should be used to secure the site. 4. School design should be sensitive to the guidelines of the Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 5. Street frontages should be improved to the standards of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 6. The school district should coordinate street improvements and access locations with the City Traffic Engineer. Preferred access is on Summit Avenue and Amber Lane. 7. A Development Review application including, but not limited to, site plans, building elevations and landscape plans should be submitted to the City for a courtesy review. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission provide comments which will be forwarded in writing to the school district for their consideration. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:DC~Is Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Letters from Applicant's Attorney Exhibit "C" - Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District Regulations Exhibit "D" - Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District Map Exhibit "E" - Photos of Site Exhibit "F" - Photos of Grover Henderson house Exhibit "G" - Engineering Preliminary Review Comments ¢Z?Wlf-o¢ X 15~ BOWIEs ARNESON~ WII.I~.S & ~IANNONE ~m~q H. C;UNN (661) 2a4-2S08 1 71 07 M 1 *A ERO~ION~CORPO~TION April 28, 2000 REC~'VED ~.Y 0 1 ~000 City o~ Rancho Cucamon~ Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner Division City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Request for Report on the Proposed Acquisition of Early Education Center School Site by the San Bemardino County Office of Education Dear Mr. Buller: On behalf of the San Bemardino County Office of Education ("SBCOE"), this letter serves as notice of SBCOE's intention to acquire real property for the construction of an early education center ("Etiwanda Early Education Center"). Specifically, SBCOE proposes to undertake the acquisition of Assessor's Parcel Number 225-011-005, commonly known as 6084 Etiwanda Avenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, California ("Proposed Project Site"). The SBCOE plans to construct the Etiwanda Early Education Center on the Proposed Project Site. Pursuant to Public Resoumes Code Section 21151.2, the SBCOE is required to give written notice of a proposed acquisition to the planning commission with jurisdiction over the Proposed Project Site, which in this case, is the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("Planning Department"). Accordingly, this letter shall serve as such formal notice and request for the Planning Department to investigate the Proposed Project Site and submit a written report to the SBCOE within thirty (30) days of your receipt of this letter. The report should detail the Planning Department's investigation and recommendations conceming the SBCOE's acquisition of the Proposed Project Site. BOWIE, ARNESON, WILES & GIANNONE Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner April 28, 2000 Page 2 Because the County of San Bemardino has adopted a general plan as well as the Etiwanda Specific Plan, this letter also serves to advise the Planning Department, pursuant to Government Code Section 65402, that the SBCOE is considering the acquisition of the Proposed Project Site for lhe purposes of constructing an early education center. We further request that the Planning Department report on whether the SBCOE's acquisition of the Proposed Project Site will conform with the adopted general plan and Etiwanda Specific Plan as is required pursuant to Government Code Section 65402. This additional aspect of the Planning Department's report should include a determination of whether the zoning for the Proposed Project Site permits construction of an early education center on the Proposed Project Site. We visited the Planning Department earlier this week and found the staff to be very pleasant and helpful. To assist the Planning Commission in its investigation, we have enclosed a copy of the Assessor's Map which we obtained from the Planning Department during our visit, which shows the location of the Proposed Project Site. Specif)catly~he~P~chr~o~ed Project Site is approximately 6.07 acres of real property, and is located on tt~uth-eastem c' o~[ner of Etiwanda Avenue and Summit Avenue. t / We would appreciate your sending your response to this request,lo the undersigned on or before May 31, 2000. If you have any questions with respect to this request or the proposed acquisition, please feel free to contact this firm. Very truly yours, WILES & GIANNONE JDR/ad Enclosures cc: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner Dave Reck, San Bemardino County Office of Education Alex Bowie BAW&G/JDR/65765 BOWIE~ ARNESON~ WII.F~S & GIANNONE A P,~LRTNERSH IP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS May 2, 2000 MAY 0 4 ~000 City of Rancho Cucamon~ Oivision Via U. S. Mail and Facsimile (909) 477-2847 Mr. