Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994/04/27 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WEDNESDAY APRIL 27, 1994 7:00 P.M. RANCHO CUCAMOHGA CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA III. IV. Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call chairman Barker Vice Chairman McNiel Commissioner Lumpp Commissioner Melcher Commissioner Tolstoy __ Announcements Consent Calendar The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted on by the Commission at one time without discussion. If anyone has concern over any item, it should be removed for discussion. DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES - The design review of the detailed site plan and building elevations for a previously recorded tract consisting of 55 lots on 11 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of Banyan Street, across from Chaffey College - APN: 201-563-38 through 92. V. Public Hearings The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman 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. Be Ce De Ze CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A public hearing on a final EIR for the General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Subarea Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03, and Tentative Parcel Map 14647 for the redevelopment of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 39; and 210-361-01 through 26. SPECIFIC PLAN 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A plan for the redevelopment of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 39; and 210-361-01 through 26. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 93-02A - GENERAL DYNAMICS A proposed amendment to change the land use map from Industrial Park and General Industrial to Mixed Use and Open Space and other related amendments in conjunction with the Subarea 18 Specific Plan for 380 acres of land generally located north of 4th Street and west of Milliken Avenue - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 39; and 210-361-01 through 26. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC pLAN AMENDMENT 93-03 - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A proposed amendment to create a new Subarea 18, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue, and other related amendments to provide consistency with the Subarea 18 Specific Plan - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 39; and 210-361-01 through 26. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; VACATION OF CLEVELAND AVENUE BETWEEN 4TH AND 6TH STREETS, THOMAS ST-REET, VINCENT A~U~~-~. AND 7TH STREET EAST OF CLEVELAND AVENUE; AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A subdivision of 380 acres of land into 15 parcels in the General Industrial designation (Subareas 10 and 11) and the Industrial Park designation (Subarea 12) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 39; and 210-361-01 through 26. Ge VARIANCE 94-02 - ORTIZ - A request to construct a 6-foot high solid fence within the front yard setback of an existing single family residential parcel in the Very Low Residential designation (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located at 5333 Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1074-231-08. He ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-11 - BHP STEEL U.S. A. (SUPRACOTE) - A request to construct a 93,500 square foot addition to connect two existing industrial buildings in the General Industrial designation (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the north side of Arrow Route at Oakwood Place - APN: 208-961-18 and 19. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-09 - PETROSSI - A request to establish an indoor soccer facility, including 2 soccer rinks, snack bar, pro-shop, and arcade, within an existing industrial building in the General Industrial designation (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 11120 Tacoma Drive - APN: 209-471-05. VI. New Business ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. - A request to construct an 8,540 square foot restaurant on a 2.2 acre parcel in the office Park designation of the Terra Vista Planned Community, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue - APN: 1077-421-58. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. VII. VIII. IX. X. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-03 - MATLOCK ASSOCIATES - A request to construct a 4,710 square foot multi-purpose building of a previously approved church master plan in the Low Residential designation (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the west side of Jasper Street between Base Line Road and Lomita Drive - APN: 202-026-13. Director's Reports L. 1994 DESIGN AWARDS - Oral report Public Co~ents 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. Co~ssion Business &djournment 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. VICINITY MAP ./ I ~ ~:.'.'.'.'.'.'.' '.'.'.'.'.' '..': .' '~I.:.:.'-:.'.'.'.'.'.'.-.'.'.'.'.'.'.'l.:... ,~.~...~,,., ..... ...........,~.- CITY HALL CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Steve Hayes, Associate Planner DESIGN REVIEW FOR TRACT 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES - The design review of the detailed site plan and building elevations for a previously recorded tract consisting of 55 lots on 11 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of Banyan Street, across from Chaffey College - APN: 201-563-38 through 92. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: ae Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single Family Residential; Low Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre). South - Flood Control Retention Basin and Co~nunity Trail; Flood Control East - Chaffey College; Low Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) West - Single Family Residential; Low Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) North - Low Medium Residential South - Open Space East - School West - Low Medium Residential Ce Site Characteristics: The entire site has been rough graded and slopes from north to south at approximately 8 percent. Curb and gutter currently exist along Haven Avenue. Riverwood Place also has curb and gutter along its frontage, which was installed in conjunction with the Northwoods development north and west of the project site. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 13703 was originally approved by the Planning Co~m~ission on April 27, 1988. Approval included the subdivision of the 11 acre site into 55 lots along with the conceptual site planning, grading, landscaping, and building elevations for development. The three approved house designs ranged in size from 1,668 to 2,237 square feet, with the smallest being a one-story product. Subsequently, this tract was recorded but only rough grading permits were issued. Since that time, the new property owner (Sheffield Homes) purchased the recorded tract and elected to propose new homes for the lots. ITEM A PLANNING CO~4ISSION STAFF REPORT DR 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES April 27, 1994 Page 2 ANALYSIS: General: Three different floor plan types are proposed from 1,747 to 2,336 square feet on lots that range in size from 5,119 to 11,458 square feet and average 6,640 square feet. The one-story plan has a two-car garage, while the smaller two-story model has a three-car garage. The largest two-story model offers the option of having a three-car garage or a two-car garage with a bonus room. Lot 2 is plotted with the smaller two-story model and a side-on garage to meet the constraints of this lot. The Haven Avenue Community Trail will extend across the frontage of this project. However, individual lots will not be allowed horses due to their small size, hence, local trail system through the site is not required. The main vehicular access to the project off Haven Avenue (Amber Lane) is located to line up with the signalized main driveway into Chaffey College. The Riverwood Place frontage, which is part of the Northwoods development, will be required to be landscaped in conjunction with development to this site and to be maintained by the Northwoods Homeowners Association in perpetuity. ifssues: At the time of original approval, the City Development Standards ]permitted side yard setbacks to be a minimum of 5 feet on both interior side property lines in the Low Medium Residential Development District. The lots within this tract are typically around 50 feet in width along San Andreas Drive and approximately 60 feet elsewhere. Since that time, the Development Code has been amended and now requires a 10-foot minimum setback on one interior side property line. Staff feels this application complies with the intent of the Code because the original prototype for these lots was approved with 5 and 7-foot interior side yard setbacks. At ]Least one lot along San Andreas Drive would have to be eliminated if the current standards were applied. While there are 15 situations where the required setbacks are not being met, only 6 of these have the house plotted at the minimum 5-foot setback line on both interior sides. In addition, the applicant has agreed to plot at least 20 percent of the lots with a minimum 10-foot setback on the garage side property line to facilitate recreational vehicle access in the side and rear yard areas. Given the narrow width of lots, the reduction in the number of situations where homes have been plotted at the 5-foot minimum setbacks, the greater building separations, and RV storage access, staff feels that the Commission should support the unit plotting as proposed with applicable conditions included in the attached Resolution of Approval. Design Review Co~ittee: The Design Review Co~ittee (Lumpp, Bullet) reviewed the application on March ~5, 1994 and recommended approval subject to conditions in the attached Resolution of Approval. The Design Review Co~nittee Action Comments are attached for your convenience (see Exhibit "G"). Neighborhood Meeting: Since this project does not require a public hearing and is an infill project, staff suggested to the applicant that a neighborhood meeting be held to inform residents of the immediate area about the new proposal. As of the writing of this report, no neighborhood PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES April 27, 1994 Page 3 meetings have been held. However, the applicant has been in contact with the President of the Northwoods Homeowners Association and the property management company. In addition, Sheffield Homes has posted a large sign on the property along Haven Avenue to inform the public of the development. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Co~a~ission approve the design review for Tentative Tract 13703 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. City Planner BB:SH:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Site Precise Grading Plan Exhibit "C" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Building Elevations Exhibit "E" - Floor Plans Exhibit "F" - Design Review Committee Comments Resolution of Approval with Conditions Ii~ / !h lit !11~ . £ J..33H$ 33S 1~3H$ 335 m~3HS A~ r J .i -09 (.5 Z 0 Z 0 "'£ z ! ~ , j -- L J DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 6:40 - 7:30 Steve Hayes March 15, 1994 DESIGN ~EVIEW FOR TRACT 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES - The design review of the detailed site plan and building elevations for a previously recorded tract consisting of 55 lots on 11 acres of land in the Low Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of Banyan Street, across from Charley College - APN: 201-563-38 through 92. Design Parameters: The site in question is currently vacant and slopes from north to south at approximately 8 percent. To the north and west is the Northwoods residential subdivision. A San Bernardino County Flood Control District retention basin and co,unity trail exist i-w~ediately south of the site. On the east side of Haven Avenue is Charley College. A Colunity Trail is planned to extend the length of the Haven Avenue frontage. The main vehicular access to the project off Haven Avenue (Amber Lane) is located to line up with the signalized main driveway into Chaffey College. There are three models proposed (the smallest of which is one- story) ranging in size from 1,747 to 2,336 square feet on lots ranging in size from 5,119 to tl,458 square feet and averaging 6,640 square feet. Background: Tentative Tract 13703 was approved by the Planning Co-~ission on April 27, 1988. This approval included the subdivision map plus the development/design review of single fa~ly homes on the 55 lots. The three house designs ranged in size from 1,668 to 2,237 square feet, with the s~11est being a one-story product. The following colents are intended to provide an outline for Coiltree discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Colittee discussion regarding this project. Staff feels no ~jor issues exist with this proposal. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TRACT 13707 - SMEFFIELD HOMES March 15, 1994 Page 2 Secondary Issues: time permitting, design issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and the Committee will discuss the following secondary Generally, staff feels the architectural plans represent an upgrade of the originally approved architecture for the site. However, staff suggests minor architectural revisions (in addition to the highlighted policies) as follows: a) Heavier or double timber co1,,mn elements and should be used to give a more substantial and secured look; b) The roof overhang on the rear elevation of the Plan 2 model is awkward and should be revised. Staff suggests clipping the main roofline at the ridge to provide the desired effect; c) The roof and fascia should be wrapped under the window element on the front of the Plan 2C garage; and The proposed use of siding should be considered by the Committee. e) The brick veneer accent material should continue the length of the garage of the Plan 2C side-on garage elevation. 2. Pilasters should be incorporated into the walls on project perimeters and in corner side yard situations. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Co~mission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Decorative paving should be provided within in~ividual driveways. Return walls and retaining walls exposed to public view should be composed of decorative ~sonry or a decorative finish. 3e Some units should be plotted with a l0 to ~2-foo~ garage side yard setback unobstructed by walls, slopes, etc., to allow recreational vehicle parking and storage in the side and rear yard areas. Units should be plotted to allow a greater variety of front yard setbacks. 5. Individual driveways should be located as far as possible from street intersections on corner lots. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TRACT 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES March 15, 1994 Page 3 A fourth b~ilding elevation should be added for each floor plan type. Provide extra deep setbacks for two-story homes on corner lots. One-story massing is preferred on corner lots. Some units should be replotted on lots where identical or similar elevations are plotted on adjacent or across the street lots. Chimney stacks should utilize the applicable accent material used on that house. 10. Vary wall setbacks along Haven Avenue to increase visual interest. Staff reco~nends that the Design Review Committee reco01nend approval of the project to the Planning Co-~%ssion subject to conditions as recommended by the Co~lnittee. Design Review Co~m/ttee Action: Members Present: Heinz Lumpp, Brad Bullet Staff Planner: Steve Hayes The Design Review Co~ittee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Co-~ission subject to the following con~itions: The design of the shed roof overhang and the related projecting architectural element should be revised on the Plan 2 model for further review of the Design Review Committee prior to scheduling the project for Planning Comtssion review. Suggestions include extending the gable roof and fascia of the element to be better integrated with the overall design. A mtnin~m 6-foot by 6-foot timber element should be used for all support columns in patio areas. The applicant should have the option of wrapping the roof and fascia under the window above the Plan 20 garage. 4e The use of wood siding as an accent material was acceptable to the Co---ittee. 5e The use of brick veneer on the Plan 2C si~e-on garage model was acceptable to the Co~l~ittee. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS TRACT 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES March 15, 1994 Page 4 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Pilasters should be incorporated into the design of all block walls (including the Haven Avenue streetscape wall) exposed to public view. The Co~nittee concurred with the applicant that decorative paving in individual driveways could consist of various patterns and textures of concrete, as long as the walkway leading to the front door is also designed this way. The Co~ittee reco~ended that the applicant attempt to maximize the number of lots where units can be plotted with a 10 to 12-foot setback on the garage side to allow recreational vehicle access and storage to the rear and garage side yard areas. The Co~=nittee felt a fourth building elevation would not have to be added to the mix as long as at least three Plan 3 models with bonus room options were built in the initial phases of development. The Co~nittee reco~ended that chi~eys can remain stucco as proposed as long as chimney cap treatments vary from plan to plan. The unit on Lot 2 should be shifted northwest to increase the amount of open space on the south side, given this is the rear elevation of the house. This may be accomplished by reducing the unit to a 2-car garage and/or reducing the width of the drainage area between the retaining wall and garage. The Committee suggested t_hat the applicant may desire to delete the double doors on the front of the Plan 3 model for security reasons. Porches should be increased in size, subject to review and approval of the City Planner. The final design of the combination retaining/block wall used on corner lots should be reviewed by staff on the final grading plan, prior to the issuance of a precise grading permit. Policy Issues nos. 2, 7 and 8 should be conditioned as part of the approval of this project. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 13703, THE DESIGN REVIEW OF THE DETAILED SITE PLAN AND BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR A PREVIOUSLY RECORDED TRACT CONSISTING OF 55 LOTS ON 11 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF RAVEN AVENUE, NORTH OF BANYAN STREET, ACROSS FROM CHAFFEY COLLEGE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 201-563-38 THROUGH 92. A. Recitals. 1. Sheffield Homes has filed an application for the Design Review of Tentative Tract No. 13703, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Design Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On April 27, 1988, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 88-76 for the subject property to be subdivided into 55 lots in their present configuration. The Final Map was recorded consistent with the Tentative Tract Map approval. 3. On April 27, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held a meeting to consider 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. That the proposed design is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. That the proposed design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES April 27, 1994 Page 2 d. That the proposed design, 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. 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Plannin~ Division 1) The final design of the rear elevation of the Plan 2 model shall be consistent with the latest revised drawing reviewed by the Design Review Committee, as shown in the Conceptual Building Elevations. 2) The minimum 6-foot by 6-foot timber element shall be used for all support columns in patio areas. 3) 4) 5) The applicant shall have the option of wrapping the roof and fascia under the window above the Plan 2C garage. Pilasters shall be incorporated into the design of all block walls (including the Haven Avenue streetscape wall) exposed to public view. Decorative paving in individual driveways shall consist of various patterns and textures of concrete, as well as the walkway leading to the front door. 6) 7) 8) 9) The site plan shall be revised, to the satisfaction of the City Planner, to plot a minimum of 20 percent of the lots with a minimum 10-foot free and clear area in the garage side yard to allow recreational vehicle storage access in private side and rear yards. A minimum of three Plan 3 models shall be constructed with the bonus room option in the initial two phases of development. Chimney cap treatments shall be located between plans to the satisfaction of the City Planner. The unit on Lot 2 shall be shifted north to increase the amount of open space on the south side, given that this is the rear elevation of PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES April 27, 1994 Page 3 the house. Options that may be considered include reducing the unit to a two-car garage and/or reducing the width of the drainage area between the retaining wall and garage. 10) Porches shall be increased in size, subject to review and approval of the City Planner. 11) The final design of the combination retaining/block wall used on corner lots shall be reviewed by staff on the final grading plan, prior to the issuance of a precise grading permit. 12) Return walls and retaining walls exposed to public view shall be composed of decorative masonry or a decorative finish. The final location of all return walls shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. Extra deep setbacks shall be provided for two- story homes on corner lots. Some corner lots shall be plotted with a single story model to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 14) Some units shall be replotted to avoid identical or similar elevations being plotted on adjacent or across-the-street lots, to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 15) A Minor Exception application shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Planner for any walls in excess of 6 feet but less than 8 feet in height. The application shall be approved by the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. En~ineerin~ Division 1) The developer shall obtain written agreement from the Northwoods Homeowners Association to maintain landscaping installed in the east side of Riverwood Place, adjacent to the west tract boundary of Tract 13703. Landscape plans shall be prepared, to the satisfaction of the City Planner, prior to building permit issuance and installed prior to occupancy. If the Homeowners Association does not agree to assume maintenance of the east parkway for Riverwood Place, then this area shall have full parkway width sidewalk PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 13703 - SHEFFIELD HOMES April 27, 1994 Page 4 installed. Revise the street improvement plans (Drawing No. 1028) to show sidewalk or street trees. 4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: n DEPARTMENT OF .,n COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS _. /'~?, I APPLICANT: ~ r . _ Those items checked are Conditions of Approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 989-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Time Limits 1.Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are ---J not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. 2. Development/Design Review shall be approved prior to / / ___/ / 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subject to lhe approval of .~J /.__ 4. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, / / participated in, or consummated, a Melio-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct to finance construction and/or maintenance ol a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District's property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Melio-Roos Community Facilities District lot the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent Io the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance ol building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not 1ormed a MelIo-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of Ihe project and prior to the recordation of the !inal map or issuance of building permits lot said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. I / S~- [2/93 Compicuor~ D~¢ This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that tl~e applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior Io issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. B. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, arcfiitectural elevations, extedor materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and Specific Plan and Planned Community. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. / / Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall's regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitled to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. / / / All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency pdor to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.), or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community Plans or Specific Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. / A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Sheritf's Department (989-6611 ) pdor to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 8. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick.up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded lrom public view. / / 9. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, / . and the numl:)er of trash receptacles shall de subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of I~ilding permits. / 10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall _ / be located oul of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, betming, ancl/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 12/93 1 1. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accorclance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 13. A detailed plan indicating trail widlhs, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to approval and recordation ol the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 14. The Covenants, Condilions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option ol keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors or homeowners' associations Ior amendments to the CC&Rs. 15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles ol Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval ot the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or pdor to the issuance ol building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 16. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or dwelling unil shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use ot a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation ol the !inal map or issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except 1or utility wires and similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2. 18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No. · Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or interior alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal ol landmark trees, demolition, reiocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site, shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval. C. Building 1. SC- 12/93 / / / / / / / / __J / Design An aitemative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency, All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall be supplemented with solar healing. Details shall be included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of sudace treatment subject to City Planner review and approval pdor to issuance ol building permits. / / 3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted for City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. D. Parking and Vehicular Access (incllcate detalia on bull(ling plans) All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including (:uFo). 'rextured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughoul the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/ plazas/recreational uses. o All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standan:Is and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on this site unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. E. Landscaping (for publicly maintained landscape areas, refer to Section N.) ~ 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- ing in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape a~chitect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in lhe case of a custom lot sulxlivision. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barder in acco rclanca with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be sho~vn on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and Idmming methods. A minimum of trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the project: % - 48- inch box or larger, % - 36- inch box or larger, __ % - 24- inch box or larger, % - 15-gallon, and __ % - 5 gallon; 4. A minimum of % of trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. 5. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for ever three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50'/, o! the parking area at solar noon on August 21. C.~plcuor~ D~te: / / / / I I I I _J I I I I I / I I /_ / SC-12/93 6. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. All private slope banks 5 feet or less in vertical heighl and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. AIIprivateslopesinexcessof 5feet,butlesstl~an8 leet inverticalheightandof2:lorgreater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. It. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. It. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu- ously maintained in a healthy and thdving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by Ihe buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 10, For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are respon- sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public rignt-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free lrom weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fe~lilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, deed, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date ol damage. 11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or · This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 12. The linal design of the perimater parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landsc&oing plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander- ing sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensilied landscaping, is required along 14. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of.way on the perimeter of tiffs project area Shall be continuously maintained by tho developer. 15. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteda sitall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to consewe water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancl~o Cucamonga Municipal Code. / / / __/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / sc. 12/93 F. Signs The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Orciinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. 2. A Uniform Sign Programforthisdevelopment shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval pdor to issuance of building permils. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or townhomes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. G. Environmental The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted .Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City .Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. *The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. A final acoustical report shall be submifted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level ol interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction lechniques provided, and it appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in lhe final report. H. Other Agencies V/ 1. EmergencysecondaryaccessshallbeprovldedinaccordancewithRanchoCucamongaFire Protection District Standards. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 leer wide at all times dudng construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District requirements, Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District that temporary water supply for life protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. The applicant shall contact the U. S. Postal Service to determine Ihe appropriate type and k:~cation of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure lot mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of lhe overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. / / / _.J / / / / / / / .__J / / /__ SC-12/93 For projects using septic tank facilities, writlen certification of acceptability, including all supportive informalion, sitall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department of Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 989-1863, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development 1. The applicant shall comply with lhe latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautificaticn Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rale. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. 4. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. J. Existing Structures K. Grading ~,/ 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations tor the intended use or the building shall be demolished. Existing sewage disposal lacilities shall be removed, filled and/or capped to corr~ly wilh the Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans sul~nitted for building permit application. Grading ol the subject property shell be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shell be prepared by a qualilied engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. The development is located within the soil erosion control bounclades; a Soil Disturbance Permit is required. Please contact San Bernardino County Department of Agriculture at (714) 387-2111 for permit application. Documentalion of such permit shall be submitted to the City prior !o the issuance ol rough grading permit. A geological report Shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. ~plcuo~ DaLe: / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / sc-t2/g3 6. As a custom-lot subdivision, the following requirements snail be met: a. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits. b. App~:opriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto or over'adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division pdor to issua'nce of grading and building permits. / / / /__ c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties, are tO be installed pdor to issuance ol building permits for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a pamel relative to which a b~ilding permit is requested. d. Final grading plans f~each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis.) ' e. All slope banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses or planled with ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method of erosion conitel shall be comJ~leted to the satisfaction ol the Building Official. In addition a permanent irr{g,ation system shall be provided. This requirement does not release the applicant/developer Irpm compliance with the slope planting requirements of Section 17.08.040 I ol the ~velopmeht Code. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING [:~'ISI~)N, (909) 989-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: / \,. L. Dedication and Vehicular Access / ~. / \ 1. Rights-of-way and easements shaft be dedicaled to the~,City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos,/public landscape areas, ~{reet Irees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plan~"and/or tentative map. Pdvatp easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, lecal feeder trails, etc.) shall be re'served as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. ,/ ~ 2. Dedicalion shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the pe~, eter streets (measured !tom street/centerline): ~ / / / /.l total feet on · / total feet on / / total feet on ~,, / / total feet on all' I~ 3. An irrevocable offer of dedication for -foot wide roadway easement sh made / /- for al143rivate streets or drives. \, 4. N~n~-vehicular access shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets: ///oReciprocal access easements shall be provided ensudng access to all parcels by CC&Rs ~' by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or pdor to the issuance of building permitS, where no map is involved. 12/93 8 / / DATE: TO: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Co~ission FROM: Rick Gomez, Community Development Director BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS A plan for the redevelopment of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A public hearing on a Final EIR for the General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Subarea Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A, Industrial Area Specific Plan 93-03, and Tentative Parcel Map 14647 for the redevelopment of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & So F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue. SUMMARY: After many public hearings, workshops, and months of work by the Planning Commission, staff, and applicant, the final Subarea 18 Specific Plan and related Final Environmental Impact Report have been completed for your final review and consideration. It is intended that this meeting will provide a forum for final Commission comments on the Specific Plan text and Final Environmental Impact Report for the purpose of making a final recommendation to the City Council. ANALYSIS: The Specific Plan proposes a multi-use development composed of 11 interrelated planning areas organized around the central golf course amenity. Distinguishing elements of the concept plan include an 18-hole championship golf course with clubhouse and related training facilities, a hotel/conference facility, a mixed-use commercial center, and a Metrolink Station. The planning areas range in size from 16 acres up to 28 acres. Approximately 75 acres of the site are fully developed with three industrial/office buildings. The Specific Plan addresses potential adaptive reuses for these three buildings. The Planning Commission's deliberations have focused upon several key issues: land use flexibility, master planning, and regulatory procedures (i.eo, the review process for future development). The Commission's concerns have been addressed through revisions in the document or with Conditions of Approval, as follows: ITEMS B & C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SP 93-01 & FEIR - GENEP~L DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 2 De Land Use Flexibility/Retail Development - The key to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan is flexibility in land use because of the unique setting of this project around a golf course, the uncertainties in the market, and the continuing evolution of industry and retail trade. A wide range of ].and use options is proposed for all planning areas. The Co~ission will also consider the mix of land uses with the review of each master plan to ensure that the land use mix and conceptual physical layout of each planning area is appropriate. Master Plans - The consensus of the Co~ission was that the goal of the City to obtain a proper balance and mixture of land uses and the applicant's desire for land use flexibility, could be achieved through a Master Plan process for each planning area. The Specific Plan regulatory procedures have been revised consistent with the Commission's discussion to require a Master Plan at the time of the first development application or subdivision. Regulatory Procedures: Various changes were proposed to the City's review process for Development Review applications, subdivisions, and Conditional Use Permits. These changes were intended to streamline the process and provide flexibility for the developer. The final language being proposed reflects the Commission's direction and is supported by staff. Design Guidelines (Level of Detail): The Co~ission's major concern was that unifying design elements were needed to create a distinguishing character for the 380 acre project. The Commission agreed that design concepts should be put in place by General Dynamics to guide future developments. These concepts should include entry statements, signage, and street furniture (e.g., light standards, benches, bollards, etc.). These guidelines should be approved by the Commission prior to the development of any planning area other than the golf course/driving range. Infrastructure Phasing: The Planning Commission supported the phasing of improvements; however, they expressed concern with the applicant's proposal not to underground utilities along the A. T. & S. F. railroad line. Past Commission practice, consistent with the City's adopted policy for utility undergrounding, has been to require developers to underground along any public right-of-way, including railroad corridors. Also, the Co~ission indicated they were willing to defer undergrounding for the golf course frontage along 4th Street because of the short length involved. Therefore, the Planning Co~m~ission reco~aended the following: 4th Street - The golf course developer should be responsible for undergrounding utilities; however, actual undergrounding may be deferred until such time as the adjoining planning area develops, if secured by an in-lieu fee. 6th Street - Underground utilities between Cleveland and planning area IX with the golf course development. * A. T. & S. F. - Underground utilities with golf course. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SP 93-01 & FEIR - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 3 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), including responses to comments, has been completed. The responses to co~nents and additional traffic analysis are packaged as an appendix (see attached). The FEIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and State guidelines and staff supports the adequacy of the document. The executive summary at the beginning of the document lists the potentially significant impacts and their mitigation measures, and the potential for unavoidable adverse impacts. The FEIR identifies three impacts that would not be reduced to a level of less than significant after implementation of the proposed mitigation measures: Agricultural Land Loss: The loss of approximately 305 acres of producing vineyards would also occur under the existing Industrial Area Specific Plan land use designations. Since the project includes a ~55-acre golf course, the potential exists for conversion back to agricultural use, which would not be possible under the current Industrial Area Specific Plan. Therefore, development of the proposed project is considered to have a lesser significant and unavoidable impact. Cumulative Traffic Increase: Each development within the project will be required to mitigate all on-site traffic and specified off-site impacts through installation of frontage improvements consistent with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Plan Circulation Element, as well as contribute to the City's Transportation Development Nexus Fee program for off-site impacts. However, the project will incrementally contribute to cumulative impacts to the regional circulation system, even after mitigation. Specifically, the project will contribute to reductions of levels of service, although Congestion Management Plan standards (i.e., Intersection Level of Service E) will be maintained. Ce Air Quality: During construction of the project, a measurable increase in airborne dust will occur. This "fugitive dust" would be reduced by implementing the measures required by the South Coast Air Quality Management District; however, the level of dust would still be significant for the duration of grading and excavation activity. The dust problem would also occur under the existing Industrial Area Specific Plan. The City Council must balance the benefits of this proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse effects, these effects may be considered "acceptable." California Environmental Quality Act requires the City to adopt a written statement of its views that the significant unavoidable adverse impacts are acceptable due to the overriding concerns. This statement is included in the project approval Resolution. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM: State law requires the City to adopt a monitoring program for the changes to the project which are required or mitigation measures which are adopted. Essentially this is a reporting program designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The attached Mitigation Monitoring Plan (MMP) for the Subarea ~8 Specific Plan PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SP 93-01 & FEIR - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 4 will be adopted by City Council as part of the project approval findings. The MMP will be in place through all phases of the project, from initial design through construction and operation. The MMP identifies each adopted measure or required changes in the project design which mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. For each mitigation, the MMP lists who is responsible for implementing (i.e., developer or City); when the mitigation is implemented (i.e., design, plan check, construction, etc.); and who is responsible for monitoring and enforcing the mitigation. The MMP also establishes the reporting format and is intended to provide a means for decision-makers to gauge the effectiveness of mitigation measures. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recon~ends that approval of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan including the Mitigation Monitoring Plan, Resolutions. C~mmuni t~e lopment Director the Planning Co~ission reco~nend and certification of the FEIR, through adoption of the attached PJ~:DC:sp ~ttachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 1994 Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Minutes of February 23, 1994 Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Minutes of March 23, 1994 Draft Environmental Impact Report (previously transmitted) Response to Con~nents (previously transmitted) Mitigation Monitoring Plan Resolution for Specific Plan Resolution for Final Environmental Impact Report Ge DRAFT SUBSEOUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A public hearing on a Draft Subsequent EIR for the General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Subarea Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A, and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03 for the redevelopment of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Street. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS SPECIFIC PLAN 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A plan for the development of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Street. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, introduced the applicant's representatives. Steve Eimer, Stephen Eimer & Associates, Inc., 10900 East 4th Street, $601, Rancho Cucamonga, gave a brief overview of the history of the project. He said the 170-acre golf course was suggested to help create an identity and stimulate other types of uses. Me stated the golf course was envisioned to be a public course with ancillary services including an indoor training facility. He commented they need flexibility on the remainder of the project in order to secure users. He indicated that the Specific Plan lays out nine separate planning areas on the periphery of the golf course and he outlined the proposed uses in the various areas. Me specified the Metrolink Station with nearby convenience retail and service uses, office, Research and Development, manufacturing, commercial, and hotel/conference center. He stated they want to move through the process fairly quickly and start construction on the golf course in the fall. Robert Smith, RTKL, 818 West Seventh Street, Los Angeles, showed a Japanese magazine that had featured their firm. Me gave a brief history of his firm and said they specialize in multi-use projects. He complimented staff for their professionalism. He noted that the overall parcel is large. He observed that parcels would have dual frontage with streetscape on one side and the golf course on the other. He thought the corner of Milliken Avenue and 4th Street would have the most intensive use. Me felt some of the existing buildings in Planning Areas II and IV could be reused. Jeff Kudlac, Kudlac Associates, 10900 East 4th Street, $601, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was available to answer questions. Tom Smith, Michael Brandman Associates, 2530 Red Hill Avenue, Santa Ana, discussed the process used in preparing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). He reported that during scoping of the DEIR, there had been meetings with other public agencies such as SANBAG, SCAG, the school districts, Cucamonga County Water District, etc. He observed that the DEIR identified Planning Commission Minutes -8- January 26, 1994 three significant unavoidable impacts: the loss of agricultural land, cumulative traffic impacts, and air quality impacts during the construction phase. He stated that the General Plan already adopted by the City had already confirmed the loss of the agricultural land. Lee Card, LSA Associates, Inc., One Park Plaza, Suite 500, Irvine, stated they had prepared a traffic impact analysis consistent with the requirements of the County's Congestion Management Program. He said they used the traffic model from the City of Fontana and population and employment projections from SCAG and SANBAG. He estimated internal trip capture between users to be 10 percent. Mr. Card observed the project was compared to the previously approved Industrial Area Specific Plan. He remarked that five intersections were identified as needing specific improvements either with or without the project and those improvements conform to the General Plan Circulation Element. He said the recommended improvements were included as mitigations with the project to pay on a fair-share basis. Tom Smith discussed the air quality impacts during the construction phase and stated the project would exceed allowable emissions as stated in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook adopted in 1993 by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Mr. Coleman stated that the Planning Commission would be holding a meeting on February 23, 1994. He said the public review period for the DEIR would close on March 10 and staff was available to meet with the public. Commissioner Melcher requested that the hearing on the DEIR be left open so that people could make oral comments instead of only written comments. He asked[ if a Notice of Availability had been prepared. Mr. Coleman responded affirmatively and stated that a Notice of Completion had been sent to all public agencies. He said copies of the DEIR were available at the Planning Division counter and in the public library. He noted that the City is not required to have a public hearing under CEQA regulations. Commissioner Lumpp also felt the public hearing should be left open. Commissioner McNiel felt the project had been greeted with enthusiasm. He thought the air quality ramifications which are not due to construction should also be considered. Commissioner Lumpp stated that the City would have to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations because of the unavoidable impacts and he noted that no matter what is done, the air quality standards would not be met. He felt it would be helpful to have a definition section in the Specific Plan, particularly with relation to Section 6, the Implementation Program. He also thought it would be beneficial to have a graphic representation of the proposed approval process and how it compares to the existing approval process. Commissioner McNiel acknowledged that the project is on a rigid time table and he did not wish to interfere with the process; however, he preferred leaving Planning Commission Minutes -9- January 26, 1994 the public hearing open for comments on the DEIR if that would not extend the time line. Chairman Barker asked if keeping the public hearing open would delay the process. Mr. Buller suggested that the DEIR public hearing could be continued to February 23, 1994, when the Specific Plan was scheduled to be considered by the Planning Commission. He acknowledged that keeping the hearing open allows greater flexibility for the public to submit comments. Chairman Barker felt that would be appropriate. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Melcher, to continue Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A, and Industrial Area Specific Plan 93-02A to February 23, 1994. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, LUMPP, MCNIEL, MELCHER NONE TOLSTOY -carried COMMENTS There no additional public COMMISSION There was no Lonal Commission business. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by McNiel, :onded by Melcher, to adjourn. 9:27 p.m. - The Planning C~ission adjourned to a Commission goals and priorit~e~at 5:00 p.m. on February 8, Tolstoy residence, 9540 Hillsidebad, Rancho Cucamonga. That adjourn to 5:00 p.m. on February g~1994, at the City Council Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga.~ on Planning ~4, at the [ng will 10500 Respectfully submitted, Secretary Planning Commission Minutes -10- January 26, 1994 ~DAR TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT modify )r scheme for a gas station center, in Commercial District ( Boulevard S Plan, located at 9082 APN: 208-101-17 20, 49, and 50. UNOCAL - A request to Rancho Town shopping of the Foothill Boulevard - Motion: Moved by Lumpp, absent, to adopt the Consent ~d by McNiel, carried 4-0-1 .cher PUBLIC HEARINGS DRAFT SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A public hearing on a Draft Subsequent EIR for the General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Subarea Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A, and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03 for the redevelopment of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Street. (Continued from January 26, 1994) DIRECTOR'S REPORTS Co SPECIFIC PLAN 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A plan for the development of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Street. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. He reported that staff had received the screen check copy of the Mitigation Monitoring Program and it would be forwarded to the Commission prior to the final review on April 27, 1994. He stated that revised proposed language on master plans was before the Commissioners. He said the applicant proposes providing a master plan at the time the property is subdivided and once the Planning Commission approved the master plan, subsequent reviews would be handled at staff level by the City Planner. He said an example of such a master plan was the recent Olive Garden Master Plan in which the Commission had approved a conceptual site plan, general building locations, access points, circulation, and some representation of where office and retail uses might go. He said the second level of master plan proposed by the applicant and staff is a more detailed master plan which would deal with specific buildings. He showed the Bixby Ranch Business Park guidelines, which include detailed design guidelines for archktecture, theme of materials, massing, colors, landscaping, etc. Planning Commission Minutes -2- February 23, 1994 'Ne r Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Commissioner McNiel noted the proposal is a departure from what has been done in the past in that the Planning Commission currently reviews the buildings and the proposal would have the Commission approving a master plan. He said he did not oppose such a plan so long as the master plan is definitive in identifying the materials and architectural elements the Commission would normally handle. He questioned who would be the arbitrator of disputes between staff and the applicant regarding implementation of the master plan. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated the City Planner would make a decision which could be appealed to the Planning Commission or the matter could be heard by the Commission by mutual consent. He said any decisions by the Commission would be appealable to the City Council. Commissioner McNiel asked if the master plan would identify by example the type of architecture, etc. which would be presented. Mr. Buller said the applicant was also proposing a tiered master plan review so that a portion of a planning area could be developed prior to completing the detailed level of that master plan. He said staff supports that flexibility to provide the applicant a chance to market the property in the planning areas. Commissioner McNiel stated he appreciated what the applicant was trying to accomplish, but he was concerned that the City not write a blank check in the interest of flexibility. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Jeff Kudlac, Kudlac Associates, 10900 East 4th Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he and others on the planning team were available to answer questions. He said they have had a variety of productive meetings with staff and he was pleased with the progress. Chairman Barker stated he had read market studies from two development groups citing the need for additional retail. He asked if General Dynamics had prepared such a study. Mr. Kudlac stated they have done a lot of analysis regarding the market for golf. He said they were trying to create some synergy and activity related to the golf course and this would be an all new market. Chairman Barker asked if they had done a market study on retail uses. Mr. Kudlac replied they have done a fiscal analysis which was included in the Specific Plan. He said they have tried to provide flexibility because they believe they can create a market. Chairman Barker asked if the master plan would include standards for mixing different types of land uses. Planning Commission Minutes -3- February 23, 1994 Mr. Kudlac said it would and noted that design details would also be part of the master plan. Me said staff had shared some master plans and discussed the level of detail and he understood the level of detail that would be expected by the Commission in the master plan process. Chairman Barker asked if professional golf tournaments were anticipated. Mr. Kudlac replied they had not come to any conclusions in that respect. He felt it will be a championship quality course but said they had not determined what future activities would be occurring there. Chairman Barker felt any tournaments or other large events could cause parking problems. Mr. Kudlac responded they expected to have reciprocal access easements and parking. He felt such instances could be accommodated and thought it would be addressed within the master plans for the planning areas. Commissioner McNiel felt there is some risk because of the unique aspect of the project as compared to typical golf courses. He noted that the proximity of the Metrolink station could be an asset. Mr. Buller noted the applicant had prepared a composite of development activity and land uses around the project. Mr. Kudlac showed the exhibit identifying existing and proposed projects as well as designated land uses. He said they wanted to take advantage of the changing land uses to the south. Me observed the project has great freeway access. He felt the proposed flexibility and mixed-use concept would allow them to respond to market changes as the changes continue to happen over the next 10 to 15 years. Commissioner Lumpp questioned if there was enough justification in the EIR for the Council to make a determination regarding the overriding consideration relating to the loss of agricultural land. Tom Smith, Michael Brandman Associates, 2530 Red Mill Avenue, Santa Ana, felt there is sufficient language. He felt there was adequate evidence in the record because the finding had already been made with the certification of the EIR for the Industrial Area Specific Plan and said they had referenced that certification action by the City. Commissioner Lumpp asked for clarification on a program versus a focused EIR. Mr. Smith responded that a program EIR is intended to be comprehensive enough to allow development to occur without the need for preparation of another EIR. He said in that respect, this document was intended to be a program EIR for the Specific Plan. Me said individual master plans under the specific plan would have environmental review and would be compared against the specific plan and the evaluation in the EIR for consistency. He said their program EIR was focused because during the initial study, certain issues were determined not to have potential for generating environmental impacts and the Planning Commission Minutes -4- February 23, 1994 EIR focused on the issues which were thought to have potential impacts. He said the initial study documentation was included. Commissioner Lumpp questioned why the traffic analysis concentrated on the p.m. peak. He thought the trip generation factors used for various uses appeared to be low. He thought perhaps factors should be based on number of parking spaces provided or number of rounds on the golf course rather than the acreage. He also noted the factor for the theatres used the number of screens rather than the number of seats or parking spaces. He thought the total project trip generation factors appear low. He noted that the traffic mitigation measures for 2010 indicate significant improvements will be necessary to certain surrounding streets. He asked who would pay for those improvements. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that transportation fees are collected with development and those fees are used to pay for improvements throughout the City. Mr. Smith said the consultant who had prepared the traffic analysis would respond to staff with answers on the traffic issues. He said they used a process which complies with the Congestion Management Plan framework established by SANBAG. He reported they are having continuing discussions with SANBAG and City staff to be sure they are comfortable with the analysis. He stated they had used the standard trip generation factors established by the Institute of Traffic Engineers based on uses throughout the country. Commissioner Lumpp said he was not questioning the rates in the analysis but he was more interested in the multiplying factor being used; i.e. acreage and screens. Mr. Kudlac said the traffic analysis had taken a conservative approach considering maximum build-out with 100 percent occupancy. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. He asked for comments on the land use flexibility and master plan proposal. Commissioner McNiel noted the Commission had once entertained the concept of a blanket conditional use permit and it was a terrifying concept. He said he did not want to resist progress, but he was having a hard time getting comfortable with the concept. Mr. Buller agreed with the applicant that there are no other similar projects and said staff believes it deserves the flexibility in order to be successful. Commissioner Tolstoy asked what would happen if the process did not work. Mr. Bullet said changes can be made if the process does not work. Chairman Barker said that if the Commission could agree on a master plan as the checkpoint system, then the process could be streamlined. He expressed faith the applicant had the skills to prepare a master plan which would be Planning Commission Minutes -5- February 23, 1994 vastly superior to the Bixby Ranch one. He said he understood the concept, but in looking at the Bixby Ranch Master Plan there were gigantic holes where things could go wrong. He commented the master plan would have to be detailed enough to allow the Commissioners to be comfortable with relinquishing control. Commissioner McNiel supported the concept; however, he noted the master plans would be subject to interpretation. He said he wanted to be sure the master plans are tight enough to protect staff and the City would not suffer. He wanted to be sure all documents are carefully reviewed. Commissioner Tolstoy concurred. Commissioner Lumpp said he was comfortable with the process. He felt the only thing which will be developed initially will be the golf course. Commissioner Tolstoy said it was his understanding that a master plan would be required for any subdivision. Mr. Coleman confirmed that was correct. Chairman Barker said he would like to see a master plan so clear and perfect it can be used as a guide for the rest of California. Commissioner Tolstoy was concerned that there is not enough staff to handle the additional burdens of this project. Mr. Buller said that it is not known at this time if deferring more matters to staff will place an extra burden because staff would be relieved of some activities necessary to forward the matters to the Commission. He said that time saved would then be used to review the matters which had been delegated to staff. He said it is hoped the time will balance out. Commissioner Tolstoy observed that every year the Commission reviews the Planning Division work program and there are many things which cannot be accomplished because of lack of time. He was concerned that all other activities in the City might suffer because of a new process being used for the General Dynamics project. Chairman Barker concurred. C COMMENTS Ther~ ~re no additional comments. COMMISSION iNESS There was no .onal Commission busi Planning Commission Minutes -6- February 23, 1994 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting March 23, 1994 Vice Chairman McNiel called !a Planning Commission to Chamber at Rancho C% Dri% Rancho Cucamonga, Californi ,f allegiance. Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho ~er at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in %onga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Vice Chairman McNiel then led in the ROLL PRESENT: David Lumpp, Tolstoy ~rker (arrived 7:02 p.m.), Heinz rry McNiel, John Melcher, Peter ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Richard Alcorn, Code Enforce nt Supervisor; Brad Buller, ity Planner; Dan Coleman, P: :ipal Planner; Nancy Fong, %ior Planner; Rick GomE Community Development D ~ctor; Ralph Hanson, Deputy :y Attorney; Joe Henry, Po Lieutenant; Dan James, ~nior Civil Engineer; Bert Associate Engineer; ~il Sanchez, Planning Commi~ .on Secretary ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no announcements. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by T¢ oy, carried 4-0-0-1 with abstaining, to adopt the minutes of March 9, )4, as amended. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS SPECIFIC PLAN 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A plan for the development of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, commercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole golf course, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Street. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Melcher observed that staff recommended that a more definitive design theme be established for the project through either a design manual or master plan for the project. He asked if staff recommended that the Specific Plan be approved as is with the design theme to follow later. Mr. Coleman affirmed that was correct. Commissioner Melcher noted the staff report indicated a potential need for buffering the golf course by sound walls. He questioned what would trigger the need for a sound wall around the golf course. Mr. Coleman stated that the General Plan sets noise standards for golf courses and the Draft EIR identified some specific areas where those standards may be exceeded. He noted that there would be more answers at the April 27, 1994, meeting when the final EIR will be considered. He said that staff would like to focus on the areas around the club house. Commissioner Melcher commented that golf courses can generally be viewed from surrounding areas. He felt it would be a shame to close off views of the course with walls. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that specific language regarding noise levels of golf courses was included when the General Plan was drafted. He thought the authors had probably envisioned golf courses only being constructed up in the foothills rather than along major streets. He stated staff did not see a reason for placing a sound barrier between the course and the street. Commissioner Melcher asked for verification regarding maximum building height. Mr. Coleman stated that a hotel could be a maximum of eight stories or 90 feet, whichever is greater, and office buildings could be up to six stories or 90 feet, whichever is greater. Commissioner Lumpp asked for clarification regarding the proposed Floor Area Ration (FAR) requirement. Mr. Coleman standards. center. said staff was still working with the applicant on FAR He noted a higher FAR is recommended for a hotel/conference Chairman Barker invited public comment. Jeff Kudlac, Steve Eimer & Associates, 10900 East 4th Street, Building 601, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they agreed with most of the comments made by staff in the staff report. He stated he would like to discuss the Planning Commission's policy regarding undergrounding of overhead utilities. He said there are currently three locations with overhead utilities: the railroad right-of-way at the northern end of the property, the southern end of 6th Street, and the 4th Street alignment. He said they had submitted an Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 23, 1994 infrastructure phasing program to the City shown as Exhibit A of the staff report. Me noted they had initially requested that they delay the undergrounding of the utilities along 6th Street and 4th Street until development occurs in one of the adjacent planning areas. He noted that currently there is an overhead above 66 kv on the railroad right-of-way and that would remain in place. He acknowledged that the City's current policy would require them to underground communications lines on the same poles. He said they will be creating a berm effect from the railroad down to the golf course and using landscaping to mitigate noise and improve the view from the course. He felt the cost was not justified to underground the utilities since the lines would not be seen from the golf course. He requested that the Commission consider leaving the communications line above ground. Me offered to underground the line on 6th Street from Cleveland to the eastern edge of the golf course at the time the course is developed but defer undergrounding on 4th Street until development in adjacent planning areas. Me showed a board of the proposed updated alignment of the golf course with the club house moved to 6th Street, a golf maintenance facility located at the end of Cleveland Street, and the course extending down to 4th Street. Mr. Kudlac requested that the minimum landscape requirement within the planning areas be reduced because the golf course would be over 170 acres of greenscape. Me said the Specific Plan should reflect that the proposed hotel is possible in a number of planning areas so each of those planning areas should have the ability to have a higher FAR only if the hotel occurs there. He said they had worked with staff on the language regarding the master plan and were in agreement with what was presented this evening. Commissioner Tolstoy felt a hotel would be a great asset to the project and he thought it may be a good selling point to have the hotel within walking distance of the club house. Mr. Kudlac stated they were looking at a number of possible planning areas for a hotel. He commented they hope to create a shuttle and/or pedestrian system throughout the project. He said their most important concern at the present time is the function of the golf course. He commented they were trying to relate the golf course to the demographics of Rancho Cucamonga rather than a resort. Me said they want to relate to office users and the community. Commissioner McNiel questioned if there is any language with respect to the relationship between the golf course and any surrounding buildings. He wanted to avoid having 70-foot poles with netting to protect the buildings. Mr. Buller indicated the specific plan does not specify a distance from the golf driving range to buildings but does set perimeter setbacks for the layout of holes (page 5-25). Me indicated that once the layout of the golf course is known it may be possible to set some standards for building locations. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if that would be considered as each parcel is developed. Mr. Buller felt it could be considered at the master plan stage because the golf course would be designed and in place at that time. Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 23, 1994 Commissioner McNiel felt that may not be enough. Mr. Smith said they were industry standards. He said there would also generally be a grade transition so the golf course would be below the development pads which would serve as an additional containment for errant balls. He observed that there is also a 10-foot landscape buffer along the edge of the golf course which will help to block balls while providing view corridors. Mr. Bullet suggested that the Commission allow staff to work with the applicant regarding language on orientation and location of buildings in relationship to the golf course. Commissioner McNiel felt that would be satisfactory. He wanted to be sure that the problem is addressed. Mr. Buller said that staff may conclude that it might be descriptively stated in the text of the specific plan but actually addressed with the master plan once the golf course final layout is known. Chairman Barker asked about the proposed netting on the driving range. Mr. Kudlac said they were still working with the consultant to determine where netting would be required. He observed that staff's recommendation had been that netting be brought back to the parking setback if needed along the streets and they were in agreement with that requirement. There were no additional public comments. Commissioner Melcher asked if each of the planning areas would be able to develop its own set of design guidelines. Mr. Buller said there are several exhibits within the specific plan text showing major street entries and streetscape. He said concepts of streetscape design, entry statements, etc. would be considered with the master plans. Commissioner Melcher questioned if that meant that other than the streetscape design, there may be totally different development concepts unrelated to one another from site to site. Mr. Buller confirmed that was a possibility. Chairman Barker felt there should be some sort of tying together of theme including lighting standards, signage, etc. He thought it is a marvelous opportunity to tie things to the golf course and did not want to see small parcels appear disjointed and unrelated to surrounding parcels. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if he was talking about infrastructure likeness such as monument signs, street lights, etc. Chairman Barker felt that should be at the very minimum. He said he would like an overall design basically spelled out in a design manual so that as projects are processed by staff, there would be few problems. Plannilng Commission Minutes -4- March 23, 1994 Commissioner Tolstoy noted staff's recommendation was for a minimum of design concepts for entry statements, monumentation, directional signs, and lighting standards. He asked if Chairman Barker was also looking for an architectural theme. Chairman Barker said he would be happier with that but he acknowledged it probably would not happen. He wanted to be sure there is a smooth transition from one parcel to the next. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed with staff's recommendation and he felt those design concepts could be achieved through a design manual or master plan prior to the development of any planning area. Commissioner Melcher thought the design manual or master plan could be for any of the planning areas, not necessarily all of them. Mr. Buller stated the specific plan calls for site signage and lighting to be designed and located as part of an overall coordinated program for the entire 380 acres but the specific plan does not go into detail of what they shall look like and how they will be designed, etc. He said the applicant has agreed to a coordinated plan but staff feels it does not have to be part of the specific plan. Commissioner Melcher questioned if that meant that the developer of the first planning area would have the burden of developing the program for the entire 380 acres. Mr. Buller agreed the first master plan for the first development may establish the theme for the rest of the 380 acres unless the master developer sets an overall design guide prior to the first master plan. Commissioner Melcher thought the various planning areas would probably be parceled off and sold to other parties for development. He said he understood the first development could not take place prior to the establishment of the design concepts for entry statements, monumentation signs, and lighting standards and would also have to provide a master plan for development of that particular planning area. He asked if different planning areas can have unrelated architectural concepts for the structures. Mr. Buller replied they could. He noted that each master plan would be subject to the review of the Commission and the Commission could determine the level of detail required in the master plans. Chairman Barker repeated that he wanted compatibility or transitioning between the planning areas. Co[mmissioner Melcher supported the need for an overall design theme dealing with landscaping, street furniture, entry statements, monumentation signs, and lighting standards. However, he felt it should not be left until the first planning area is submitted. He thought it would be to the master developer's benefit to control the theme because it would be easier to market the property. Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 23, 1994 Commissioner Tolstoy noted the undeveloped parcels range from 17 to 28 acres. He felt the parcels are large enough to allow different architectural themes on the various parcels so long as there is some control for compatibility between the planning areas. Chairman Barker asked if there is a means of guaranteeing compatibility between planning areas. Mr. B. uller suggested staff work with the applicant to see how and when the coordinated programs will occur. He stated there had been discussions with the applicant and he felt the applicant is not far from being able to identify the coordinated landscaping, street furniture, entry statements, and sign programs so it would not have to wait until the first planning area is ready to be submitted. Chairman Barker invited the applicant to comment. Mr. Kudlac stated much of the standards on the perimeter of their property is being dictated by the City under street beautification programs along the major streets. He felt the Commission would have an opportunity to ensure continuity between the individual planning areas when reviewing the various master plans. He agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy that there should be flexibility to be creative with different architectural styles or design themes for the various uses and planning areas. He wanted to be able to create some unique environments around the golf course. He thought the final topography of the golf course would help lend to the uniqueness of the entries, monumentation, and access points in the planning areas. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the Palmer group would be designing the landscape palette or if a landscape architect would be hired after the course is designed. Mr. Kudlac responded that it is a team approach and the landscape architect will work with the Arnold Palmer group and the other members of the group. Commissioner McNiel asked if Mr. Kudlac was willing to discuss with staff the development of a specific theme for the entire project. Mr. Kudlac said they would be willing to discuss it with staff but he was not sure they would be able to come up with a vehicle to do that because he thought the mechanism is already in place with the beautification plans required on the perimeter streets. Commissioner Tolstoy observed that the plans which are already in place were designed with completely different uses intended in the area. He thought there may need to be some adjustments because of the changes in uses. Mr. Buller felt some answers could be provided at the April 27 hearing. He thought perhaps language could be added to the specific plan to clarify when coordinated programs of street furniture, etc. would be required in the process; i.e., master plan level, design guidebook created by the master developer prior to any development, etc. He thought a supplemental guidebook Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 23, 1994 would have a greater flexibility for the applicant and Commission to revise in the future. Commissioner Melcher noted the specific plan proposes many varied uses in areas appropriate at the time of construction and he thought some sort of overall unifying theme needs to be established as part of the specific plan. Commissioner Lumpp agreed there should be an established unified theme that could flow throughout for the interior of the project. He thought the perimeter is somewhat set with monumentation on the corners, etc. He felt the street lights, uniform bollards, interior monumentation signage, should be set as a general guideline theme with flexibility of the design left for the developer to bring back to the Commission after the golf course has progressed to a logical point. He thought the architectural level of design guidelines could be established at the master plan level with different types for the various planning areas. He observed the City had established a master plan overlay for Haven Avenue with some criteria for development of buildings along Haven. He thought the same concept might be used as a guide program. Commissioner McNiel agreed with Commissioner Melcher that a sense of guidance for the streetscape should be established at the time the specific plan is adopted. Commissioner Tolstoy felt language needs to ensure there will be compatibility between parcels. He did not wish to establish an architectural theme for the entire 380 acres because he thought the parcels are large enough to allow flexibility and variety. Commissioner Melcher felt Commissioner Lumpp made an excellent suggestion that the specifics of an overall theme package could be deferred so that the preparation would not overwhelm the specific plan process but that it be required of the master developer prior to the Commission's being willing to accept the first master plan. He supported that concept and felt it needs to be in place before land development begins. Mr. Buller said staff and the applicant could work on language for the Commission's consideration and the Commission's recommendation would be forwarded to the City Council. Commissioner Tolstoy suggested that language be added to provide for adequate setback and landscaping to soften the effect of any 70-foot tall net fencing. Commissioner McNiel thought there should not be any need for fencing along 6th Street the way the golf course is being laid out. Mr. Buller said the applicant has indicated it is their goal to avoid netting along any street frontages. Commissioner McNiel felt the possibility exists for such fencing along the railroad right-of-way and it would probably be necessary along the edge of the driving range. Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 23, 1994 Commissioner Lumpp recommended that sound walls be avoided along all street frontages. Commissioner Melcher agreed. Commissioner Lumpp felt staff should work out a reasonable increase to the FAR that would work for a hotel and incorporate that language into the document. Commissioner McNiel supported allowing higher buildings with more open space between the buildings. Commissioner Melcher was delighted to see the introduction of the notion of FAR which he believed to be a valid concept. He suggested that the higher FAR be available in any planning areas which may have a hotel but be available only for a hotel. It was the Commission's recommendation to retain the current ISP landscape minimum standards as opposed to granting the applicant's request for a reduction. Chairman Barker asked for comments on the applicant's request for infrastructure phasing of undergrounding. Commissioner Lumpp stated he understood that the utility poles along the railroad right-of-way would remain because they are 66 kv and the applicant was requesting that the communications lines be allowed to remain above ground since the poles would remain. Commissioner Lumpp felt the purpose of undergrounding is to eliminate visual blight and he suggested the applicant be permitted to leave the communication lines above ground. He thought the cost of undergrounding the lines along 4th Street should be borne when one or two of the adjacent planning areas develop. Commissioner McNiel asked if the applicant was proposing to defer the cost of undergrounding on 4th Street to a prospective buyer. Mr. Bullet said it was his understanding the applicant was willing to accept responsibility for undergrounding along the golf course frontage but they were asking to defer construction until an adjoining planning area develops and they were willing to underground along the 6th Street frontage of the golf course and golf practice facility at the time of golf course construction. He said the matter would be forwarded to the City Council and the applicant was seeking support from the Commission to delay the undergrounding. Commissioner McNiel wanted to be sure the lines are undergrounded. Me said the whole project is like an unwritten book with pages being filled in as the project progresses. He commented that the City and the developers do not know what will happen other than a golf course is to be built in the center. He said it is uncommon for the Commission to have such a loose process and he thought the Commission should proceed cautiously. He stated it has been a matter of policy which the Commission has uniformly applied to underground wherever possible. He did not object to moving time lines but he wanted assurances that the undergrounding will take place and to know who will be responsible, who will pay, and when it will happen. Planning Commission Minutes -8- March 23, 1994 Commissioner Lumpp asked if the applicant plans to underground the utilities on 4th Street adjacent to Planning Area V where an existing building is located. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, stated it is Engineering's intent to condition any development on the parcel to underground the lines which are under 66 kv. Commissioner Tolstoy asked how the City would get the lines undergrounded if the building is not torn down. Mr. ,James responded that even a Design Review could trigger the request for undergrounding. Commissioner Tolstoy stated his goal is to get the undergrounding done. He felt undergrounding should be required on 6th Street from Cleveland to the western end of Parcel IX as a condition of development of the golf course. He did not object to delaying the undergrounding on 4th Street but he thought the telecommunications lines should be undergrounded along the railroad right-of- way. Mr. James said there are two sets of poles in the railroad right-of-way: one set owned by the railroad for their communication lines and the poles owned by Edison Company. Me said the City typically would require that everything . except the 66 kv be placed underground. Commissioner Tolstoy observed such a requirement would be consistent with past practices. He did not object to phasing so long as it is spelled out by whom and when it would be done. Commissioner Melcher stated that he had previously represented a developer and argued that communication lines should be allowed to remain on the poles which have 66 kv lines and had been unsuccessful whenever he had made that argument. He still felt it made some sense to allow the communication lines to remain. However, he noted the City had gone to great lengths to clean up the railroad frontage because of the Metrolink service and the window presented by the community. He did not feel that area should be deferred. Commissioner Lumpp questioned the logic of requiring the removal of the communication lines if the 66 kv lines would stay. Chairman Barker stated that in the past the Commission had been consistent in requiring the removal of the communication lines and he felt that inconsistency in allowing them to remain in this case would create problems with future projects and other developers. Commissioner Tolstoy stated the City was trying to remove as much visual clutter as possible. Chairman Barker stated he also wanted to be sure the undergrounding would occur and wanted to know who would do it and when it would be done. Planning Commission Minutes -9- March 23, 1994 Commissioner McNiel felt the undergrounding should be done on 6th Street all the way from Cleveland Avenue to Milliken Avenue because the clubhouse will be in that area. Commissioner Tolstoy agreed that would be better than stopping at the western edge of Planning Area IX. Commissioner Lumpp noted that the applicant had expressed agreement with the revised wording regarding master plans. Commissioner Tolstoy observed the City has had a number of master plans presented in the City and he felt the plans submitted for this project should be at least equal to those in the past. He suggested language be added regarding the appeal process. Mr. Buller indicated that staff would be advising the Commission of approvals made under the master plans so that Commissioners, if necessary, would have an opportunity to appeal City Planner decisions within the 10-day period. Commissioner Melcher asked to whom the applicant would appeal a City Planner decision. Mr. Buller replied the applicant could appeal to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Melcher stated that would mean the Planning Commission would be acting as a Design Review committee in that event. Mr. ~uller questioned if the Commissioners felt an appeal of a design issue should go to the Design Review Committee or the full Commission. Commissioner Melcher was concerned that the proponents of the individual master plans would have to come up with precise architectural concepts of form, height, bulk, orientation, etc for their master plans because the design review process is being set aside for this specific plan area and that would equip the City Planner with a tight book of guidelines which would produce a uniform level of mediocrity. He thought there should be more freedom to allow the design community to come up with appropriate designs. He noted the project needs to be viewed in relation to what is going on around it. He said the author of the various master plans should be addressing what is happening acros~ the street. He said those kinds of relationships make up pleasant spacers. He feared the process will not have good results. Mr. Coleman noted there are statements in the specific plan which discuss compatibility of architectural design and the physical setting and surroundings. He said staff was comfortable with the language of the specific plan and the added availability of the master plans. Commissioner Melcher said he did not oppose proceeding but he thought the Commission may want to see sketches of the architectural concepts of form, bulk, height, and orientation and the sketches would become part of the master plans and then perhaps allowable materials would be discussed. He feared that would squelch any creative design. Planning Commission Minutes -10- March 23, 1994 Commissioner McNiel hoped that the golf carts would traverse through a tunnel under 6th Street rather than on a bridge over 6th Street. Mr. Buller said the current direction is to go underground. Commissioner McNiel questioned the amount of street improvements required on 6th Street. Mr. James stated there is currently an asphalt curb and gutter and staff's direction has been that the golf course frontage along 6th Street would have to be complete including curb and gutter, sidewalks, and street lights; however, the street frontage of Planning Areas VIII, IX, or XI would only need to be widened to two lanes without the curb and gutter being installed. Commissioner McNiel asked for verification that no landscaping would be required along 6th Street other than in front of the golf course until development occurs on the other planning areas. Mr. James confirmed that was correct. Commissioner McNiel felt that 6th Street should be finished from Cleveland to Milliken. Me noted that a clubhouse would be installed. He acknowledged that the curb would have to be cut when the driveway alignment is determined. Mr. James said that there would also be approximate 300-foot deceleration lanes and those locations had not been identified. Commissioner Melcher commented that the Terra Vista Specific Plan calls for major off-site construction whenever a proposed development touches certain streets. He thought perhaps Commissioner McNiel was looking for a similar requirement on this project. Commissioner McNiel felt 6th Street should be completed to create an attractive approach to the golf course or he thought a sales opportunity would be lost to the developer. He thought values would be increased by the installation of the curb and gutter and landscaping. Mr. Buller said the development agreement would be brought to the Commission and he suggested the matter could be determined then. He noted that the Bixby Ranch property was required to landscape the perimeter of its project and it improved appearances but did not seem to aid in speeding up development. He said staff is finding that a lot of the streetscape is having to be adjusted as users come in. Commissioner McNiel stated it did make the area look less abandoned. Mr. Bullet agreed. The Planning Commission adjourned from 9:01 to 9:09 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes -11- March 23, 1994 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 93-01, THE SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. General Dynamics has filed an application for Specific Plan 93-01, as described in the title of this Resolution, hereinafter referred to as the "application." 2. On January 26, February 23 and March 23, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted meetings on the application. 3. On April 27, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing concerning the recommended adoption of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, hereinafter referred to at the "Plan." 4. The Plan comprises approximately 380 acres, currently under contiguous ownership, and located generally north of 4th Street, south of the A. T. & S. F. rail line, east of Utica Avenue and Cleveland Avenue, and west of Milliken Avenue, all referenced in the attached Conceptual Development Plan, Exhibit "A." 5. On file in the City Clerk's office, and incorporated herein by this reference, is a full, true, and correct copy of the Plan. 6. 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. Prior to the adoption of this Resolution, this Commission has reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Plan, General Plan 93-02A, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03, and Tentative Parcel Map 14647, and recommended that the City Council certify the Report, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Consideration, in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. SP 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 2 3. Prior to the adoption of this Resolution, this Commission has reviewed and recommended approval of General Plan Amendment No. 93-02A, and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03, and recommended adoption by the City Council. 4. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission, including, without limitation, evidence presented during the above-referenced public hearing, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The Plan is consistent with and will promote the Land Use Policies and other elements of the General Plan. The detailed findings of consistency set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto are hereby incorporated by reference; b. The Plan is consistent with the objectives of the City's Development Code, Ordinance No. 211, adopted December 7, 1983; c. The Plan will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare; d. The Plan is consistent with the City's Industrial Area Specific Plan; e. The actions taken and proposed to be taken by the City with respect to the adoption of the Plan and the corresponding change of zoning designation have been and will be completed and reviewed in accordance with, and comply with, all applicable State and local laws and regulations. 5. This Commission hereby finds that the Plan has been drafted to include, in text and accompanying diagrams, all of the information as follows: a. The distribution, location, and extent of the land uses, including open space, within the area covered by the Plan; b. The proposed distribution, location, extent, and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential infrastructure proposed to be located within the area of the Plan and needed to support the land uses described in the Plan; c. The standards and criteria by which development will proceed for land uses within the Plan and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable, within the area of the Plan; and d. A description of the implementation measures, including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out those provisions, referenced in subparagraphs a, b, and c above within the area of the Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. SP 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 3 6. This Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt Specific Plan 93-01, the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, subject to the following conditions: 1) within 45 days of City Council approval, a revised Plan text, Final EIR, and Mitigation Monitoring Plan incorporating the changes required shall be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval. Upon acceptance by the Community Development Director, a total of 25 unbound, 3-hole punch, copies of these documents shall be submitted for distribution to the City Council, the City Clerk, the Planning Commission, and staff. In addition, one unbound original copy each, and one executable copy each on a 3.5 inch computer diskette in a format acceptable to City, shall be submitted. 2) A copy of this Resolution shall be included within the Plan text after the title page. 3) Utilities shall be undergrounded per Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96 , with the following understanding: a) 4th Street - The golf course developer shall be responsible for undergrounding along the golf course frontage of 4th street. Said undergrounding may be deferred until the development of Planning Areas V, VI, or VII, if secured by an in-lieu fee. b) 6th Street - The golf course developer shall be responsible for undergrounding utilities between Cleveland Avenue and the westerly boundary of Planning Area IX at the time of the golf course development. c) A. T. & S. F. Rail Line - Utilities shall be undergrounded with the golf course development. 4) The applicant shall prepare supplemental design guidelines to create a distinguishing character for the 380 acre project. The guidelines shall include unifying design concepts for entry statements, signage, and street furniture (e.g., lighting standards, bollards, benches, etc.). The guidelines shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the application for development of any planning area, except for the golf course. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. SP 93-01 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 4 7. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit. AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: JL_ ,d !~.ANN]NG \ Pt~NNIN~ ~ PLANNING Note: This figure represents the current proposed Land Use Plan for Sub- Area 18 and may be subject to future refinements and/or modifications. Refer to Section 4.2 Land Use Plan, Table 5-1 Summary Land Use by Planning Area and Table 5-2 Land Use Type Definitions for types ol land uses permitted in planning areas. 800' 4O0' 0' 800' Michel Br~ndm~n A.~ociate~ · 12./93 exhibit A Conceptual Development Plan "~ ~'" C ~ g Rar~o Gucamonga ,ASP $ut>-Area , 8 $Pe¢,fi¢ Plan EIR EXHIBIT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY This Exhibit assesses how the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and the proposed amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan and General Plan (the "project") furthers the objectives and policies of the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and whether the project will obstruct the attainment of these objectives and policies. Rather than attempt to analyze each individual objective, policy, or program set forth in the General Plan -- a process which would detract from understanding how the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan relates to the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan as a whole -- the relationship between the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is discussed within the context of each of the principal components comprising the General Plan -- Land Use and Development, Environmental iResources, and Public Health and Safety -- with more detailed discussion reserved for those specific policies and objectives that are particularly germane to assessing the changes proposed relative to the current Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) and General Plan land use designations. A. Land Use and Development. 1. General Land Use Objectives. The General Plan identifies a number of key land use objectives that "are aimed at creating a City that functions efficiently, is exciting to leave in, and makes the best use of its various resources." A number of these objectives have been incorporated as principal objectives of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, including: (i) encourage opportunities to mix different, but compatible land uses and activities; (ii) provide recreational, cultural, and employment opportunities to meet the needs of the community; (iii) coordinate industrial development to encourage an integrated industrial area with maximum flexibility and access to the regional circulation network; (iv) promote land use patterns that encourage non-motorized modes of transportation; and (v) organize land uses to promote maximal opportunity for transit usage. The project promotes these important objectives by establishing a more flexible, better integrated array of proposed land uses within the context of a Specific Plan. The expanded variety and mixture of uses established under the Sub-Area Specific Plan, in conjunction with changes in market demand and increased commercial development on the southern edge of the IASP, are expected to promote the land 211877 [25757] I - ! - 12-APR-94 00:34:21 use objectives identified in the General Plan, including those enumerated above. 2. General Land Use Policies. a. Industrial. The General Plan currently establishes three categories of industrial land uses: Industrial Park, General Industrial, and Heavy Industrial. The General Plan specifically reflects that the policies relating to industrial uses are "elaborated in the City's Industrial Area Specific Plan which outlines a much more detailed development program for this area." The General Plan describes "Industrial Park" uses as "planned grouped concentrations of industrial and research and development offices," which are "typically labor intensive, meaning that the number of employees per acre is high. The General Plan contemplates that these uses will be organized along major thoroughfares, including 4th Street, and "along the periphery of the industrial area and with convenient access to public transit." That portion of the project site currently located within IASP Sub-Area 12 is designated as Industrial Park under both the IASP and the General Plan. The IASP currently permits a variety of commercial uses within this Sub-Area, including professional/design services, administrative and office, research services, business support services, financial, insurance and real estate services, hotel, commercial and recreation facilities, including a golf course. The General Plan describes "General Industrial" land use as permitting a wide range of industrial activities including heavy commercial, and office uses. The General Plan states that "this land use is appropriate as a buffer between non-industrial uses and heavy industrial uses." That portion of the project site within current Sub-Areas 10 and 11 are designated "General Industrial" under the IASP and the General Plan. The IASP permits, or conditionally permits, office professional, design and research, indoor wholesale/retail commercial, and recreational facilities within this zone. Although all of the industrial uses and many of the commercial uses proposed under the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan are permitted or conditionally permitted under the current IASP Industrial Park, and General Industrial designations, one of the express objectives of this project is to eliminate what are perceived as artificial and arbitrary divisions between the three existing Sub-Areas (for example, 211877 [2575711 - 2 - I I-APR-94 23:46:30 a number of uses which may be permitted in Sub-Area 12 may be prohibited or only conditionally permitted in Sub-Area 10 or 11) . Specifically, by expanding the variety of commercial and recreational uses contemplated within the project site, the Property Owner intends to inject more creative and imaginative employment-generating designs and to help better integrate this portion of the southern boundary of the IASP with anticipated regional market trends. As a result, the Property Owner is proposing an amendment to the IASP ("IASP Amendment") to specifically incorporate the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and to concurrently amend the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment. While an amendment to the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment and the adoption of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would, alone, appear to ensure consistency, it was also felt that the three categories of industrial use currently identified in the General Plan, while specifically acknowledging the need to provide for labor intensive office and commercial uses and non-industrial transitions within the industrial category could be construed narrowly, and thereby discourage the General Plan objectives (noted above) ~5o promote planning flexibility and the mixture of different, but compatible land uses. As a result, the ]Property Owner has proposed an additional amendment to the General Plan to add a new category of land use entitled ~'Mixed-Use." The Mixed-Use category permits a wide range of a commercial and industrial activities including, medium, light, and custom manufacturing, research and development, office, recreation, mixed-use commercial, retail, and general commercial. Because the proposed uses within the areas designated Mixed-Use under the Sub-Area Specific Plan will also be designated Mixed-Use under the General Plan Amendment, consistency will be ensured. b. Open Space. The General Plan provides that open space areas must be maintained "in order to protect valuable natural resources, and to prevent development in areas considered unsafe because of environmental constraints" The General Plan contains a variety of "written and mapped policies to ensure that the resources are managed so that posterity can enjoy them." The IASP currently does not contain any open space district designations, although the IASP does permit, or conditionally permit, golf course uses within each of the three Sub-Areas currently comprising the project site. 211877 [2575711 - 3 - I I-APR-94 23:46:31 Although the applicant's proposed amendment to the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment and the adoption of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would itself ensure consistency with the General Plan's policies relating to open space, the City has requested that instead of designating the Golf Course "Mixed-Use" along with the remainder of the Sub-Area 18, that this portion of the site be designated "Open Space". Because the current description .of open space uses within the General Plan may be construed to refer specifically to the conservation of natural resources, an additional amendment to the definition of "Open Space" has been proposed to clarify that the Open Space designation may also include man-made open spaces, including golf course uses, within designated areas adjacent 15o residential, commercial, or industrial uses. The clarifying amendment will ensure project consistency with the General Plan. 3. Circulation. The General Plan establishes a circulation system for the City as a whole and the IASP area. The Circulation Plan established under the Sub-Area Specific Plan preserves this circulation system in all principal respects. However, the proposed vacation of a portion of Cleveland Avenue south of 6th Street and the redesignation of Cleveland north of 6th Street from a secondary arterial with an 88-foot right-of-way to a 66-foot local industrial collector, does require a corresponding amendment to the General Plan Circulation Plan. Because the project EIR indicates that no traffic impacts will occur as a result of the vacation and redesignation of Cleveland, the conforming General Plan amendment will ensure consistency with the policies and objectives of the General Plan. 4. Public Facilities. The General Plan contains a variety of objectives and policies designed to ensure that adequate public facilities and services will be maintained as the City develops. The proposed project is not expected to have any substantial impact on the City's Parks and Recreational Plan, or on schools. The establishment of a golf course as a central feature of the Specific Plan will promote a number of General Plan policies concerning the encouragement of recreational uses. 5. Community Design. The primary design goals identified in the General Plan are to promote the functional efficiency of the 211877 [25757]1 - 4 - I I-APR-94 23:46:32 City, improve the City's image and appearance and to use development to express community character. The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan promotes these primary objectives and the more detailed community design elements set forth in the General Plan by providing a unifying character to the project site through the adoption of a Specific Plan which incorporates a variety of land uses around a central golf course feature. Consistency is further ensured through the retention of existing City policies relating to performance standards, site development criteria, subdivision, master planning, and development and design review. Additionally, preservation of the principal features of the City Circulation Plan ensures that the objectives associated with maintaining travel routes will be promoted. The incorporation of project design features adjacent to the proposed Metrolink station further promotes these objectives. B. Environmental Resources. 1. Land Resources. This section of the General Plan contains a number of objectives and policies designed to promote proper soil management techniques and to prevent the premature elimination of agricultural land whenever feasible. The Sub-Area Specific Plan will not change the impact of development on the existing grape vineyard uses on the site. The loss of this agricultural use was previously acknowledged as inevitable when the IASP was first adopted. By requiring subsequent development to comply with applicable City policies and procedures concerning soil management and grading activities, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan ensures compliance with the General Plan land resource objectives and policies. 2. Water Resources. The General Plan contains several objectives and policies designed to protect and enhance water resources. Compliance with applicable City policies and procedures as a condition to subdivision and Design Review approval ensure compliance with these policies and objectives. The EIR for the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan concludes that no significant impacts to water resources will occur. 3. Open Space. The conforming amendments to the General Plan ensure consistency with the General Plan's policies and objectives concerning the preservation of open space. The 211877 [2575711 - 5 - I I-APR-94 23:46:32 establishment of a golf course will result in an increase in open space areas within 5he project site. 4. Enerqy. The General Plan identifies the objective of encouraging more efficient use of energy resources. The project EIR incorporates a number of mitigation measures specifically intended to promote this objective. Compliance with applicable City policies and regulations as a condition to subdivisions and Design Review approvals further ensures consistency with the General Plan's energy objectives and policies. (2. Public Health and Safety. The General Plan sets forth a broad number of objectives and policies designed to ensure that subsequent development within the City will be sensitive to geologic, seismic, flood, fire, noise, air quality, crime, and emergency service concerns and hazards. The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan preserves development and regulatory procedures from the IASP and the City Development Code as a means to mitigate potential impacts in each of the areas identified in the General Plan. Additionally, each of these areas are explored in more detail in the project EIR, which indicates that the changes from the current designations under the IASP will not result in any substantial additional impacts to the environment. Although the EIR indicates that development of the project site (under either the proposed Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan or the current IASP designations) will result in new sources of construction and operational air emissions, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan contemplates the adoption of a transportation demand management strategy consistent with the policies identified in the General Plan. In particular, the location of industrial and commercial uses in proximity to the proposed Metrolink station provides a mechanism to ensure that non-motorized transportation policies will be achieved. The incorporation of numerous mitigation measures dealing with the suppression of particulate emissions and the promotion of energy conservation further ensures consistency with the General Plan air quality objectives and policies. 211877 [25757] 1 - 6 - 1 I-APR-~, 23:46:33 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. There has been presented to this Commission, in conjunction with this Commission's consideration of the recommended adoption of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, and related General Plan Amendment No. 93-02A, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 93-03, and Tentative Parcel Map 14647, a Final Environmental Impact Report. 2. The Final Environmental Impact Report referred to in this Resolution consists of that document dated January 1994, entitled "Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Subarea 18 Specific Plan," together with the draft Final Environmental Impact Report dated April 1994, including written comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report and written responses thereto submitted by staff of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and testimony presented during the hearings on the recommended adoption of the said Specific Plan insofar as that testimony pertained to the environmental matters, as well as the revised Executive Summary, including revisions to mitigation measures, as well as the mitigation monitoring plan. Hereinafter, the above-referenced documents will be referred to as the "Final Environmental Impact Report." The entirety of the Final Environmental Impact Report is hereby incorporated in this Resolution by this reference. 