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Response to Request for Information on the Proposed Acquisition of Early Education Center School Site by the San Bemardino County Office of Education Dear Mr. Coleman: On behalf of the San Bemardino County Office of Education ("SBCOE"), thank you for your inquiry in response'to our correspondence of April 28, 2000 regarding the SBCOE's intention to acquire real property for the construction of an early education center ("Etiwanda Early Education Center" or "Center"). This correspondence attempts to address the questions raised by your office in regard to additional information about the Center, additional early education centers in the County of San Bernardino ("County") and plans in regard to the existing dwelling unit on the proposed project site. Specifically, we understand that the Etiwanda Early Education Center will house approximately 72 special education students from the immediate area between the ages of 3 months to pre-kindergarten. In essence, as soon as a parent discovers that their child has a developmental delay and such diagnosis is confirmed by a physician, the child can be enrolled. We also understand that some of the children will be bussed, while others will be driven to the Center. The nearest existing early education center in the County is the Mulberry Early Education Center located at 9521 Business Center Drive, Building 9, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730-4508. BAW&G/JDPd65734 BOWIE, ARNESON, WILES & GIAN-NONE Mr. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner May 2, 2000 Page 2 The SBCOE plans to demolish the existing dwelling unit located on the proposed site, as present plans for the Center consist of one building of approximately 14,000 square feet. There will be no cafeteria or food prepared on the premises, but there will be an area for food service within the building, probably in the multi-purpose room. There will be no gymnasium, as any indoor physical activity will occur in the multi-purpose room and there will be a playground which we anticipate to consist of 75 square feet of playground per child. The only anticipated night time use for the facility would be for parental education classes and weekend use of the facility is not anticipated. Pursuant to our discussion with staff from your office last week, we understand that whether or not a traffic and/or noise study will be required if determined by your office on a project-by-project basis. In this regard, please advise our office whether the SBCOE will be required to prepare a traffic and/or noise study for the Etiwanda Early Education Center project. Thank you again for your assistance with this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any further questions, comments or need further information. Very truly yours, BOWIE, ARNESON, WILES & GIANNONE JDR/ad cc: Brad Bullet, City Planner Dave Reck, San Bemardino County Office of Education Alex Bowie BAW&G/JDR/65734 Etiwanda Specific Plan Part II, Chapter 5 .300 EIOL - Etiwanda Avenue Overlay District .301 Purpose: In addition to meeting the p~'ovisions of Chapter 3, it is the intent of the E/OL District to protect and enhance the visual and historical character and the quality of Etiwanda Avenue and its immediate surroundings. .302 E/OL Distdct Boundaries: E/OL Distdct provisions shall apply to all properties located within 200 feet of the centerline of Etiwanda Avenue, between Foothill Boulevard and 24th Street. .303 Conditional Use Permit Required: All proposed developments shall be subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit, except as follows: (a) Single or two family residences developed in accordance with the provisions of the ER or VL Districts. (b) Single family residences constructed on existing legal lots of record. .304 Special Requirements: Etiwanda Avenue Setback: 30 feet average, 25 feet minimum. Structures facing Etiwanda Avenue shall be separated by a minimum of 25 feet. All structures shall be designed to enhance and reinforce the visual.and historical character and quality of Etiwanda Avenue. While no specific amhitectural style is required, the-style selected shall reflect the traditional architectural styles found along Etiwanda Avenue. The use of field stone as a major design element is strongly encouraged. Residential structures containing more than one dwelling shall be designed to present an image of large single family structures. Careful attention to the placement of entrances, garages and private open space areas shall be required to reinforce the single family image. Front yard landscaping shall be consistent with the streetscape theme for Etiwanda Avenue, Figure 5-26. All such landscaping and associated irrigation shall be installed Pri0r to occupancy. All new development shall be required to restore and/or reconstruct the stone curbing along Etiwanda Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and the City limits in conformance with adopted City standards acceptable to the Historic Preservation Commission. Photographic documentation of the condition of the curbing shall be provided pdor to issuance of construction permits. Special Studies -/ Overlay District (seismic) lil Iii Etlwanda Avenue ~ ^w Overlay District 2 D Community Service Overlay District (PerFI;. s-si Equestrian Overlay District ~ Foothill blvd. S.P. · .,ow, / title figur~/~- i! d"d~ [[ !-Il OVERLAY ".=~-~/o~il'~' DISTRICTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - ENGINEERING DIVISION PROJECT PRELIMINARY REVIEW COMMENTS To, Planning Division: DAN Project No. PR 00-09 APN 225-111-05 Applicant(s): San Bemardino County Location: NWC Summit Office of Education ~ Etiwanda Avenue Courtesy Review by Plarining CommisSion at its mee[in~n May 24, 2000 COMMENTS: 1. There is conflicting property line information in this area of Etiwanda. a. The APN map indicates a strip of land, approximately 50 feet wide, on the north side of Summit Avenue still owned by the property owner on the south side of Summit. If so, this needs to be acquired and merged with the subject property. b. On the other hand, easements dedicated to the City in 1990, for the construction of Summit Avenue (portion of Exhibit C from OR 90-291641 and OR 90-291642 attached), indicate the subject property already fronts Summit Avenue. c. lfthe discrepancies cannot be resolved through a title search, we recommend preparation of a Record of Survey for the property. 