3. On January 26, February 23, and April 27, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings concerning environmental impacts of the proposed Subarea 18 Specific Plan and the companion amendments to the City's General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan (collectively, along with the approvals and actions described therein, the "project") and the adequacy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the project ("Draft EIR"). 4. The public comment on the Draft EIR was duly and lawfully closed on March 10, 1994, following due notice to the public and all applicable public agencies. 5. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the environmental documentation prepared to evaluate the proposed project, including the Final Environmental Impact Report. 6. 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: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. FINAL EIR - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 2 1. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Final Environmental Impact Report was presented to the Planning Commission and that the information contained in the Final Environmental Impact Report has been independently reviewed and considered by members of the Planning Commission. The Final Environmental Impact Report and each of its components reflect the independent analysis and judgment of the City. 2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt: (i) the Statement of Findings (EIR) attached hereto as Attachment A; (ii) the Statement of General Plan Consistency attached hereto as Attachment B; (iii) the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached hereto as Attachment C; and (iv) the Mitigation Monitoring Program attached hereto as Attachment D, based on the following recommended findings: a. The facts and findings set forth in the Statement of Findings (EIR), Statement of General Plan Consistency, and Statement of Overriding Considerations are supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record and the Final Environmental Impact Report. b. The Final Environmental Impact Report has identified all significant environmental effects of the project; there are no known potentially significant environmental impacts not addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report. c. Although the Final Environmental Impact Report identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects that can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been reduced to an acceptable level by the imposition of mitigation measures on the project. These mitigation measures are attached hereto as part of the Mitigation Monitoring Program and incorporated herein by this reference. d. Potential mitigation measures or project alternatives not incorporated into the project (including the "no-project" alternative) were determined to be infeasible based upon the considerations set forth in the Statement of Findings (EIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report and other substantial evidence in the administrative record. The cumulative impacts of the project in relation to other projects in the area have been considered, and, except with respect to those unavoidable impacts described in the Statement of Findings (EIR), mitigation measures are incorporated into the project to reduce such impacts to insignificant levels. e. The unavoidable significant impacts of the project that have not been reduced to a level of insignificance, as identified in the Statement of Findings (EIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report, have been substantially reduced in their impacts by the imposition of mitigation measures. The remaining unavoidable significant impacts are outweighed by the economic, social, technological, legal, and other benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. FINAL EIR - GENERAL DYNAMICS Aprilk 27, 1994 Page 3 f. The Final Environmental Impact Report has described a reasonable range of alternatives to the project (including the "no-project" alternative), even though these alternatives might impede the attainment of project objectives and might create other significant economic, social, legal, technological, or environmental impacts. A good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives in the preparation of the Draft EIR, and reasonable alternatives were considered in the review process of the Final Environmental Impact Report and the ultimate decisions on the project. 3. This Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga certify that the Final Environmental Impact Report has been prepared on the Subarea 18 Specific Plan in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") with State and City Guidelines for implementing CEQA and all other regulations promulgated with respect thereto, and with all other applicable laws and regulations thereunder. Further, that the Council certifies that it has considered the contents of the Final Environmental Impact Report in considering the adoption of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, together with General Plan Amendment No. 93-02A, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 93-03, and Tentative Parcel[ Map 14647; 4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT:: COMMISSIONERS: ATTACHMENT A STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACTS (EIR) This Statement of Findings and Facts for the Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") is divided into three sections. Section A sets forth the City's findings with respect to the environmental impacts of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, the concurrent amendments to the City's General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP), and all other approvals and actions necessary to implement the foregoing as described therein (collectively, the "project"). This section has been further divided into ten subsections, addressing each of the areas of potential impact identified in the EIR. Section B sets forth the City's findings with respect to significant unavoidable adverse impacts, and has been divided into three subsections -- one for each area of potential unavoidable impact. Section C sets forth the City's findings with respect to alternatives to the proposed project, and has been divided into five subsections, one for each of the alternatives considered in the EIR. This Statement of Findings and Facts (EIR) is based upon the entire administrative record for the project, which is hereby incorporated by reference, and includes, without limitation, the EIR, the conditions of approval of the Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan, and testimony provided by members of the public, as well as coincidents by the Planning Co~Lission and the City Council, during the hearings on the project before the Planning Commission and the City Council. The findings contained herein and in the Statement of General Plan Consistency (Attachment B) and the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment C) are not inclusive, but rather are intended to supplement the findings set forth in the attached Resolution. The statement of facts in support of the City's findings are also not inclusive, but rather are intended to identify certain of the principal facts in the administrative record which support the findings contained herein. Additional facts in support of the City's findings may be found in the EIR, the conditions of approval of the Subarea 3 Specific Plan, the Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment D), the various staff reports prepared for both the Planning Commission and the City Council, the minutes from the various public hearings on the project, and the administrative record as a whole. All references to "project design considerations" shall include, without limitation, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, the 211880 [2575711 - 1 - 13-APR-94 09:52:43 corresponding amendments to the City's General Plan and the IASP, and all conditions of approval of the Specific Plan. A. Effects Determined Not To Be Siqnificant or Mitigated to a Level of Insiqnificance. With respect to each of the ten areas in which potentially significant environmental effects could occur, the City finds, as provided below, that these potential impacts have been avoided or substantially lessened by virtue of project design considerations and the mitigation measures described in the EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring Program, each of which are hereby incorporated by reference. The following facts and conclusions reflected in the EIR and the administrative record support these findings: 1. Land Use. The current General Plan and IASP designations for the project site ("General Industrial" and "Industrial Park") have been amended to "Open Space" (with respect to the Golf Course) and "Mixed-Use" (with respect to the remainder of the project site). Development of the project site under these designations would include a broader mix of uses, particularly commercial, office, retail, and recreational uses, and greater development flexibility than is allowed under existing land use designations. The changes proposed are consistent with the general objectives and policies of the General Plan, as described further in the Statement of General Plan Consistency (attached hereto as Appendix B), and the expansion of uses, including the addition of con~%%ercial and recreational uses, would enhance the project's compatibility with the approved co~,~ercial uses in areas south of the project site. The project includes vacating and reclassifying portions of Cleveland Avenue. Cleveland Avenue is not considered a key roadway within the City circulation system due to its limited existing and planned access points. Conforming amendments to the General Plan and the IASP ensure consistency with the City's circulation system. No substantial traffic impacts will occur as a result of the street vacations contemplated by the project. The Project will have a significant unavoidable impact on the loss of agricultural lands. These impa~ts are discussed further in Section B below. 211880 [25757] 1 - 2 - 13-APR-94 09:52:43 2. Traffic and Circulation. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) has been for the project in accordance with the standards forth in the Bernardino County Congestion Mana¢ Plan (CMP). The TIA has been incorporated in the and is consist~ t with and confozms to the re( set forth in the ~d upon maximum buildout of t the full Lty permitted under the Sub Plan, the ect would generate vehicle trip and approximately 7, trips. This of traffic represE increase over traffic that woul¢ build out to existing IAS project site at 18 Specific .y 64,600 p.m peak hour only an incremental under a full use designations. The proje will incrE potentially t levels of intersections ~nd outsi~ contribute to t .1 level additional intersecti~ 15 southbound ramt improvements sufficient service are identified i have been incorporated to offset the project'~ system and offsite exacerbate at a number of the City, and will also service deficiencies at two Avenue/Fourth Street and I- However, roadway ~ain acceptable levels of :he EIR and mitigation measures ~equire fair share contributions to both the City circulation ions and interchanges. Because the )roject impacts to the regJ reductions of of identified as sic and further below. ~ill contribute to cumulative ~tion system, resulting in these impacts have been and are discussed 3. 3e. )roject may result in emporary short-term constructi¢ noise impacts. Miti¢ .on measures have been incorporat to reduce the noise from construction activity. Given the distance ~he project site and the nearg residential area, the resi~al noise impacts remaini~ after mitigation are not cons~ered significant. /The cumulative vehicular traffic~ rail, and stati~hary source noise adjacent to Sixt~ ~eet has the pote~ial of resulting in significant noise~mpacts on outd6or golf course areas that are used on a~kongoing basis (i.e., eating areas) in conjunction with struc~es located on the golf course (i.e., the club house~ To ~e extent these outdoor activity areas are impacted beyond'the 70 dBA 211880 12575711 - 3 - 13-APR-94 09:52:44 2. Traffic and Circulation. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) has been prepared for the project in accordance with the standards set forth in the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan (CMP). The TIA has been incorporated in the EIR and is consistent with and conforms to the requirements set forth in the CMP. Based upon maximum buildout of the project site at the full density permitted under the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, the project would generate approximately 64,600 vehicle trip ends and approximately 7,800 p.m peak hour trips. This level of traffic represents only an incremental increase over the traffic that would arise under a full build out pursuant to existing IASP land use designations. The project will incrementally exacerbate potentially deficient levels of service at a number of intersections within and outside the City, and will also contribute to potential level of service deficiencies at two additional intersections, Haven Avenue/Fourth Street and 1- 15 southbound ramps/Fourth Street. However, roadway improvements sufficient to maintain acceptable levels of service are identified in the EIR and mitigation measures have been incorporated to require full frontage and intersection improvements as well as payment of city-wide transportation development fees to offset the project's impacts to both the City circulation system and offsite intersections and interchanges. Because the project will contribute to cumulative impacts to the regional circulation system, resulting in reductions of levels of service, these impacts have been identified as significant and unavoidable and are discussed further below. 3. Noise. The project may result in temporary short-term construction noise impacts. Mitigation measures have been incorporated to reduce the noise generated from construction activity. Given the distance between the project site and the nearest residential area, the residual noise impacts remaining after mitigation are not considered significant. The cumulative vehicular traffic, rail, and stationary source noise adjacent to Sixth Street has the potential of resulting in significant noise impacts on outdoor golf course areas that are used on an ongoing basis (i.e., eating areas) in conjunction with structures located on the golf course (i.e., the club house). To the extent these outdoor activity areas are impacted beyond the 70 dBA 211880 [2575711 -3- April 27, 1994 Ldn, mitigation measures are identified to reduce noise to levels deemed acceptable under the General Plan. 4. Air Ouality. The grading and construction activities associated with the development of the project site will result in emissions of CO, NOx, PM10, and ROC which exceed the tlhreshholds of significance established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Numerous mitigation measures have been identified to reduce construction related emissions to the extent feasible; however, insofar as construction-related emissions still exceed SCAQMD thresholds for CO, NOx, and ROC, they are identified as significant and unavoidable. These impacts are discussed further in Section B below. Project operational emissions, due principally to emissions from vehicle trips, would be comparable to those produced under current IASP designations. The project's incremental increase in regional emissions would only exceed tlhe SCAQMD thresholds for CO. However, according to the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the 1991 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which is incorporated in the EIR, regional emissions of CO will meet Federal and State ~mbient air quality standards by the target year 2010 after application of identified mitigation measures on a regionwide basis. Air modeling results indicate that the project will not produce local CO concentrations in excess of State and Federal standards. The project is in conformity with the 1991 AQMP. It will contribute to the attainment of subregional job/housing performance targets and will implement regional growth management objectives and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and vehicle trips (VT) through the application of transportation demand management strategies. Mitigation measures have been incorporated which reduce VMT and VT to the greatest extent feasible. 5. Soils and Geology. The project site is not located in the vicinity of known active or inactive faults, and the potential for seismic or geologic related impacts is not considered significant. The potential for subsidence and differential compaction will be addressed through mitigation requiring subsurface geotechnical investigations prior to issuance of grading permits. 211880 [25757] 1 - 4 - 13-APR-94 09:52:45 6. Hydrology, Drainage, and Water 0uality. Due to the proposed Golf Course, development of the project site would result in approximately 40% less impervious surface than under the existing IASP designations. Storm drain improvements will be installed as development progresses to convey the post-development on- site stormflows into the existing storm drain facilities adjacent to the site. Identified mitigation measures require compliance with applicable storm water quality requirements. 7. Biological Resources. A biological survey of the site, including focused surveys for the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly, San Diego Horned Lizard and Orange-Throated Whiptail, were conducted and indicate that no significant habitat will be impacted by development of the project. The project site has been substantially disturbed from decades of agricultural activities, uses of the existing building parcels, and grading associated with previous subdivision activities. Although further development will result in an incremental addition to the on-going regional conversion of open space to urban uses and related loss of foraging/nesting opportunities for human-tolerant species, this loss is likely to be less than that associated with the current IASP (due to the presence of the Golf Course), was contemplated in the General Plan and IASP as a product of the conversion of agricultural lands, and is not considered significant due to the site's isolation from other large natural open-space areas by existing urban development. 8. Public Services and Utilities. Although the project would incrementally increase the level of water consumed and wastewater generated, the in.acts of the project would be less than those under existing IASP designations, and the Cucamonga County Water District has adequate capacity to provide water and accept wastewater discharges. Appropriate water conservation measures have been incorporated. The project would increase the generation of solid waste, but adequate facilities would be available to accept this waste, and the inclusion of source reduction and recycling mitigation ensures that no significant impact will Occur. Because the project will help address an existing jobs/housing imbalance in the region, it may not have any 211880 [2575711 13-APR-94 09:52:46 readily identifiable effect on schools. To the extent the project has indirect, incremental impacts on schools, these impacts will be mitigated to a level of insignificance through payment of school mitigation fees and participation in the tax increment pass through arising as a result of the project's location within the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Plan area. 9. Energy Demand and Conservation. The project will result in less electrical and natural gas demands than that which would arise under existing IASP designations. Existing and planned utility facilities are available to adequately serve the planned glrowth within the district, and mitigation has been incorporated to require appropriate conversation measures. 10. Hazardous Materials. Development of the project site may introduce industrial land uses that could generate hazardous materials; however, due to the overall reduction in hazardous material-related uses compared to the current IASP, the proposed project would likely have a beneficial impact in reducing hazardous material-related risks. Residual impacts of historic pesticide use are not considered a significant constraint on development. Any health risks associated with potential asbestos-containing ~terials in the existing buildings will be addressed by compliance with applicable SCAQMD notification and removal requirements. B. Significant Unavoidable Impacts. The EIR identified three areas in which potentially significant impacts would remain after mitigation. With respect to each of these impacts, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified. Additional mitigation of cumulative regional impacts is within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, and not the City. With respect to any remaining impacts within the City's jurisdiction, specific economic, social, environmental, legal, and technological considerations make infeasible additional mitigation measures. The following facts and conclusions reflected in the EIR and the administrative record support these findings: 2 ! 1880 [25757] 1 -6- 13-APR-94 09:52:47 1. The Loss of Agricultural Lands. loss of agricultural lands within ect site was tticipated and accepted in the City's Plan and the The project would not result in new impacts fr~ the development contemplated in IASP. The loss of ope space values associated with conversion from agricul use has been mitigated inclusion of the Golf Cou: e, which will constitute th largest contiguous op space area within the district. 2. Traffic. As contribute to system, resulting EIR identifies re¢ constructed, would E). With respect City, a mitigation contribute its fair through payment of in Section A.2, Lative impacts to n reductions of circulati ~eserve CMP :hose sure re to Fee. With respect to mitigation measure requ~ basis, in a regionally- Further mitigation of the control of the City project traffic impacts from those that would iroject will regional circulation .evels of service. The improvements which, when of service (i.e., LOS located within the the project proponent to necessary improvements, Transportation Development outside of the City, a pation, on a fair-share :ed mitigation fee program. .ative regional impacts is beyond :he applicant. The residual considered an incremental change the IASP. 3. Air Oua ty. As noted phases of anticipated to exc Mitigation construction and the extent Section ~ :, air emissions from certain and :ion of the project are SCAQMD of significance. designed to the level of have been incorporated to Upon impleme ~ation of the mitigation measures identi .ed in the EIR, no exceedances of Carbon occur, and the ~ion of mitigation me~ ires set forth in the )91 AQMP on a region- wide basis mean that the project ill not contribute to any violatiol of Federal and State ~rds. The project is in confo with the policies and of the 1989 Growth ement Plan and the 1991 Any remaining c~ impacts are beyond the jurisdi ~ion and control of the icant or the City to mitigate ~ther. 211880 [2575711 -7- 13-APR-94 09:52:47 11. The Loss of Agricultural Lands. The loss of agricultural lands within the project site was anticipated and accepted in the City's General Plan and the IASP. The project would not result in any new impacts from the development contemplated in the IASP. The loss of open space values associated with the conversion from agricultural use has been mitigated by the inclusion of the Golf Course, which will constitute the largest contiguous open space area within the IASP district. 12. Cumulative Traffic. As noted in Section A.2, the project will contribute to cumulative impacts to the regional circulation system, resulting in reductions of levels of service. The EIR identifies regional circulation improvements which, when constructed, would preserve CMP levels of service (i.e., LOS E). With respect to those improvements located within the City, a mitigation measure requires the project proponent to install full frontage improvements, including ultimate intersection geometrics, upon development and to pay the City's Transportation Development Fee as contribution toward city-wide impacts. With respect to improvements outside of the City, a mitigation measure requires participation, on a fair-share basis, in a regionally-adopted mitigation fee program. Further mitigation of cumulative regional impacts is beyond the control of the City or the applicant. The residual project traffic impacts are considered an incremental change from those that would arise under the IASP. 13. Air Ouality. As noted in Section A.4, air emissions from certain phases of construction and operation of the project are anticipated to exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance. Mitigation measures designed to reduce the level of construction and vehicle emissions have been incorporated to the extent feasible. Upon implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR, no local exceedances of Carbon Monoxide will occur, and the application of mitigation measures set forth in the 1991 AQMP on a region- wide basis will mean that the project will not contribute to any violations of Federal and State standards. The project is in conformity with the policies and goals of the 1989 Growth Management Plan and the 1991 AQMP. Any remaining cumulative impacts are beyond the jurisdiction and control of the applicant or the City to mitigate further. 211880 [2575711 -7- April 27, 1994 C. Project Alternatives. The EIR identifies a total of five alternatives to the proposed project. The City finds that the range of alternatives discussed in the EIR is reasonable. With respect to each of the alternatives identified, the City finds that: (i) such alternatives cannot feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project; (ii) specific economic, social, environmental, legal, or technological considerations make the proposed alternatives infeasible; and (iii) these same factors are overriding considerations which warrant rejection of the alternatives in favor of the proposed project. The following facts and conclusions reflected in the EIR and the administrative record support these findings: 1. No-Project/No Development Alternative. Although this alternative could reduce the potential for significant unavoidable local impacts in the three areas were project mitigation would not be fully effective in doing so -- loss of agricultural lands, cumulative traffic impacts, and exceedances of SCAQMD emission thresholds -- the benefits produced by retention of the project site in its existing undeveloped state are considered minimal, and, as described further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations incorporated herein, are outweighed by more compelling and substantial social, economic, and legal considerations. The project-specific impacts cited in the EIR as "unavoidable" all reflected a cumulative diminution or exacerbation of regional resources. These impacts would not be fully addressed even under the no project alternative. The substantial loss of agricultural lands acknowledged and accepted at the time the City adopted its General Plan would occur with or without development on the proposed project site. The failure to develop the project site would merely shift absorption of commercial and industrial uses, and associated traffic generation, to other properties either within or outside the City, and perhaps do so in a manner ].ess compatible with the growth management objectives of the 1991 AQMP and the 1989 Growth Management Plan. For the same reason, the reduction of air pollutant emissions would not be expected to have any material impact on the regional emission inventory (and the project's local air quality impacts have already been mitigated to a level of insignificance 211880 [2575711 -8- 13-APR-94 09:52:48 Conversely, preservation of the project site in an undeveloped state would be expected to have substantial socio-economic and legal repercussions. This alternative would perpetuate existing uneconomic agricultural activities in direct contravention to the goals and objectives stated in the City's General Plan and the IASP. Assuming such preservation is accompanied by a down-zoning of the project site, the project applicant would undoubtedly raise legal concerns about the deprivation of economically beneficial uses of the project site. More generally, the project site comprises a substantial percentage of the remaining undeveloped portion of the IASP area and would, if left undeveloped, deprive the City of thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in tax revenue, including tax increment to be used by the City's Redevelopment Agency to achieve the important redevelopment objectives set forth in the City's Redevelopment Plan. Because this alternative could not reasonably attain any of the basic objectives of the project, which contemplate improving planning flexibility so as to facilitate development and better promote the job and revenue-generating objectives of the General Plan, it is considered infeasible. 