2. A dirt road along the north property line of this property currently serves four 2.3-acre properties. Amber Lane has been partially dedicated (see attached excerpt from Assessors Parcel Map). The subject project shall dedicate at least 40 feet along the entire length of the north property line and install a "half street" to City standards (minimum pavement width of 26 feet with curb and gutter on the south side). We' would prefer installation of a full width local street, if the developer can obtain rights-of-way from the adjacent property owners to the north. 3. All project frontages shall be fully improved upon development: a. Etiwanda Avenue does not require widening, but existing cobble curb and gutter shall be repaired as needed (see Standard Drawing 105-B). Install an 8-foot bike path and street trees per attached Etiwanda Specific Plan figure 5-27. Install street lights and "No Parking Any Time" (R26) signs to City standards. Revise Drawing 1435 to show the new improvements. b. Install sidewalk and street trees along Summit Avenue per attached Etiwanda Specific Plan figure 5-39. Install a drive approach and "No Parking Any Time" (R26) signs to City standards. Revise Drawing 1417 to show the new improvements. c. Install curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, sidewalk, street trees, street lights and a drive ] I~ ~ approach to local residential street standards for Amber Lane. 4. Dedicate an additional 4 feet of right-of-way for Etiwanda Avenue (44 feet measured from the street centerline). 5. In conformance with the attached Driveway Policy (B.3), it is preferable to locate project drive approaches on collector or local residential streets (Summit Avenue and/or Amber Lane) rather than secondary arterials like Etiwanda Avenue. Commercial style drive approaches (Standard Drawing 101, type C), a minimum of 35 feet wide, shall be located at least 100 feet from street intersections, although further is better from the Summit/Etiwanda intersection. 6. Submit a site plan for our review indicating driveway and parking lot locations and on site circulation including student pick-up and drop-off locations. 7. Line of Sight designs shall be provided for all project driveways, in accordance with the attached policy. 8. In accordance with the attached "Existing Overhead Utility Requirements" handout, development will be required to underground existing overhead utilities along Summit Avenue when the street improvements are installed. In addition, in lieu fees shall be paid for the future undergrounding of lines on the opposite sides of Etiwanda Avenue and Amber Lane. 9. According to Drawing 1417-D, a local storm drain (45" RCP) is to be extended north of Summit in Etiwanda Avenue. Development will be required to complete said extension for the length of the project, as a frontage improvement. 2 of 2 (~ Tax Rate Area II L..~.5°2'?-, t5o37. I__ I__ I T. RA. i 15022 r 5 AC. t 9.70AC M/L 2.31 AC , Z43 AC ~ 2.30AC. I I I I I I I - Z~E nd ~ '~ AVENUE ~ Assessor~ Map '~ Book 225 .Page II R A N C HO C U C A M O N G A DATE: May 24,2000 TO: Chairman and Members of thug Commission FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engin6~.---x~? BY: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil E~gineer SUBJECT: ENGINEERING DIVISION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: Attached is the Engineering Division's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Fiscal Year 2000/01. The projects have been categorized by type of project (Beautification, Drainage, Streets, etc.), which are in alphabetical order within a category. A map showing the project locations is also attached. A summary of project costs by category is shown on the cover page. The total for all projects is $10,086,000. A few projects are dependent upon uncommitted funds from other agencies; therefore, their construction during the next year is not guaranteed at this time. Following the CIP is a listing and description of the various funds (revenue sources) used to finance the projects. This item has been reviewed and approved by the City Council Public Works Subcommittee. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find the Capital Improvement Prugrarn in conformance with the General Plan. Respecff-~lly submitted, Willia.m' J. O'Neil City Engineer Attachments ITEM J CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FISCAL YEAR 2000/01 SUMMARY Beautification $777,000 Drainage 250,000 Facilities 175,000 Miscellaneous 390,000 Parks 1,200,000 Railroad Crossings 787,000 Streets 5,775,000 Studies 290,000 Traffic 442,000 TOTAL $ ! 0,086,000 Comments: The projects are listed in alphabetical order within each category, except for numbered streets which are in numerical order at the beginning ora section. The number following the fund name is the project account number. If the account number ends in xxxx, a final number has not been assigned as yet. BEAUTIFICATION 1. Carnelian St - 1000 ft south of to Vivero St. - Landscape parkways. (Design and construct) Fund - Beautification 21-4647-9826 $300,000 2. Calsense Retrofits in parkways (Phase 2 of S). (Design and Construct) Fund - Beautification 21-4647-9627 $80,000 3. San Bemardino Rd. - West of Hellman Av to Hellman Av - Restore parkway landscaping. (Design and construct) Fund - Beautification 21-4647-xxxx $20,000 4. Wilson Ay. - San Sevaine Rd. to Cherry Ay. - Landscape median and parkways. (Design and construct) Fund - Beautification 21-4647-xxxx $377,000 DRA/NAGE 5. Almond trail west of Beryl St. - Correct existing drainage condition. (Design and construct) Fund - General City Drainage 23-4647-xxxx $200,000 6. Hermosa Av. - 800 ft. south of Ma~7~-~ita Dr. on east side - Replace existing open drainage inlet with standard catch basin. (Design and construct) Fund - General 01-4647-xxxx $50,000 FACILITIES 7. RCSC (Senior Center) Renovation- Interior modifications of the existing building and provide ADA accessibility to the new parking lot on the east side of the building. (Design) Fund - CDBG 28-4333-xxxx $145,000 8. RCSC (Senior Center) Landscape - Renovation of the existing landscaping and irrigation system. (Design) Fund - CDBG 28-4333-9712 $30,000 2 MISCELLANEOUS 9. ADA Ramps and Driveways - Install missing ramps and reconstruct ramps and driveways to conform to current ADA standards at various locations within the City, 34 year ofa 6 year program. (Design and construct) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-9804 $100,000 TDA Art. 3 16-4637-9106 4,000 CDBG 28-4333-9106 22,000 $126,000 10. Graffiti removal at various locations. Fund - CDBG 28-4333-9045 $22,000 11. Developer Reimbursements - Reimburse funds to Developers for construction of City Master planned transportation and drainage facilities Fund - Transportation 22-4637-9120 $0 General Drainage 19-4637-9120 200,000 Etiwanda Drainage 23-4637-9120 20,000 $120,000 12. Sidewalk grinding and repairs at various locations. Fund - CDBG 28-4333-9107 $22,000 PARKS 13. Demens Trail - Construct equestrian trail along south side of Demens Basin west of Amethyst St. (Construct) Fund - Park Development 20-4532-9915 $225,000 14. Red Hill Park Storage Facilities - Construct a storage building at Red Hill Park. (Design and construct) Fund - Park Developmem 20-4532-9913 $100,000 3 15. Tot Lot Modification - Renovation of existing tot lots at various parks. (Design and construc0 Fund - Park Development 20-4532-9405 (Hermosa & Red Hill) $175,000 20.4532-9910 (Heritage) $400,000 20-4532-9911 (East Beryl) $300,000 $875,000 RAILROAD CROSSINGS 16. 6~ St. at ATSF RXR Spur east of Archibald Ave - Widen crossing, provide new gates, warning signals, and concrete pads. (Design and construct) Fund - Transportation 22-4637-9517 $517,000 17. Etiwanda Ave. at SCRRA RXR south of Whittram Ave - Widen crossing, provide new gates, warning signals, concrete panels, and relocate spur line in conjunction with related street work. The project depends upon cooperative funding from SCRRA. (Design and construe0 Fund - Transportation 22-4637-9509 $270,000 STREETS 18.6th St. - Archibald to Hermosa - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design and construct) Fund - Measure I 32.4637-9927 $155,000 19. 6t~ St. - Haven Ave. to Milliken Ave. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design and construe0 Fund - Measure I 32-4637-9904 $330,000 20. 6~ St. - Milliken Ave. to Hyssop Dr. - Rehabilitate existing pavemem. (Design and construct) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-9905 $410,000 4 21.7t~ St. - Milliken Av to Pittsburgh Ay.- Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $4,000 22.8th St. - Archibald Ay. to Haven Ay. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $7,000 23.26t~ St. - Center St. to Haven Av. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure ! 32-4637-xxxx $6,000 24. Amethyst St. - Crossing SP RXR right of way - east side - Provide curb and gutter, sidewalk, and cover open drainage facility. (Design and cons~xuct) Fund - General 01-4647-xxxx $97,000 25. Amethyst St. - 19t~ St. to Hillside - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design and construct) Fund - Measure ! 32-4637-9812 $351,000 26. Amethyst St. - Hillside to North City Limits - Rehabilitate existing pavement and some widening. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $5,000 27. Arrow Route - Grove Ave. to Baker Ave. - Rehabilitate existing pavement, some widening, and upgrade the traffic signal at Grove Ay. (Design and construct) Fund - Prop. 111 10-4637-9807 $200,000 Measure I 32-4637-9807 $800,000 $1,000,000 28. Arrow Route - East of Rte I15 - Widen for a left turn pocket at a driveway. (Design and constmcO Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $110,000 29. Base Line Rd. - Vineyard Av. to Hellman Ave. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design and construct) Fund - Measure ! 32-4637-9906 $132,000 5 30. Bus bays at various locations. (Design and construct) Fund - AQMD 14-4158-xxxx $ 58,000 31. Carnelian St. - Vineyard Ave. to 1000 ft south of Vivero St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design and construct) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-9314 $207,000 32. Center St. - 6' St. to 7*. St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $7,000 33. Center St. - 7* St.to 8th St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $10,000 34. Etiwanda Ave. - 6* St. to Arrow Route - Rehabilitate existing pavement in conjunction with the.railroad crossing project. (Design) Fund - Transportation 22-4637-9511 $5,000 35. Foothill B1. - Haven Ay. to Rochester Av. - Install conduit for future fiber optic line and electrical service for median island. (Design and conslxuct) Fund - RDA " 998-1111-9998 $850,000 36. Grove Ay. - 8* St. to Foothill B1. - Design study. Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $17,000 37. Hellman Ay. at 9* St. - Install drain under the east side of the intersection. (Design and construc0 Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $175,000 38. Helms Av. - Feron B1. to 9* St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $4,000 6 39. Lemon Av. - Carnelian St. to Beryl St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design and construct) Fund- Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $190,000 40. Local Street Rehabilitation - Various locations within the City - Rehabilitate local street pavement in accordance with the Pavement Management Program. (Design and construct) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-9113 $414,000 41. Marine Ay. - Humboldt Ay. to 26~ St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $7,000 42. Milliken Ave. - 4~ St. to 7~ St - Rehabilitate existing pavement and some widening. (Construct) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $400,000 Transportation 22-4637-xxxx $271,000 Assess Dist 82-1 $109,000 $780,000 43. Monte Vista St. - Amethyst Av. to Archibald Av. - Reconstruct Street. (Design and construct) Fund - CDBG 28-4333-9721 $419,000 44. Pittsburgh Ay. - 4t~ St. to 6~ St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $11,000 45. Pittsburgh Ay. - 6~ St. to 7~h St. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $6,000 46. Terra Vista Parkway - Church St. to Spruce Av. - Rehabilitate existing pavement. (Design) Fund - Measure I 32-4637-xxxx $8,000 7 STUDIES 47.6~ St. at 1-15 Freeway - Project Study Report to evaluate the feasibility of constructing an interchange at that location. Fund - Transportation 22-4637-xxxx $ ! 50,000 48. Base Line Rd. at 1-15 Freeway - Project Study Report (Phase 2) to evaluate widening of ramps and installation of traffic signals. Fund - Transportation 22-4637-xxxx $100,000 49. Infrastructure Inventory of City facilities. Fund - Prop 111 10-4637-xxxx $30,000 50. Pavement Management Program Update - Update of City-wide pavement management program.. Fund: Prop. 111 10-4637-9110 $10,000 TRAFFIC 51. Foothill BI. - Haven Ay. to Rochester BI. - Restripe from 4 to 6 lanes. (Design and construct) Fund - Transportation 22-4637-xxxx $50,000 52. Rehabilitate traffic signal internally illuminated street name signs. (Design and construct) Fund - Transportation 22-4637-xxxx $20,000 53. Emergency vehicle preemption system for the Rte. 30 traffic signals, year 3 of a 5 year program. (Design and construct) Fund - Transportation 22-4637-9814 $12,000 54. Signal - Foothill B1. at Malachite Av. - Install traffic signal. (Design and construct) Fund - Transportation 22-4637-xxxx $ ! 00,000 8 55. Signal - Milliken Av. at Vintage Dr. - Install traffic signal. (Design and construct) Fund - Transportation 224637-xxxx $47,000 TDA 8 12-4637-xxxx $83,000 $130,000 56. Signal - Rochester Ay. at Lark Dr. - Install traffic signal. (Design and construct) Fund - Transportation 22-4637-xxxx $130,000 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Description Of Special Revenue Funds LIBRARY: FUND 02 In fiscal year 1994/95 the City began providing library services to the residents of Rancho Cucamonga. In the Fall of 1994 the City opened the interim municipal library facility with a 70,000 piece coll6ction consisting of books, audio, video and reference materials. The 22,000 square foot facility doubled the mount of space previously available through the County system. The City's library collection and progr~m~ are designed to meet the needs of adult, young adult and children of Rancho Cucamonga. Funding for the library system comes from current taxes that are collected by the County for h'brary services. The City's library system continues to operate from these same tax dollars and does not receive any additional funding bom the City's general fund. REIMB/STATE COUNTY PARKING CIT.: FUND 03 This fund was established for the tracking of revenues and expenditures related to State & S.B. County surcharges on parking citations as required effective June 1992. SPORTS COMPLEX: FUND 05 The Rancho Cucamonga Sports Complex was dedicated on April 3, 1993. This facility includes three lighted softball fields, two lighted soccer fields, and one ninety-foot baseball field. The centerpiece of the facility is the baseball stadium, home of the Rancho Cucamonga Quakes, a California League Class "A" Team affiliated with the San Diego Padres. This fund is supported by charges to customers, rental fees, and an admission tax. This Enterprise Fund accounts for personnel and operating costs directly associated with the operations of this facility. CCWD: FUND 06 This fund is a clearing account for expenses and reimbursements associated with City perfmmed street sweeping and minor maintenance of State highways in the City on behalf of Caltrans. CALTRANS AGREEMENT: FUND 07 Thi_q fund is a clearing account for expenses and reimbursements associated with City performed street sweeping and minor maintenance on State highways in the City on behalf of Calm. S.B. COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AGREEMENT: FUND 08 Thin fund is a clearing account for expenses and reimbursements associated