2. Development Under Current IASP Designations. On the whole, this alternative would have substantially the same environmental impacts as the proposed project. The impacts from this alternative were analyzed in the EIR based upon assumed development at a level less than the "worst case" build-out assumptions used in assessing impacts from the proposed project. In this respect, a comparison of the proposed project with the current IASP likely overstates the actual differences between the two. In some areas, most notably biological resources, energy consumption, and public facilities, the proposed project is likely to produce incrementally fewer impacts than this alternative due to the presence of the Golf Course and the de-emphasis of industrial uses. To the extent this alternative would produce any substantial environmental benefits over the proposed project, the substantial social and economic benefits noted below, which are described further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations incorporated herein, substantially outweigh these benefits. With respect to the feasibility of this alternative, changing market conditions have led to the teevaluation of the type of zoning within the project site that would best achieve some of the principal objectives 2 t 1880 [25757] 1 13-APR-94 09:52:49 identified in the General Plan and the Redevelopment Plan: (i) encouraging opportunities to mix different, but compatible land uses and activities; (ii) providing recreational, cultural, and employment opportunities to meet the needs of the co~auunity; (iii) coordinating industrial development to encourage an integrated industrial area with maximum flexibility and access to the regional circulation network; (iv) promoting land use patterns that encourage non-motorized modes of transportation; and (v) organizing land uses to promote maximal opportunity for transit usage. While the existing IASP designations could, in theory, have achieved these objectives (at least in part), changes in market conditions due to a glut of industrial warehouse space and increased competition, along with substantial constraints arising as a result of the project's location in three separate subareas within the IASP, greatly diminished the prospects for attracting end-users and thereby impaired the development potential of the site. The introduction of the Golf Course, along with (i) a more coordinated integration of uses between planning areas, (ii) more advantageous use of the rail lines to the north ((:hiefly in conjunction with a proposed Metrolink Station) and the major roadway arterials adjacent to the site (Milliken, Fourth Street, and Sixth Street), and (iii) a more flexible mix of uses with greater emphasis on conm%ercial, office, retail, and recreational uses, are all features of the proposed project which improve the project site's ability to achieve the above-stated goals. The IASP alternative would not be likely to achieve these goals within any forseeable time period. Buildings. IASP With Re-Use of Existing On-Site This alternative would have substantially similar environmental, social, and economic impacts and benefits as the second alternative analyzed above. Due to the more intense development associated with the re-use of the existing building parcels, environmental impacts of this alternative would be greater than those associates with Alternative 2. For the same reasons noted above, it is questionable whether this alternative would be environmentally superior to the proposed project. Although this proposed alternative would improve the marketability and development potential of the 75 acre existing building parcels, it would not alter the IASP land use designations for the remainder of the project site and would, therefore, suffer from the same constraints discussed in Section C.2 above. Thus, for the same reasons noted 211880 [2575711 -10- 13-APR-94 09:52:50 above, this alternative could not reasonably attain the principal objectives of the project within reasonably foreseeable time periods. Additionally, to the extent that any minimal environmental benefits exist under this alternative, they are substantially outweighed by the socio- economic factors identified earlier. 4. Residential Development Alternative. Under this alternative, the project site would be primarily developed with residential dwelling units surrounding an 18 hole public golf course. The introduction of such a substantial number of dwelling units (over 2,500) over such a substantial portion of the remaining industrial lands within the City could result in significant incompatibilities with on-site and surrounding land uses and would represent a significant departure from the land use objectives currently identified in the General Plan, the IASP, and the Redevelopment Plan. Although this alternative would result in fewer vehicles trips, and would potentially reduce the level of air emissions, noise, and energy consumption, the substantial incompatibilities resulting from the introduction of so many sensitive receptors to an area already developed with industrial uses would offset any perceived environmental benefits of this alternative and render it environmentally inferior to the proposed project. To the extent that any environmental benefits accrue under this alternative, such benefits would be substantially outweighed by the socio-economic factors described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Additionally, because this alternative would not achieve the job-generating objectives identified by the City, it is considered "infeasible." 5. Alternative Site. As described more fully in the EIR, the ability to select an alternative site for implementation of the type of golf course-oriented multi-use project contemplated by the City would be significantly constrained by the remaining area available for industrial development and by the amount of! contiguous acreage necessary to implement these objectives. The largest piece of undeveloped land in the IASP encompasses only approximately 160 acres, and would be barely adequate enough to construct an 18 hole golf course. Other sites within the City would either be too small or would require substantial zoning and General Plan amendments to preserve land use consistency. For these and other reasons, an alternative site for the project could not 880 [25757] 1 -3.1- 13-APR-94 09:52:51 reasonably achieve the project's objectives, and are therefore considered infeasible. 211880 [25757] 1 -12- 13-APR-94 09:52:51 ATTACHMENT B STATEMENT OF GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY This Attachment assesses how the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and the proposed amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan and General Plan (the "project") furthers the objectives and policies of the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and whether the project will obstruct the attainment of these objectives and policies. Rather than attempt to analyze each individual objective, policy, or program set forth in the General Plan -- a process which would detract from understanding how the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan relates to the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan as a whole -- the relationship between the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is discussed within the context of each of the principal components comprising the General Plan -- Land Use and Development, Environmental Resources, and Public Health and Safety -- with more detailed discussion reserved for those specific policies and objectives that are particularly germane to assessing the changes proposed relative to the current Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) and General Plan land use designations. A. Land Use and Development. 1. General Land Use Objectives. The General Plan identifies a number of key land use objectives that "are aimed at creating a City that functions efficiently, is exciting to leave in, and makes the best use of its various resources." A number of these objectives have been incorporated as principal objectives of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, including: (i) encourage opportunities to mix different, but compatible land uses and activities; (ii) provide recreational, cultural, and employment opportunities to meet the needs of the community;(iii) coordinate industrial development to encourage an integrated industrial area with maximum flexibility and access to the regional circulation network; (iv) promote land use patterns that encourage non-motorized modes of transportation; and (v) organize land uses to promote maximal opportunity for transit usage. The project promotes these important objectives by establishing a more flexible, better integrated array of proposed land uses within the context of a Specific Plan. The expanded variety and mixture of uses established under the Sub-Area Specific Plan, in conjunction with changes in market demand and increased commercial development on the southern edge of the IASP, are expected to promote the land 214569 [25757] 1 -1- 13-APR-94 09:50:23 use objectives identified in the General Plan, includin9 those enumerated above. 2. General Land Use Policies. a. Industrial. The General Plan currently establishes three cate9ories of industrial land uses: Industrial Park, General Industrial, and Heavy Industrial. The General Plan specifically reflects that the policies relatin~ to industrial uses are "elaborated in the City's Industrial Area Specific Plan which outlines a much more detailed development pro~ram for this area." The General Plan describes "Industrial Park" uses as "planned ~rouped concentrations of industrial and research and development offices," which are "typically labor intensive, meanin~ that the number of employees per acre is high. The General Plan contemplates that these uses will be organized alon~ major thoroughfares, includin~ 4th Street, and "alon9 the periphery of the industrial area and with convenient access to public transit." That portion of the project site currently located within IASP Sub-Area 12 is designated as Industrial Park under both the IASP and the General Plan. The IASP currently permits a variety of commercial uses within this Sub-Area, includin~ professional/design services, administrative and office, research services, business support services, financial, insurance and real estate services, hotel, commercial and recreation facilities, includin~ a 9olf course. The General Plan describes "General Industrial" land use as permittin~ a wide ran~e of industrial activities includin~ heavy commercial, and office uses. The General Plan states that "this land use is appropriate as a buffer between non-industrial uses and heavy industrial uses." That portion of the project site within current Sub-Areas 10 and 11 are designated "General Industrial" under the IASP and the General Plan. The IASP permits, or conditionally permits, office professional, design and research, indoor wholesale/retail co~L~ercial, and recreational facilities within this zone. Although all of the industrial uses and many of the commercial uses proposed under the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan are permitted or conditionally permitted under the current IASP Industrial Park, and General Industrial designations, one of the express objectives of this project is to eliminate what are perceived as artificial and arbitrary divisions between the three existin~ Sub-Areas (for example, 214.569 C25757] 1 -2- 13-APR-94 09:50:24 a number of uses which may be permitted in Sub-Area 12 may be prohibited or only conditionally permitted in Sub-Area 10 or 11). Specifically, by expanding the variety of commercial and recreational uses contemplated within the project site, the Property Owner intends to inject more creative and imaginative employment-generating designs and to help better integrate this portion of the southern boundary of the IASP with anticipated regional market trends. As a result, the Property Owner is proposing an ~endment to the IASP ("IASP Amendment") to specifically incorporate the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and to concurrently amend the General Plan to reflect the IASP ~endment. While an amendment to the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment and the adoption of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would, alone, appear to ensure consistency, it was also felt that the three categories of industrial use currently identified in the General Plan, while specifically acknowledging the need to provide for labor intensive office and co~%ercial uses and non-industrial transitions within the industrial category could be construed narrowly, and thereby discourage the General Plan objectives (noted above) to promote planning flexibility and the mixture of different, but compatible land uses. As a result, the Property Owner has proposed an additional amendment to the General Plan to add a new category of land use entitled "Mixed-Use." The Mixed-Use category permits a wide range of a commercial and industrial activities including, medium, light, and custom manufacturing, research and development, office, recreation, mixed-use commercial, retail, and general co~ercial. Because the proposed uses within the areas designated Mixed-Use under the Sub-Area Specific Plan will also be designated Mixed-Use under the General Plan ~nendment, consistency will be ensured. b. Open Space. The General Plan provides that open space areas must be maintained "in order to protect valuable natural resources, and to prevent development in areas considered unsafe because of environmental constraints". The General Plan contains a variety of "written and mapped policies to ensure that the resources are managed so that posterity can enjoy them." The IASP currently does not contain any open space district designations, although the IASP does permit, or conditionally pe~,it, golf course uses within each of the three Sub-Areas currently comprising the project site. 21¢569 [25757'J 1 -3- 13-APR-94 09:50:25 Although the applicant's proposed amendment to the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment and the adoption of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would itself ensure consistency with the General Plan's policies relating to open space, the City has requested that instead of designating the Golf Course "Mixed-Use" along with the remainder of the Sub-Area 18, that this portion of the site be designated "Open Space". Because the current description of open space uses within the General Plan may be construed to refer specifically to the conservation of natural resources, an additional amendment to the definition of "Open Space" has been proposed to clarify that the Open Space designation may also include man-made open spaces, including golf course uses, within designated areas adjacent to residential, co~=~ercial, or industrial uses. The clarifying amendment will ensure project consistency with the General Plan. 3. Circulation. The General Plan establishes a circulation system for the City as a whole and the IASP area. The Circulation Plan established under the Sub-Area Specific Plan preserves this circulation system in all principal respects. However, the proposed vacation of a portion of Cleveland Avenue south of 6th Street and the redesignation of Cleveland north of 6th Street from a secondary arterial with an 88-foot right-of-way to a 66-foot local industrial collector, does require a corresponding amendment to the General Plan Circulation Plan. Because the project EIR indicates that no traffic impacts will occur as a result of the vacation and redesignation of Cleveland, the conforming General Plan amendment will ensure consistency with the policies and objectives of the General Plan. 4. Public Facilities. The General Plan contains a variety of objectives and policies designed to ensure that adequate public facilities and services will be maintained as the City develops. The proposed project is not expected to have any substantial impact on the City's Parks and Recreational Plan, or on schools. The establishment of a golf course as a central feature of the Specific Plan will promote a number of General Plan policies concerning the encouragement of recreational uses. 5. Community Design. The primary design goals identified in the General Plan are to promote the functional efficiency of the 214569 [257571 -4- 13-APR-94 09:50:26 City, improve the City's image and appearance and to use development to express co~unity character. The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan promotes these primary objectives and the more detailed con~unity design elements set forth in the General Plan by providing a unifying character to the project site through the adoption of a Specific Plan which incorporates a variety of land uses around a central golf course feature. Consistency is further ensured through the retention of existing City policies relating to performance standards, site development criteria, subdivision, master planning, and development and design review. Additionally, preservation of the principal features of the City Circulation Plan ensures that the objectives associated with maintaining travel routes will be promoted. The incorporation of project design features adjacent to the proposed Metrolink station further promotes these objectives. Environmental Resources. 1. Land Resources. This section of the General Plan contains a number of objectives and policies designed to promote proper soil management techniques and to prevent the premature elimination of agricultural land whenever feasible. The Sub-Area Specific Plan will not change the impact of development on the existing grape vineyard uses on the site. The loss of this agricultural use was previously acknowledged as inevitable when the IASP was first adopted. By requiring subsequent development to comply with applicable City policies and procedures concerning soil management and grading activities, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan ensures compliance with the General Plan land resource objectives and policies. 2. Water Resources. The General Plan contains several objectives and policies designed to protect and enhance water resources. Compliance with applicable City policies and procedures as a condition to subdivision and Design Review approval ensure compliance with these policies and objectives. The EIR for the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan concludes that no significant impacts to water resources will occur. 3. Open Space. The conforming amendments to the General Plan ensure consistency with the General Plan's policies and objectives concerning the preservation of open space. The 214569 [257~7] 1 establishment of a golf course will result in an increase in open space areas within the project site. 4. Energy. The General Plan identifies the objective of encouraging more efficient use of energy resources. The project EIR incorporates a number of mitigation measures specifically intended to promote this objective. Compliance with applicable City policies and regulations as a condition to subdivisions and Design Review approvals further ensures consistency with the General Plan's energy objectives and policies. C. Public Health and Safety. The General Plan sets forth a broad number of objectives and policies designed to ensure that subsequent development within the City will be sensitive to geologic, seismic, flood, fire, noise, air quality, crime, and emergency service concerns and hazards. The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan preserves development and regulatory procedures from the IASP and the City Development Code as a means to mitigate potential impacts in each of the areas identified in the General Plan. Additionally, each of these areas are explored in more detail in the project EIR, which indicates that the changes from the current designations under the IASP will not result in any substantial additional impacts to the environment. Although the EIR indicates that development of the project site (under either the proposed Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan or the current IASP designations) will result in new sources of construction and operational air emissions, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan contemplates tlhe adoption of a transportation demand management strategy consistent with the policies identified in the General Plan. Ils particular, the location of industrial and con~T~rcial uses in proximity to the proposed Metrolink station provides a mechanism to ensure that non-motorized transportation policies will be achieved. The incorporation of numerous mitigation measures dealing with the suppression of particulate emissions and the promotion of energy conservation further ensures consistency with the General Plan air quality objectives and policies. 214569 [25?57] 1 -6- 13-APR-94 09:50:27 ATTACHMENT C STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS The City of Rancho Cucamonga proposes to approve the proposed Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and related amendments to the General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan (along with the other actions and approvals described therein, the "project"). A Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared for the project, and certain project-related environmental impacts have been identified which cannot be completely avoided through mitigation: i.e., the loss of agricultural lands, cumulative traffic impacts, and exceedances of SCAQMD air quality emission thresholds. Based upon the EIR and other information in the administrative record, the following overriding considerations are provided against which these unavoidable adverse effects are balanced in reaching a decision on this project. On balance, the remaining unavoidable adverse effects are found acceptable given the overriding considerations contained herein. The City finds that implementation of the project will: 1. Help implement a number of key objectives in the General Plan by encouraging an integrated industrial area with maximum flexibility and access to the regional circulation network, promoting land use patterns that encourage non-motorized modes of transportation, and organizing land uses to promote maximum opportunity for job creation and transit usage. 2. Improve the City's fiscal balance, thereby enabling the City to provide and enhance public services and facilities. 3. Help implement the City Redevelopment Plan by substantially improving the development potential of the project site, integrating such development in a highly- amenitized setting which includes an 18-hole public golf course, and improving the potential to generate tax increment revenues which may be used to achieve other important objectives of the Plan. 4. Help improve the overall quality of life within the community by promoting a more dynamic mix of recreational, cultural, and employment opportunities. 21.4550 [25757] 1 -1- 13-APR-94 10:50:58 5. Substantially increase the amount of open space within the City's industrial area by introducing an 18-hole public golf course. 6. Assist in achieving a major local and regional planning goal by providing jobs within a jobs-poor subregion. The City also finds on the basis of the EIR and other information in the record referenced in Attachments A and B to the accompanying Resolution (which are hereby incorporated by reference), that additional mitigation measures or alternatives which might further reduce or eliminate the significant impacts of the project cannot be feasibly accomplished in a successful manner considering the various economic, environmental, social, legal and technological factors involved. In this regard, any unavoidable impacts which would result from project implementation are principally a product of cumulative and regional growth trends, would occur under implementation of the current IASP land use designations, and would be unlikely to be avoided in the long term even if no further development on the project site occurred. This factor is an additional consideration in weighing the substantial benefits outlined above and provides an additional basis for concluding that the project's unavoidable impacts are overriden by the significant benefits offered by the project. 214550 [25757] 1 -2- 13-APR-94 10:50:58 ATTACHMENT D DRAFT MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUB-A~EA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN EIR State Clearinghouse Number 93102055 Submitted to: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Contact: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner Prepared by: Michael Brandman Associates Carnegie Centre 2530 Red Hill Avenue Santa Ana, California 92705 Contact: Thomas E. Smith, AICP, Project Director Michael E. Houlihan, Project Manager April 1994 Section 1.0 2.0 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................... 1 PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ............................. 1 2.1 2.2 Roles and Responsibilities ........................... 1 General Procedures ............................... 2 Attachment A Sample Reporting and Implementation Form lB/19090001 .MMP 1.0 INTRODUCTION Section 21081.6 to the Public Resources Code requires a lead or responsible agency that approves or carries out a project where an environmental impact report has identified significant environmental effects to adopt a "reporting or monitoring program for adopted or required changes to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects." The City of Rancho Cucamonga is the lead agency for the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan EIR. A draft environmental impact report has been prepared for this project and addressed potential environmental impacts and, where appropriate, . recommended measures to mitigate these impacts. As such, a mitigation reporting or monitoring program is required to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented. The project is located at the southern boundary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is within the existing Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP). The project site is bounded by Fourth Street to the south, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the AT&SF railroad, and on the west by Utica Street and Cleveland Avenue. The proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan would include a broad mix of uses that could include a hotel/conference center, retail, restaurant, and entertainment, as well as offk:e, research and development, and light industrial uses centering around an 18-hole golf course. 2.0 PROGRAM MANAGEMIgeNT The mitigation monitoring plan (MMP) for the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan EIR will be in place through all phases of project approval. Enforcement of the MMP will be the responsibility of a Project Manager (PM). 2.1 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: PROJECT MANAGER The PM is assigned by the Community Development Department Director. The PM assigned to the proposed project will supervise the MMP through all phases of project approval and is responsible for the overall management of the MMP. The mitigation measures identified in the MMP fall into two categories: 1. Measures that need to be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits, and 2. Measures that are implemented with subsequent levels of development through conditions of approval. The PM is thoroughly familiar with the project and qualified to determine if an adopted measure is being properly implemented. The PM oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting and Implementation (R&I) Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is being taken on each measure. The PM and/or an assignee will also be responsible for the filing and updating of the R&I Forms during all phases of the project. The PM will determine the need for a measure to $B/19090001 .MMP be modified and ensure the use of a mitigation specialist if technical expertise beyond the PM's is required. If it is found that an adopted mitigation measure is not being properly implemented, the PM would require corrective actions to ensure adequate implementation. The responsibilities of the PM inclnde the following: An MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potential significant impact and its corresponding mitigation identified in the list of mitigation measures attached hereto. 2. Appropriate specialists will be retained, as needed, to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the PM. 3. The PM and/or an assignee will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the PM and/or an assignee at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures. The PM is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the PM and/or an assignee. The completed form will be provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. The PM has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The PM also has authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring. The PM also has authority to hold the issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 2.2 GENERAL PROCI~DURES ~ l~rogrmn Definitions The MMP consists of key program elements. below. The definitions of these elements are summarized Files are established to document and retain records of the MMP. The file organization is established by the PM according to mitigation measures and project phases. Jl~/19090001 .M]VIP R&I Forms are designed to record the monitoring activity in a consistent manner with appropriate approvals. The R&I Form is placed in the MMP foes, A suggested copy of the form is in this program description as Attachment A. I~nvironmenml Conl!~liance Vm'ificmion At the completion of construction contracts that are part of the overall development cf the project, a verification of environmental compliance is executed by the PM. The verification concludes the construction monitoring process for the contract. Mitigation Monitoring Proqram Procedku'es The policies and procedures for the MMP described herein are intended to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the draft Ei]~.. Table 1 lists each mitigation measure and the implementer, the responsible party for monitoring, and the timing of implementation for each mitigation measure for the proposed project. Table ! also provides the PM a verification of compliance for each mitigation measure during each applicable phase of the project. An R&I form (see Attachment A) is prepared for each potential significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase. The PM shall initial and date the measure on Table 1. A Program EIR has been prepared and certified for the Rancho Cucamonga Sub-Area 18 Specific P~an, within the meaning of 14 California Administrative Code Section 15168, and is intended to analyze and cover the project as a whole. Each discretionary project application within the Sub-Area Specific Plan area will need to include any and all initial studies and assessments required by CEQA. To the extent permitted by CEQA, no further environmental assessment beyond the Program EIR is considered necessary. In the event CEQA requires any additional environmental review, the City may impose additional measures (or conditions) to mitigate adverse impacts which were not considered at the time the Sub-Area lg Specific Plan was approved, and which are otherwise consistent with the provisions of any development agreement between the City and the property owner. Disposition of Monitoring Forn~ All active and completed R&I Forms are kept in the MMP file with the City of Rancho Cucamonga during the pre-design, design, construction, and operational phasos of the project. Reports will be available from the city upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga (Lead Agency) Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 $B/19090001 .MMP T9£ 'ON ~9£ £0~ l 80ol ~9C'ON ~9£'0N I9~'0N ~9£'0N ~9£'0N i ~9£'0N I9£'0N 'ON ATTA~.UVI~.NT A M1~GATION ~ONITORING PROGRAM AND IMPL~ATION FOl~! RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM REPORTING AND IMI~NTATION FORM Project File: Mitigation Measure: Location: Impact Issue: # # Ohsitc Land Use and Planning Noise Earth Resources Biological Resources Energy Description of Activity/Method of Implementation: Disposition: Comments/Revisions: Phase: # Off site Traffic and Circulation Air Quality Hydrology/Drainage and Water Quality Public Services and Utilities Hazardous Materials Mitigation measure for the above-noted project phase implemented. No further action is required. Mitigation measure for the above-noted project phase is not fully implemented. Further action required. (Please explain below'} The mitigation measure for the above-noted project phase is not in compliance. Further action required. (Please explain below) Completed by: Name: Title: Date; Approved by: Name: Title: Date: 1B/19090001 .MMP Zg£'ON A-1 DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission STAFF REPORT Rick Gomez, Community Development Director Dan Coleman, Principal Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 93-02A - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A proposed amendment to change the land use map from Industrial Park and General Industrial to Mixed Use and Open Space and other related amendments in conjunction with the Subarea 18 Specific Plan for 380 acres of land generally located north of 4th Street and west of Milliken Avenue - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 39; 210-361-01 through 26. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 93-03 - GENERAL DYNAMICS A proposed amendment to create a new Subarea 18, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue, and other related amendments to provide consistency with the Subarea 18 Specific Plan - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 39; 210-361-01 through 26. SUMMARY: These amendments are part of a series of applications concerning the preparation of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan for the redevelopment of 380 acres of land that would include recreational, co~ercial, and retail facilities surrounding an 18-hole public golf course. ~he proposed amendments to the General Plan and Industrial Specific Plan are necessary for consistency with the Subarea 18 Specific Plan. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: ?roject: The Subarea 18 Specific Plan proposes a multi-use development composed of 11 interrelated Planning Areas organized around a central golf course amenity. Distinquishing elements of the concept plan include an 18-hold championship golf course with clubhouse and related training facilities, a hotel/conference center, possible family-oriented recreation/retail/entertainment facility, a mixed-use commercial center, and a Metrolink Station. ITEMS D & E PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 93-02A & ISPA 93-03 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 2 B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning (Exhibit "B"): North - South - East - West - Industrial; Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (Subarea 9) Vacant; Ontario Center Specific Plan Industrial and Office; General Industrial (Subarea 10, 11) and Industrial Park (Subarea 12) Industrial and Office; General Industrial (Subarea 10, 11) and Industrial Park (Subarea 6) C. General Plan Designations (Exhibit "C"): 'Project Site - General Industrial and Industrial Park North - Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial South - Ontario Center Specific Plan (City of Ontario) East - General Industrial and Industrial Park West General Industrial and Industrial Park Site Characteristics: The project site currently includes 300 acres of vineyards, 5 acres of unpaved city road right-of-way that is proposed to be vacated, and three existing buildings on 75 acres. The site is bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the existing A. T. & S. F. Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue (see Exhibit "A"). The southerly project boundary is also the northerly boundary of the City of Ontario. ANALYSIS: The current General Industrial and Industrial Park land use designations were intended to permit a wide range of activities that include manufacturing, warehouse distribution, and office uses. In addition, the Industrial Area Specific Plan land use activities currently permitted include office, business support, convenience retail, entertainment and recreation. This broad mix of land uses was intentional to provide a transition from heavier intensity uses (i.e., heavy industrial) to less intense uses (i.e., office, retail) and ensure compatibility with the approved comercial uses south of the site in the City of Ontario. Land Use Changes: The current land use designations of General Industrial and Industrial Park are proposed to be changed to Open Space for the 174 acres of golf course and driving range. The Open Space designation would ~ consistent with the General Plan's designation for the Red Hill Country Club golf course. Such a designation would recognize and preserve the ()pen space character of the course, see Exhibits "D" and "E." In order to expand the variety of comercial and recreational uses contemplated within Subarea 18, and to encourage development which combines different, yet compatible uses, a new land use category entitled '"Mixed Use" is proposed for the balance of the site, approximately 206 acres. The Mixed Use category would permit a wide range of co~ercial, office, and industrial activities, including medium, light, and custom manufacturing; research and development; office; recreation; and commercial. When built next to high activity nodes along major £,,%. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT GPA 93-02A & ISPA 93-03 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 3 transportation corridors, such as Milliken Avenue, mixed use development furthers General Plan goals to facilitate public transit or other alternative transportation modes. Circulation Change: The project proposes vacation of Cleveland Avenue between 4th Street and 6th Street to accom~nodate the large open space needed for the golf course. Cleveland Avenue exists as an 88-foot secondary arterial to serve local area traffic between 4th Street and 7th Street. The reduced traffic levels resulting from the golf course eliminates the need for Cleveland Avenue south of 6th Street. Miscellaneous Changes: A number of changes to the General Plan and Industrial Area Specific Plan text and maps are needed for consistency with the Subarea 18 Specific Plan. These changes are minor in nature and are not considered significant. A full description of these changes can be found in the attached Resolutions. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project. See related item on agenda for complete staff report. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property has been posted, and notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project site. RECOF~4ENDATION: Staff recon~ends that the Planning Co~nission recom~%end approval of General Plan Amendment 93-02A and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amen(iment 93-03 through adoption of the attached resolutions. G:DC:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Project Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Exhibit "C" - Existing General Plan Land Use Designations Exhibit "D" - Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations Exhibit "E" - Existing Industrial Area Specific Plan Land Use Designations Exhibit "F" - Proposed Industrial Area Specific Plan Land Use Designations Resolution for General Plan Amendment 93-02A Resolution for Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03 LEGEND Pro~:t Lotion Rancho Cur..vnon~ City Michel Brandman Az.toc~atm · 1/94 Not to Scale exhibit Project Vicinin' Map Rancflo Cucamo~ga IASI3 Sub--Area 1 8 S~eohc P~an LEGEND ~'~--~ Light Indumial/Offlce Light Indusreal/General IndusmaffC~ce Michagl Br'~dm~ Associates · 1194 li~ Indusm. I ~ V~ney-uds Vacant 8o0' 400' 0' 800' ~ exhibit Existing Onsite and Surrounding Lan Uses Ranclio Cucamooga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speo$,c P~an ~., City of Ontario FOURTH LEGEND Indusreal Park General lndusuiai Mich~:l Branclm~ Assodates · 1/94 Hc~ Indusmai s~x, ai ~d Sub.-Az~ 18 General Plan Land exhibi~ C Use Designations Rar~:ho Cucamo~ga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spec,h< P~a~ £ ~ ! ! ! I I I I LEGEND IncluuriaJ Patk ~"~ G~'al Indusreal Midol Brant[man A~aam · 1/94 General Plan Land Use Amendment FCX~ BLVD.* 1-10 LEGEND ./ Industrial Area Specific Plan Land Use Designanon FOOTHILL BLVD.* 1-10 LEGEND I"-"~ C~mmo'c:~ ~ Haven Overhy District q Michael Bra~dma.n As~:~at~ · Industrial Park I~'""~""~/~ Gcn~'a~ Industrig Minimum Impact Industrial ~krea Specific Plan Land Use Amendrfie~: RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 93-02A, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN TO ADD A NEW LAND USE CATEGORY OF "MIXED USE," TO AMEND THE LAND USE MAP FROM INDUSTRIAL PARK AND GENERAL INDUSTRIAL TO MIXED USE AND OPEN SPACE, AND OTHER RELATED AMENDMENTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN FOR 380 ACRES OF LAND BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY 4TH STREET, ON THE EAST BY MILLIKEN AVENUE, ON THE NORTH BY THE A. T. & S. F. (METROLINK) RAILROAD, AND ON THE WEST BY CLEVELAND AVENUE AND UTICA AVENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, 08; 210-081-22, 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, through 39; and 210-361-01 through 26. A. Recitals. 1. General Dynamics has filed an application for General Plan Amendment No. 93-02A 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 February 23, and March 23, 1994, The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted workshops on the application. 3. On April 27, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted and concluded 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 380 acres of land, located west of Milliken Avenue, between 4th Street and the A. T. & S. F. Railroad and is presently vacant, except for 75 acres developed with three industrial office buildings. Said property is currently under contiguous ownership and is designated as General Industrial and Industrial Park; PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 93-02-A - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 2 b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Heavy Industrial and is developed. The property to the west is designated General Industrial and Industrial Park and is primarily developed. The property to the east is designated General Industrial and Industrial Park and is primarily developed. The property to the south is designated the Ontario Center Specific Plan and is vacant; c. The application is part of a series of applications relating to a Subarea 18 Specific Plan, which contemplates a broad range of uses, such as recreational, hotel/conference center, retail, restaurant, and entertainment, as well as office, research and development, and light industrial uses surrounding an 18-hole public golf course; d. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan or the other elements of the General Plan and will provide for development , within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; e. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element and all other elements of the General Plan; and f. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and, concurrently with this application by separate Resolution, is recommended to the City Council for certification. 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; and b. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and will not result in any internal inconsistencies with the General Plan. The detailed findings of conformity set forth in Exhibit "F" hereto are hereby incorporated by reference. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of General Plan Amendment No. 93-02A to amend the land use map from General Industrial and Industrial Park to Mixed Use and Open Space for 380 acres of land at the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and 4th Street (see Exhibit "A") and amending the text of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, as follows: a. The following new major land use category shall be added, preceding Public Facilities, on page III-16, to read as follows: PL~NNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 93-02-A - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 3 Mixed Use: The opportunity exists to mix different, but compatible, land uses and activities within mixed use developments. Mixed use developments are ideally suited for land within the downtown or adjacent to high activity nodes along major transportation corridors. The concept capitalizes on the ability of a mixed-use project to provide an integrated environment, to respond to evolving market conditions, to offer a variety of physical development types, and to create strong pedestrian orientation. Mixed use projects typically incorporate a mix of office, commercial, light industrial, and research oriented activities, and residential uses all clustered together into unified, highly identifiable developments. Entertainment, recreational, cultural, and convention uses may also be part of the mix. These projects bring an "urban scale" and are intended to become focal points within the community. Uses may be stacked within a single multi-use building or individually arranged together on a parcel. When built adjacent to, or in conjunction with, public transit facilities, a built-in ridership base is established." b. The following third paragraph shall be added to Space subsection, page III-16, to read as follows: "Man-made open spaces, such as parks, golf courses, and common open spaces within residential housing projects, also help maintain an open character within the City. In particular, large open spaces, such as Heritage Park, Red Hill Park, the future Central Park, the future Subarea 18 golf course and the Red Hill Country Club golf course, provide significant vistas, and provide animal habitat, vegetation, and water resources in areas that would otherwise be developed without such features." c. The third paragraph under Location of Open Space, shall read as follows: "The Foothill and Industrial Area Specific Plans, in their designs and use limitations, will encourage openness and quality within development projects, and also continue linkages of open space throughout the community. A large public golf course is planned to stretch from 4th Street to the A. T. & S. F. Railroad, west of Milliken Avenue, as the central open space amenity of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan." the Open page IV-19, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. GPA 93-02-A - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 4 d. The Figure III-1 Land Use Plan and the Table III-2 Land Use Summary shall be revised to reflect the land use changes within the Subarea 18 Specific Plan (see Exhibit "A"). e. The Figure III-3 Circulation Plan shall be revised to delete Cleveland Avenue (see Exhibit "B"). f. The Figure III-4 Transit Concept Plan shall be revised to indicate a rail commuter line along the A. T. & S. F. Railroad and a rail commuter transfer station on the west side of Milliken Avenue at the A. T. & S. F. Railroad (see Exhibit "C"). g. The Figure III-10 Community Design Resources shall be revised to indicate the approximately 150-acre golf course contemplated within the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, between 4th Street and the A. T. & S. F. Railroad, west of Milliken Avenue, as a "Major Parks and Recreation" feature (see Exhibit "D"). h. The Figure IV-4 Open Space Plan shall be revised to indicate the approximately 150-acre golf course contemplated with the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, between 4th Street and the A. T. & S. F. Railroad, west of Milliken Avenue, as a "Proposed Park" (see Exhibit "E"). 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Ci~y Qf Ontario ].()urUI .% LL'C ~:% LEGEND Industrial Pazk Genera] lndust,~ Mixed Use Open Sp~,' 800' 400' O' 8O0' EXHIBIT "A" i .'4 ·t ...... j ~, ~ I ~ I EXHIBIT "B" I1t11111111h' EXHIBIT GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY This Exhibit assesses how the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and the proposed amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan and General Plan (the "project") furthers the objectives and policies of the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and whether the project will obstruct the attainment of these objectives and policies. Rather than attempt to analyze each individual objective, policy, or program set forth in the General Plan -- a process which would detract from understanding how the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan relates to the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan as a whole -- the relationship between the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is discussed within the context of each of the principal components comprising the General Plan -- Land Use and Development, Environmental Resources, and Public Health and Safety -- with more detailed discussion reserved for those specific policies and objectives that are particularly germane to assessing the changes proposed relative to the current Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) and General Plan land use designations. A. Land Use and Development. 1. General Land Use Objectives. The General Plan identifies a numb=r of key land use objectives that "are aimed at creating a City that functions efficiently, is exciting to leave in, and makes the best use of its various resources." A number of these objectives have been incorporated as principal objectives of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, including: (i) encourage opportunities to mix different, but compatible land uses and activities; (ii) provide recreational, cultural, and employment opportunities to meet the needs of the community; {iii) coordinate industrial development to encourage an integrated industrial area with maximum flexibility and access to the regional circulation network; (iv) promote land use patterns that encourage non-motorized modes of transportation; and (v) organize land uses to promote maximal opportunity for transit usage. The project promotes these important objectives by establishing a more flexible, better integrated array of proposed land uses within the context of a Specific Plan. The expanded variety and mixture of uses established under the Sub-Area Specific Plan, in conjunction with changes in market demand and increased commercial development on the southern edge of the IASP, are expected to promote the land 211877 [2575711 - 1 - 12-APR-94 00:34:21 use objectives identified in the General Plan, including those enumerated above. 2. General Land Use Policies. a. Industrial. The General Plan currently establishes three categories of industrial land uses: Industrial Park, General Industrial, and Heavy Industrial. The General Plan specifically reflects that the policies relating to industrial uses are "elaborated in the City's Industrial Area Specific Plan which outlines a much more detailed development program for this area." The General Plan describes "Industrial Park" uses as "planned grouped concentrations of industrial and research and development offices," which are "typically labor intensive, meaning that the number of employees per acre is high. The General Plan contemplates that these uses will be organized along major thoroughfares, including 4th Street, and "along the periphery of the industrial area and with convenient access to public transit." That portion of the project site currently located within IASP Sub-Area 12 is designated as Industrial Park under both the IASP and the General Plan. The IASP currently permits a variety of commercial uses within this Sub-Area, including professional/design services, administrative and office, research services, business support services, financial, insurance and real estate services, hotel, commercial and recreation facilities, including a golf course. The General Plan describes "General Industrial" land use as permitting a wide range of industrial activities including heavy commercial, and office uses. The General Plan states that "this land use is appropriate as a buffer between non-industrial uses and heavy industrial uses." That portion of the project site within current Sub-Areas 10 and 11 are designated "General Industrial" under the IASP and the General Plan. The IASP permits, or conditionally permits, office professional, design and research, indoor wholesale/retail commercial, and recreational facilities within this zone. Although all of the industrial uses and many of the commercial uses proposed under the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan are permitted or conditionally permitted under the current IASP Industrial Park, and General Industrial designations, one of the express objectives of this project is to eliminate what are perceived as artificial and arbitrary divisions between the three existing Sub-Areas (for example, 211877 [2575711 - 2 - 11-APR-9~ 23:46:30 a number of uses which may be permitted in Sub-Area 12 may be prohibited or only conditionally permitted in Sub-Area 10 or 11) . Specifically, by expanding the variety of commercial and recreational uses contemplated within the project site, the Property Owner intends to inject more creative and imaginative employment-generating designs and to help better integrate this portion of the southern boundary of the IASP with anticipated regional market trends. As a result, the Property Owner is proposing an amendment to the IASP ("IASP Amendment") to specifically incorporate the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and to concurrently amend the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment. While an amendment to the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment and the adoption of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would, alone, appear to ensure consistency, it was also felt that the three categories of industrial use currently identified in the General Plan, while specifically acknowledging the need to provide for labor intensive office and commercial uses and non-industrial transitions within the industrial category could be construed narrowly, and thereby discourage the General Plan objectives (noted above) to promote planning flexibility and the mixture of different, but compatible land uses. As a result, the Property Owner has proposed an additional amendment to the General Plan to add a new category of land use entitled "Mixed-Use." The Mixed-Use category permits a wide range of a commercial and industrial activities including, medium, light, and custom manufacturing, research and development, office, recreation, mixed-use commercial, retail, and general commercial. Because the proposed uses within the areas designated Mixed-Use under the Sub-Area Specific Plan will also be designated Mixed-Use under the General Plan Amendment, consistency will be ensured. b. Open Space. The General Plan provides that open space areas must be maintained "in order to protect valuable natural resources, and to prevent development in areas considered unsafe because of environmental constraints". The General Plan contains a variety of "written and mapped policies to ensure that the resources are managed so that posterity can enjoy them." The IASP currently does not contain any open space district designations, although the IASP does permit, or conditionally pezmit, golf course uses within each of the three Sub-Areas currently comprising the project site. 211877 [2575711 = 3 - 1 I-APR-94 23:46:31 Although the applicant's proposed amendment to the General Plan to reflect the IASP Amendment and the adoption of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would itself ensure consistency with the General Plan's policies relating to open space, the City has requested that instead of designating the Golf Course "Mixed-Use" along with the remainder of the Sub-Area 18, that this portion of the site be designated "Open Space". Because the current description of open space uses within the General Plan may be construed to refer specifically to the conservation of natural resources, an additional amendment to the definition of "Open Space" has been proposed to clarify that the Open Space designation may also include man-made open spaces, including golf course uses, within designated areas adjacent to residential, commercial, or industrial uses. The clarifying amendment will ensure project consistency with the General Plan. 3. Circulation. The General Plan establishes a circulation system for the City as a whole and the IASP area. The Circulation Plan established under the Sub-Area Specific Plan preserves this circulation system in all principal respects. Mowever, the proposed vacation of a portion of Cleveland Avenue south of 6th Street and the redesignation of Cleveland north of 6th Street from a secondary arterial with an 88-foot right-of-way to a 66-foot local industrial collector, does require a corresponding amendment to the General Plan Circulation Plan. Because the project EIR indicates that no traffic impacts will occur as a result of the vacation and redesignation of Cleveland, the conforming General Plan amendment will ensure consistency with the policies and objectives of the General Plan. 4. Public Facilities. The General Plan contains a variety of objectives and policies designed to ensure that adequate public facilities and services will be maintained as the City develops. The proposed project is not expected to have any substantial impact on the City's Parks and Recreational Plan, or on schools. The establishment of a golf course as a central feature of the Specific Plan will promote a number of General Plan policies concerning the encouragement of recreational uses. 5. Community DesiGn. The primary design goals identified in the General Plan are to promote the functional efficiency of the 211877 [2575711 -4- [ I-APR-94 23:46:32 City, improve the City's image and appearance and to use development to express community character. The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan promotes these primary objectives and the more detailed community design elements set forth in the General Plan by providing a unifying character to the project site through the adoption of a Specific Plan which incorporates a variety of land uses around a central golf course feature. Consistency is further ensured through the retention of existing City policies relating to performance standards, site development criteria, subdivision, master planning, and development and design review. Additionally, preservation of the principal features of the City Circulation Plan ensures that the objectives associated with maintaining travel routes will be promoted. The incorporation of project design features adjacent to the proposed Metrolink station further promotes these objectives. B. Environmental Resources. 