with City performed storm drain facility maintenance on behalf of the County Flood Control District. GAS TAX 2106, 2107 & 2107.5: FUND 09 This is a restricted fund for the construction and maintenance of streets and roads. These funds may also be used for traffic signal maintenance and street safety lighting. PROPOSITION 111: FUND 10 Proposition 111 is a state gasoline tax surcharge passed by California voters in 1990 for transportation improvement projects that include funding for the construction of various transportation systems and for street and road maintenance. Like Fund 09 these funds are restricted in their use: restrictions include requirements for a Congestion Management Plan and maintenance of effort (MOLe). MOE is intended to prevent cities from shifr/ng expenses from other funding sources to Fund 10. Funds are allocated under several categories including local and regional. II* TDA ARTICLE 8 FUNDS: FUND 12 'IDA funds are derived bom a statewide sales tax for various transportation related projects. The funds available are apportioned within each county by that county's transportation authority. Over the past few years all funds available to this county have been allocated to public u-ansportation(primarily Omnitrans). The City has been spending accumulated fund balance from prior year allocations for traffic signals throughout the City. COMMUNITY SERVICES-RECREATION: FUND 13 The Recreation Services function is coordinated with Community Services to provide cultural and recreational services for the community through recreation classes, youth and adult sports programs, trips and tours, cultural activities, and special events. Many of these recreation services activities are conducted at the Lions Community and the Rancho. Cueamonga Neighborhood Centers, as well as parks and schools. AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT: FUND 14 This grant is the City's proportionate share of AB 2766 revenues collected by the Depmh,,ent of Motor Vehicles and used to reduce air pollution from mobile sources. PEDESTRIAN GRANTS/ARTICLE 3: FUND 16 Pedestrian Grant - Article 3 is a grant fund for the construction or reconstruction of pedestrian related capital improvements. Typical projects eligible for funding include sidewalks, handicap sidewalk ramps, bicycle trails. This is a discretionary gasoline tax funding source administered by the San/Bemardino Associated Governments (Sanbag). rD,. DRAINAGE-ETIWANDA: FUND 19 The Etiwanda drainage fund is a developer impact fee supported fund for the construction of stoim drain improvements in the Etiwanda drainage area. PARK DEVELOPMENT: FUND 20 The collection of a fee for park development purposes is regulated under Chapter 16.23 of the Municipal Code as it relates to the dedication of land, payment of fees, or both, for park and recreational land in subdivisions and planned communities. Collection of the fee occurs at the time building permits are acquired by the developer. BEAUTIFICATION FUND: FUND 21 The Beautification fund is a developer impact fee supported fund for the consWaction of parkways, median islands, and other landscape related projects throughout the City. SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT: FUND 22 The Transportation Fund (formerly the Systems Fund) is a developer impact fee supported fund for the eons~'uetion of"backbone" street improvements throughout the City. DRAINAGE: GENERAL CITY: FUND 23 The General City Drainage fund is a developer impact fee supported fund for the construction of storm drain improvements in all areas of the city except for certain master planned developments and the Etiwanda drainage area. IV. F.A.UdST. TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM: FUND 24 ISTEA (formerly FALD is a federal grant funding source of the construction of major streets and bridges. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act is a competitive grant program. R-Z'BERG GRANT FUND: FUND 26 Administered by the State Depmtment of Parks and Recreation, this local assistance program was started in 1976 through passage of SB 174 (Roberti). The criteria and matching requirements were revised in 1984 through passage of AB 737 (Harris). The Harris amendment to the program changes the matching requirements to 70% state/30% local (unless waived) instead of 75% and 25%. The purpose of this grant is for acquisition and development of indoor and outdoor recreation areas and facilities. 1988 CONSERVATION GRANT: FUND 27 Administered by the California Depa~ tment of Park and Recreation, the Per Capita grant is funded under the provisions of the California Wildlife, Costal and Parkland Conservation Act of 1988. This grant is noncompetitive for acquisition, development or rehabilitation of parklands. There are no matching fund requirements for this funding source. C.D.B.G. FUND: FUND 28 FUnd 28 has been set up for the express purpose of expending Federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. The CDBG Program, which receives funds directly through the U.S. Depa~haent of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), provides for a variety of housing, community development, and public service activities. Each City and County decides for itself how this money can best be utilized to meet the unique needs of its residents. Vo The primary goals of the CDBG program are to improve the living condition and economic opportunities of lower income persons, to prevent and eliminate community blight and blighting influences, and to meet urgent needs for which no other resources can be found. A minimum of 70 percent of the benefits of the CDBG funded activities must be directed to activities which assist lower income persons. MEASURE I: FUND 32 Measure I is a local gasoline tax passed by San Bemardino county voters in 1989 for transportation improvement projects that inehides the creation of a passenger rail system, the construction and repair of streets, and the construction of an expanded freeway system. Street funds are allocated from two categories: local and arterial. SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATION: FUND 33 Special Districts manages all City assessment disu-icts and implements policies established by the City Council, maintains the working relationship with citizens, prospective citizens, developers and real estate personnel to ensure disclosure of al special districts, also continues to act as a liaison between eitizeus, Southern California Edison in monitoring of repairs and/or maintenance for all street lights. PUBLIC RESOURCES GRANT: FUND 34 This account is administered by the State Depa,t. xent of Parks and Recreation under the provisions of the Public Resources Code, Cigarette and Tobacco Products Surtax Fund. Due to the special legislation required for grant funding implementation (AB 1580) monies received through this grant are site specific. There is no matching requirement for the funding source. SB 140: FUND 35 SB 140 is a State grant funding source for the consmaction of streets and bridges. Formally titled State/Local Partnership Program, it is a competitive grant program. VI. ST. PROP 108: PASS. RAIL & CLEAN AIR BOND ACT OF 1990: FUND 36 State Prop. 108 funding is derived from bond sales for the improvement of passenger rail facilities/ncluding the City's Metrolink Station. These funds have been allocated to the City through an agreement with SANDBAG to fund the station construction. S.B. CNTY. MEASURE I: COMMUTER RAIL: FUND 37 San Bemardino County Measure I: Commuter Rail is that portion (Commuter Raft Program) of the County-wide sales tax program used to fund a commuter raft transit plan. This source, along with State Proposition 108/Passenger Rail Bond Act, is funding the City's Metrolink Station. These funds have been allotted to the City through an agreement with SANBAG. LIVID #1 GENERAL: FUND 40 Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (LMD#1) assessments pay for the ongoing maintenance of parkways, median islands, paseos, entry monuments, equestrian Wails and parks. These sites are not considered to be associated with any one particular area within the City, but rather benefit the entire City on a broader scale. Generally, LlVlD#1 is the property west of Deer Creek Channel and north of Eighth Street. LMD//2 VICTORIA: FUND 41 Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 (LMD#2) assessments pay for the ongoing maintenance of parkways, median islands, paseos, equestrian trails and parks within the Victoria Planned Community: LIVID #3A PRKWY SO. OF 6TH ST. E OF 1-15: FUND 42 Landscape Maintenance Dislxict NO.4 (LMD#4) assessments pay for the ongoing maintenance of the parkways within this district, which is located on Hyssop Drive south of Sixth Street. LMD #4 TERRA VISTA: FUND 43 Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 CLMD#4) assessments pay fOr the ongoing maintenance of parkways, median islands, paseos, equestrian trails and parks within the Terra Vista Planned Commun/ty. LMD #5 NE CORNER 24TH & HERMOSA: FUND 44 Landscape Maintenance district NO. 5 (LMD#5) represents a landscaped Tot Lot, located on the southwest comer of Andover Place and Bedford Drive. This site is associated with a group of 44 single family parcels which all have a common usage of the Tot Lot such that any benefit derived fi-om the landscaping can be directly attributed to those particular parcels. LMD #6 CARYN COMMUNITY: FUND 45 Landscape Maintenance District NO. 6 (LMD#6) assessments pay for the ongoing maintenance of parkways, median islands, and pasens within the Caryn Planned Community. LMD #3B CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL AREA: FUND 46 Landscape Maintenance District No.3B (LMD#3B) assessments pay for the ongoing maintenance of the parkways and median islands wiflfin this district, which is generally located south of Arrow Highway, north of Fourth Street, east of Grove Avenue and west of East Avenue. LMD #7 NORTH ETIWANDA: FUND 47 Landscape Maintenance District No. 7 (LMD#7) assessments pay for the ongoing maintenance of parkways, median islands, Community trails and paseos within the Efiwanda North area (north of Highland Avenue, east of Day Creek Channel, and west of the City Limits). LMD #8 SOUTH ETIWANDA: FUND 48 Landscape Maintenance District No.8 (LMD#8) assessments pay for the ongoing mnintenance of parkways, median islands, Community hails and paseos within the South Etiwanda area (south of Highland Avenue, east of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard, and west of the City Limits). SLD #1 ARTERIAL: FUND 55 Street Lighting District No. 1 (SLD#1) assessments pay for the mnlntenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets. The facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefit the City as a whole on an equal has~ and as such those costs associated with maintenance and/or installation of the facilities is assigned to this Citywide district. SLD #2 RESIDENTIAL: FUND 56 Street Lighting District No. 2 (SLD#2) assessments pay for the maintenance and/or im~tallation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets throughout the City but excluding those areas already in a local maintenance district. Generally, this area encompasses the residential area of the City west of Haven Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit this area of the City. SLD #3 VICTORIA: FUND 57 Street Lighting District No. 3 (SLD#3) assessments pay for the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and h-,al'tic signals located within the Victoria Planned Community. SLD #4 TERRA VISTA: FUND 58 Street Lighting District No. 4 (SLDff4) assessments pay for the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located within the Terra Vista Planned Community. SLD//5 CARYN COMMUNITY: FUND 59 Street Lighting District No. 5 (SLD#5) assessments pay for the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located within the Caryn Planned Community. SLD #6 INDUSTRIAL AREA: FUND 60 Street Lighting District No. 6 ($LD#6) assessments pay for the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and ~affic signals located on commercial and industrial streets throughout the City but, excluding those areas already in a local maintenance district. Generally, this area encompasses the industrial area of the City south of Foothill Boulevard. It has been determined that the facilities within this district benefit this area of the City. SLD #7 NORTH ETIWANDA: FUND 61 Street Lighting District No. 7 (SLD#7) assessments pay for the maintenance and/or ins~allation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets in what is termed the North Etiwanda area of the City. Generally, this area encompasses the area of the City east of Day Creek Channel and North of I-Iighland Avenue within the incorporated area of the City. It has been determined that the facilities within this district benefit this area of the City. SLD #8 SOUTH ETIWANDA: FUND 62 Street Lighting District No. 8 (SLD#8) assessments pay for the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets in what is termed the South Etiwanda area of the City. Generally, this area encompasses the area of the City east of Etiwanda Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard and south of Highland Avenue within the incorporated area of the City. It has been determined that the facilities within this district benefit this area of the City. AD 89-1 MILLIKEN SO OF ARROW / IMPRVMT: FUND 63 This fund is used for Assessment District 89-1 Capital Improvement projects. The monies deposited in the Improvement Fund will generally consist of bond proceeds, security deposit and accrued interest. · AD 89-1 MILLIKEN SO OF ARROW / REDEMP.: FUND 64 This fund is used for the Assessment Di~hict 89-1 bond redemption process. The Bond Redemption Fund is a short-term rotation fund, generally used to consolidate the collections received from the property owners upon payment of thei~ an~l assessments at the time of payment of their tax bills. Furtheimore, the monies in this fund are used to meet the ~nmm] principal and semiannual interest payments on the bonds. INTER-GOV'T SERVICES: Equip. Replacement: FUND 72 The internal service fund is m~int~ined for Capital Replacement/Fleet M~intenance. Thi.~ fund is supported by user charges to customers. Internal service funds account for services to the various depm'huents within the City. CFD 88-2 ETIWANDA]HIGHLAND IMPROV.:Flood: FUND' 76 The.CFD 88-2 Flood Comrol fund was established to pay for all the administration, maintenance and Trustee payments required to successfully manage the district. AD 88-2 LAW ENFORCEMENT: FUND 78 The CFD 88-2 Law Enforcement fund was established to pay for law enforcement services, administration and maintenance required to successfully manage the dis~ct. AD 84-2 ALTA LOMA CHANNEL: REDEMPTION: FUND 81 This fund is used for the Assessment District 84-2 bond redemption proCess. The Bond Redemption Fund is a short-term rotating fund, generally used to consolidate the collections received from the property owners upon payment of their annual assessments at the time of payment of their tax bills. Furthermore, the monies in this fund are used to meet the annual principal and semiannual interest payments on the bonds. AD 82-1R 6TH STREET INDUSTRIAL: IMPROV.: FUND 83 The AD 82-1R 6th Street fund was established to pay for all the administration'and m~intenance costs incurred while successfully managing the district. CFD 84-1 DAY CREEK REDEMPTION FUND: FUND 87 Thi~ fund is used for the CFI) 84-1 bond redemption process. The Bond Redemption fund is a short-term rotation fund, generally used to consolidate the collections received from the property owners upon payment of their annual assessments at the time of payment of their tax b/Ils, along with conm'butions from the Redevelopment Agency. Furthermore, the monies in this fund are used to meet the annual principal and semiannual interest payments on the bonds. PD 85 RED HILL & HERITAGE: REDEMPTION: FUND 90 This fund is used for the PD85 bond redemption process. The Bond Redemption Fund is a short-term rotating fund, generally used to consolidate the collections received from the property owners upon payment of their anw~l assessments at the time of payment of their tax bills. Furthermore, the monies in this fund are used to meet the ~nm~l principal and semiannual interest payments on the bonds and the maintenance of both parks.