1. Land Resources. This section of the General Plan contains a number of objectives and policies designed to promote proper soil management techniques and to prevent the premature elimination of agricultural land whenever feasible. The Sub-Area Specific Plan will not change the impact of development on the existing grape vineyard uses on the site. The loss of this agricultural use was previously acknowledged as inevitable when the IASP was first adopted. By requiring subsequent development to comply with applicable City policies and procedures concerning soil management and grading activities, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan ensures compliance with the General Plan land resource objectives and policies. 2. Water Resources. The General Plan contains several objectives and policies designed to protect and enhance water resources. Compliance with applicable City policies and procedures as a condition to subdivision and Design Review approval ensure compliance with these policies and objectives. The EIR for the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan concludes that no significant impacts to water resources will occur. 3. Open Space. The conforming amendments to the General Plan ensure consistency with the General Plan's policies and objectives concerning the preservation of open space. The 211877 [2575711 - 5 - 1 I-APR-94 23:46:32 establishment of a golf course will result in an increase in open space areas within the project site. 4. Enerq¥. The General Plan identifies the objective of encouraging more efficient use of energy resources. The project EIR incorporates a number of mitigation measures specifically intended to promote this objective. Compliance with applicable City policies and regulations as a condition to subdivisions and Design Review approvals further ensures consistency with the General Plan's energy objectives and policies. C. Public Health and Safetv. The General Plan sets forth a broad number of objectives and policies designed to ensure that subsequent development within the City will be sensitive to geologic, seismic, flood, fire, noise, air quality, crime, and emergency service concerns and hazards. The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan preserves development and regulatory procedures from the IASP and the City Development Code as a means to mitigate potential impacts in each of the areas identified in the General Plan. Additionally, each of these areas are explored in more detail in the project EIR, which indicates that the changes from the current designations under the IASP will not result in any substantial additional impacts to the environment. Although the EIR indicates that development of the project site (under either the proposed Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan or the current IASP designations) will result in new sources of construction and operational air emissions, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan contemplates the adoption of a transportation demand management strategy consistent with the policies identified in the General Plan. In particular, the location of industrial and commercial uses in proximity to the proposed Metrolink station provides a mechanism to ensure that non-motorized transportation policies will be achieved. The incorporation of numerous mitigation measures dealing with the suppression of particulate emissions and the promotion of energy conservation further ensures consistency with the General Plan air quality objectives and policies. 211877 [2575711 - 6 - 11-APR-94. 23:46:33 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 93-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN TO ESTABLISH A SUBAREA 18, AND OTHER RELATED AMENDMENTS, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN, FOR 380 ACRES OF LAND BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY 4TH STREET, ON THE EAST BY MILLIKEN AVENUE, ON THE NORTH BY THE A. T. & S. F. (METROLINK) RAILROAD, AND ON THE WEST BY CLEVELAND AND UTICA AVENUES, RANCHO CUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, AND 08; 210-081-22 AND 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, AND 39; AND 210-361-01 THROUGH 26. A. Recitals. 1. General Dynamics has filed an application for Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 93-03 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 February 23, and March 23, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted workshops on the application. 3. On April 27, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted and concluded 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 380 acres of land, located west of Milliken Avenue, between 4th Street and the A. T. & S. F. rail line and is presently vacant, except for 75 acres developed with three industrial office buildings. Said property is currently under contiguous ownership and is designated as General Industrial (Subareas 10 and 11) and Industrial Park (Subarea 12); PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ISPA 93-03 - GENERALLY DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 2 b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial (Subarea 9) and is developed. The property to the west is designated General Industrial (Subareas 10 and ll) and Industrial Park (Subarea 6) and is primarily developed. The property to the east is designated General Industrial (Subareas 10 and 11) and Industrial Park (Subarea 12) and is primarily developed. The property to the south is designated the Ontario Center Specific Plan and is vacant; c. The application is part of a series of applications relating to a Subarea 18 Specific Plan, which contemplates a broad range of uses, such as recreational, hotel/conference center, retail, restaurant, and entertainment, as well as office, research and development, and light industrial uses surrounding an 18-hole public golf course; d. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and with related development; e. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the General Plan; and f. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and, concurrently with this application by separate Resolution, is recommended to the City Council for certification. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the 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; and b. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. c. That the amendments to the Industrial Area Specific Plan are consistent with the objectives of the City's Development Code, Ordinance No. 211, adopted December 7, 1983. d. That the Subarea 18 Specific Plan submitted in conjunction with the proposed amendment provides for: (1) The development of community within the District that is allowable under alternate regulations; a comprehensively planned urban superior to development otherwise PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ISPA 93-03 - GENERALLY DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 3 (2) Development within the District in a manner consistent with the General Plan and related development and growth management policies of the City. (3) The construction, improvement, or extension of transportation facilities, public facilities, and public services required by development within the District. e. The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare; f. The actions taken and proposed to be taken by the City with respect to the proposed amendment and the corresponding change of zone have been and will be completed and reviewed in accordance with, and comply with, all applicable State and local laws and regulations. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03 to establish a Subarea 18 for 380 acres of land at the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and 4th Street (see Exhibit "A"), and amending the text of the Industrial Area Specific Plan per the attached Exhibit "B." 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: 1-10 LEGEND ~ ..... i Project Site Bounda~ Cemmetad Indratrial Puk ~"~ Gcncrd Induuml ~ Minim.m Impact Heavy Ind.snal Rancho Cucamonp-S-I>-,~'ca Six'title Plan 1000' Sub.--~ Bound~a ~ exhibit m~~ I ~ Industrial Area Specific Plan Land Use Amend nt Michaei Brandman ,~ate~ ' 1194 II. URBAN DESIGN CONCEPT This section deals with the physical appearance of the Industrial Area. While more specific urban design guidelines for the Area are incorporated in Part III, this section describes the overall, Area-wide design concept addressing physical form and appearance, open space network, special features and gateways. Figure II-8 summarizes the Area-wide urban design policies. Physical Form and Appearance The Industrial Area has been divided into 16 subareas, each of which is designated with one of the four Land Use Categories. The development standards specified for each of these subareas will distinguish them from each other by the types of uses permitted or conditionally permitted, parcel sizes, setback requirements, landscaping, performance requirements, vehicular and rail access, and parking provisions. The distinction of each subarea would serve as a mechanism to create and enhance the identity of each subarea. The Industrial Area forms a part of the community fabric by integration into an arterial roadway network which serves the entire City. The area's identity is further enhanced by the development of specially designed landscape themes at arterial roadway entry points into the plan area. Each land use category is further distinguished by general architectural themes based upon the planned land use intensity. While the themes may vary, hiqh quality of desiqn is expected in all land use cateqories of the Industrial Specific Plan. There are $6¢f six land use categories in the Industrial Specific Plan: INDUSTRIAL PARK CATEGORY has been designated for five f5) subareas. Primary uses in this category include custom light manufacturing, light wholesale storage and distribution, administrative and office, and professional services. This area is reserved for firms seeking attractive and pleasant working environment and a location which has prestige value. High quality architecture is required and site planning must emphasize a pedestrian oriented, campus-like setting with the greatest amount of landscaping. The development of prefab, all metal for sheathing of building is considered inappropriate for this category. The Industrial Park category is typically located adjacent to special boulevards (major thoroughfares) to enhance major gateways into the community and create a high quality image. In addition, the Industrial Park category is used as a transition from industrial to residential uses. II-4 GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY has been established for seven ~7~ subareas. This category is intended to accommodate a wide range of light to medium manufacturing and wholesale, storage, distribution uses. Typically, administrative and office and professional services are not allowed to reduce potential land use conflicts. Design and technical standards are less demanding than the Industrial Park category, but safeguards are provided to ensure a pleasant, well functioning environment. The development of prefab, all metal for sheathing of buildings is considered inappropriate for this category. MINIMUM IMPACT/HEAVY INDUSTRIAL is designated for Subarea 9. This category provides for heavy manufacturing and wholesale, storage, distribution uses which do not have a significant aesthetic impact on the surrounding area. Not permitted in this area are massive outside structures such as cranes, or unscreened storage of raw or finished products. Landscaping requirements in Subarea g along Arrow Highway have been increased to create a smoother transition to adjoining industrial park and general industrial property. HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CATEGORY has been designated in Subarea 15. Permitted uses include Medium, Minimum Impact, and Heavy Industrial Manufacturing and each of the wholesale, storage, distribution uses. Design and technical standards in this category allow massive outdoor structures and open air storage in an unscreened manner. A high degree of rail usage may also be typical. MIXED USE CATEGORY has been designated in a portion of Subarea 18. This category is intended to encourage the mix of different, but compatible, land uses and activities within a single ~ntegrated development. Mixed use developments are ideally suited adjacent to high activity nodes along major transportation corridors, particularly adjacent to public transit facilities to establish a built-in ridership. Mixed use projects can incorporate a wide range of commercial and industrial activities, including medium, light, and custom manufacturing; research and development; office; recreation; and commercial. OPEN SPACE has been designated for a portion of Subarea 18. Permitted uses include golf courses, outdoor recreation areas, and parks. The Plan also emphasizes the following areas: THE HAVEN AVENUE OVERLAY DISTRICT is located on both sides of Haven from Foothill Boulevard south to 4th Street. As the City develops, Haven Avenue will become a major north-south travel route and has a potential for high end office development with the unique combination of direct access to the Ontario Airport and Interstate 10 freeway. The standards in the Overlay District are designed to enhance Rancho Cucamonga's image by providing an intensive, high quality and prestigious gateway into the community. A progressive, sophisticated, and urban style of development is required and special site planning and landscaping requirements are included to enhance the pedestrian environment and create a campus-like atmosphere. II-5 INTERSTATE 15 {Devore Freeway} runs north-south through the industrial area and borders seven (?) subareas in each land use category except General Industrial/Rail Served. Since this area is directly south of the future regional mall and related commercial activities at 1-15 and Foothill Boulevard, and views along the freeway have a major impact on the image and identity of Rancho Cucamonga. Highest consideration should be given to design aspects that affect a positive'image of the community as viewed from the freeway. Special consideration are contained in the Development Standards of each subarea which abutts the 1-15 freeway. (An 1-15 Overlay District could provide special development criteria to eliminate unsightly views.) II-6 Open Space Network Elements that constitute open space include parks, outdoor recreation areas, creeks and channels, transmission corridors, and stormwater retention areas. In addition, to the extent that they provide amenities, development setback areas, and street landscaping with associated pedestrian and bicycle paths, also compliment open space. As indicated in Vigure II-8, easements for creeks and channels and powerline corridors traverse the Industrial Area, linking them with the City's region's, and National Forest open space areas. Directly south of 4th Street between Cucamonga Creek and Turner Avenue is Guasti Regional Park, comprised of approximately 200 acres, to which both Cucamonga and Deer Creek Channels connect. While all of these linear open space components run north/south, the Plan proposes east/west connections of open space, incorporating the ~4 ~1 ~ ~IVI ~14~ setback requirements along major arterials, as well as related buffer landscaping provisions along certain land use edges, as elaborated in Part III. The private open space areas, developed internally within the planned industrial projects, should connect with the Area-wide open space network wherever possible, to avoid fragmentation of open space to unify the Area- wide appearance. The Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Park features 42 acres of active open space in the approximate location of Arrow and Rochester. A proposed !O acre neighborhood park is located within the Industrial Area southwest of Arrow and Haven. A five acre mini-park is proposed along 6th Street between Hellman and Archibald. A 150 acre public golf course is proposed west of Milliken Avenue, between 4th Street and the A.T. & S.F. tracks. The course represents the largest contiguous open space element in the entire industrial area. II-10 Special Features Special features refer to areas of visual, historic, and activity focal points within and near the Industrial Area. These are also shown in Figure lI~ II-lO. These features should be respected and development and redevelopment around them should compliment and enhance their scale and character. The coordinated improvements of the special features and the corridors along which they are located, should further help unify the overall appearance of the Industrial Area and City. The old Cucamonga historic commercial center at the intersection of Foothill and Archibald and the location of Thomas Winery at the intersection of Foothill and Vineyard, are also of historic interest. A 42 acre Rancho Cucamonga Adult Sports Park featuring year-round sports activities, including the Rancho Cucamonga Stadium, is located on the west side of Rochester Avenue, south of Foothill Boulevard. R 150-acre public golf course is proposed to stretch from 4th Street to the A.T. & S.F. tracks, ~est of Milliken. The course will provide significant vistas from 6th Street. Also along Foothill Boulevard near its interchange at 1-15 is proposed a major regional shopping center (over one million square feet of floor space containing six department stores on approximately 100 acres of land). This would be a significant commercial activity center of regional impact. Gateways Certain points of access to the City will, by use, become major entrances to the Industrial Area. A significant portion of the visitors' and users' impressions of the Industrial Area are influenced by conditions at these locations. Hence, it is imperative that special considerations be given to the development and design of these gateways areas. As shown in Figure II-1, gateway areas are identified along the major roadways that form the Industrial Area (and City) boundaries--4th Street, Foothill Boulevard, Etiwanda Avenue, and Arrow Route. The gateway of primary importance is located at the intersection of Haven and 4th. Other major gateways to the Industrial Area LAND USE PLAN Use of the industrial lands is organized to provide a broad range of industrial development opportunities ranging from light/industrial type of accommodations to sites for heavy, rail-served industrial plants. Based on consideration of road and rail access, the relationship to surrounding non-industrial uses, City-wide plan policies and the parcelization pattern, land within the Industrial Area is assigned to major land use categories: Industrial Park General Industrial Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial Heavy Industrial/Rail-Served Mixed Use Open Space The definitions of the ~6W~ six industrial land use categories follows in Table II-1, and the distribution of these uses are shown in Figure II-1 Land Use Plan. A more detailed definition of permitted and conditionally permitted uses is listed in Part III. II-15 TABLE II-! INDUSTRIAL LAND USE CATEGORIES INDUSTRIAL PARK GROUP. Land is reserved for industrial firms seeking an attractive and pleasant working environment and a location which has prestige value. Approximately ~2~ 1,095 acres have been allocated to this use~ 6! %~ ~6~. Industrial Park group designation permits light industrial uses, office and administration facilities, research and development laboratories, limited types of warehousing, as well as support businesses and commercial service uses. The Industrial Park areas are characterized by a high employment density. The development and design standards are developed to protect lands in this use group from development which is inappropriate due to either function, appearance or environmental affects. GENERAL INDUSTRIAL GROUP. This group provides for the widest possible range of light and medium industrial type activity, including manufacturing, assembling, fabrication, wholesaling, heavy commercial, and office uses; totaling approximately I~7~ 2,161 acres~ 64 ~% 6! ~ I~6W~7 ~ 1~6. This land use category is appropriate as a buffer between non-industrial uses and heavy industrial uses. In these areas, the applicable development and design standards are less demanding than those of the industrial park areas, but safeguards are provided to ensure a pleasant well-functioning environment. The required land area per parcel is also less demanding than other industrial areas so as to accommodate smaller firms. MINIMUM IMPACT HEAVY INDUSTRIAL GROUP. Approximately 537 acres 6~ ))% 6! )~6 is reserved for minimum impact heavy industrial uses. The development standards are designed to provide for heavy industrial uses which will not significantly impact on the surrounding area. Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial activities include manufacturing, compounding, processing, fabrication, warehousing, storage and freight handling. Uses typical of this group include but are not limited to forge shops, steel milling facilities, plastic plants, steel fabrication, metal fabricating facilities, woodworking facilities, heavy machine shops and chemical storage and distribution. Not permitted within the area are uses which require massive structures outside of buildings or unscreened open air storage of larger quantities of raw, semi-refined, or finished products. II-16 TABLE II-I ~Continued~ INDUSTRIAL LAND USE CATEGORIES HEAVY INDUSTRIAL GROUP. Approximately 675 acres 6~ 7~% of land east of Devore Freeway is reserved for Heavy Industrial Uses. The development standards are designed to provide for all heavy industrial uses. Heavy Industrial activities include manufacturing, compounding, processing, fabrication, warehousing, storage, and freight handling. Use characteristics of this group would include large structures to facilitate processing and open air storage of large amount of raw or semi-refined products. Uses within this area typically include but are not limited to; vehicular assembly plants, power plants, concrete product manufactures and batch plants. MIXED USE. Approximately ~27 acres of land west of Milliken Avenue, between 4th and the A.T. & S.F. tracks, is reserved for mixed-use development. This land use category is characterized by various combinations of commercial, office, recreation, and industrial activities within an integrated development project. OPEN SPACE. Approximately 150 acres of land west of Milliken Avenue, between 4th and the A.T. & S.F. tracks, is reserved for open space. This land use category is characterized by natural or man-made open space which creates an attractive and pleasant environment for surrounding businesses. Uses within this area typically include golf courses, outdoor recreation areas and parks. Roadway Cross-Sections Roadway Network Modifications Cross-sections for roadway requirements were determined based on mid-block roadway capacities. Major arterials with 120 foot right-of-way in the Industrial Area include: o North/south roadways of Haven Avenue, Day Creek Boulevard, and Milliken Avenue. East/west roadways of Foothill Boulevard, 6th Street between Haven Avenue and Interstate 15 and 4th Street. Major arterials with 100 foot right-of-way include: North/south roadways of Archibald Avenue, Rochester Avenue, Buffalo Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue. o East/west roadway of Arrow Route. Secondary arterials with 88 foot right-of-way include: o Vineyard Avenue, Hellman Avenue, ~)~)~W~ A~ and 6th Street west of Haven Avenue. These streets will form the basic 1/2 mile grid system. The other streets, which will further divide the circulation network into 1/4 and 1/8 mile grids, will have rights-of-way ranging from 66 feet to 88 feet. Figure II-4 presents mid-block cross- sections of each street classification type with lane requirements. The following roadway modifications are recommended within the Industrial area. New Rochester. As discussed in the City-wide and Industrial Area Traffic Study and incorporated in the Industrial Area Plan, Rochester Avenue from 4th Street to $th Street should be terminated north of 4th Street and connected to Buffalo Avenue. This will provide adequate distance for turning lanes between the Rochester and 1-15 ramp intersections along 4th and (in the future) 6th Streets. II-24 FIGURE 11-5STREET CLASSIFICATION MAJOR ARTERIAL DIVIDED (120 ft. ROW) Foot hi 11 Haven Milliken 4th~ 94 6th 1~0 ~. ROW between Haven ~ 1-15 Day Creek Blvd. MAJOR ARTERIAL (1OO ft. ROW) o Archihal d o Arrow o Buffalo o Etiwanda* o Rochester south of Foothill ft. 100 ft. ROW *Median island between Arrow and Foothill. 14' II-24 SECONDARY (88 ft. ROW) o Vineyard o Hellman / o 6th West of Haven o Turner o Jersey o 8th West of Vineyard e4 ft. 88 ft. ROW ALL LOCAL INDUSTRIAL (66 ft. ROW) o 8th (east of Vineyard) o 9th o Center o Santa Anita o Old Rochester o Baker o Other Local Streets 44 ft. ft. ROW Figure 11-6 DIRECTIONAL LANE AND RO.W. REQUIREMENTS AT INTERSECTIONS FOOTHILL BLVD. ARROW ROUTE 6TH STREET 132 "~1 131 131 131 4TH STREET 131 1 -,-~' - MILLIKEN TABLE II-4 LOCATIONS OF MEDIAN LEFT TURN OPENINGS ON MAJOR DIVIDED HIGHWAYS MAJOR STREET Haven Avenue Milliken Avenue Foothill Boulevard 6th Street 4th Street MEDIAN OPENING LOCATIONS Foothill Boulevard, Civic Center Drive, Arrow Route, Jersey Boulevard, 7th Street, 6th Street, Trademark Street, 4th Street. Foothill Boulevard, Day Creek Boulevard Extension, Arrow Route, Jersey Boulevard, 7th Street, 6th Street, 5th Street, 4th Street. Haven Avenue, Aspen Avenue, Spruce Avenue, Elm Avenue, Milliken Avenue, 1200' E/O Milliken Avenue, 1000' W/O Rochester Avenue, Rochester Avenue, Day Creek Boulevard, Route 15, Etiwanda Avenue, Cornell Avenue, East Avenue. Haven Avenue, Utica Avenue, Cleveland Avenue, 1300' E/O Cleveland Avenue, Milliken Avenue, Pittsburgh Avenue, 950' E/O Pittsburgh Avenue, Buffalo Avenue, Rochester Avenue, Old Rochester Avenue/Route 15. Archibald Avenue, Lucas Ranch Road, Turner Avenue, Center Avenue, Haven Avenue, Utica Avenue, ~l~ A~~! 1300' E/O Utica Avenue, 1300' W/O Milliken Aven MilliKen Avenue, Pittsburgh Avenue, Buffalo Avenue, Rou'~u 15. II-33 TABLE II1-1 (Continued) SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY SUBAREA SUBAREAS HO~ 1 :::::::ClA::: :::::: :::::: ::::::::: ::::: :: :::: :::::::? ::::::: ::: ::? ::::::::::?::: ::: :::: Agricultural/Nursery Supplies & Services P P P P P P P P Animal Care c c c c c c Automotive Fleet Storage c c c c c c Automotive Rental/Leasing P P P c c C P c c C Automotive/Light Truck Repair-Minor P C P C C P P P P Automotive/Truck Repair-Major P C P c P P C c c Automotive Sales c c c c Automotive Service Court c Automotive Service Station c c C c c c c c ¢ c c c Building Contractor's Office & Yards p c P c c P P P P P Building Contractor's Storage Yard P Building Maintenance Service 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 P P P P P P P P Business Support Services P P c P P C P P P c C P P P P c P P Communication Services p p p P P P P c P P P P c P P Convenience Sales &Services c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c Eating & Drinking Establishments P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Entertainment C c C c c c C c c Extensive Impact Commercial c Fast FoodSales C C C c C C c C c c c Financial, Insurance & Real Estate Services p c c p P p c c P P P Food & Beverage Sales c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c Funeral & Crematory Services c C C Heavy Equipment Sales & Rentals C C C C c C C c Hotel/Motel C P P P P P Indoor Wholesale~Retail Commercial C C C C c C C Laundry services P P P P P P P Medical/Health Care Services P C C C C C C C C C c P C Personal Services c C c c c c c C c C c c c Petroleum Products Storage c c c c c c Recreation Facilities C C c c C c C c P c C C P P P P P Repair Services P P C P P p p p p p P c Specialty Building Supplies & Home Improvement C NOTES: IP - Industr~aJ Pa~ t-K3 - Haven Ave O~e~lay Dis;~-t GI Gefleral Indus~aJ MI/HI - Minimum Impac~ Heavy Industhai HI - Heavy Industrial P - Permitted Use C - Conditionally Permitted Use [--'1 ' Non-marked Uses Not Perm~ed Revised:6/03/92 111-5.A TABLE II1-1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY SUBAREA USE TYPES MANUFACTU RING Custom Light Medium Heavy Minimum Impact Heavy PPPPPPPP PPPPPPPP CCC P C SUBAREAS ~ 1 3 4 I 7 8 9 ~101111 13114 16 17 /~~ PPPPP PP PPPPP PP PPP PPP P P P Administrative&Office P c C c P P C C P C C P P Professional/Design Services P c c c P P c c P c c P p Research Services p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p WHOLESALE, STORAGE & DISTRIBUTION :~:: ;':::~;::!::::::::::: ::~i:.: ?::.: ::.::::: :: :::: ~:i::: Public Storage Light Medium Heavy MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITIES Collection Facilities Processing Facilities Scrap Operation CIVIC Administrative Civic Services Cultural Extensive Impact Utility Facilities Flood Control/Utility Corridor Public Assembly Public Safety & Utility Services Religious Assembly CCPCC PCCC CP P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P p CPPCP PPPP PPP C PC P PPPPP PPPP PPP C CCCC CCC C PP PP PPP PPPP PP P C CC CCC CC C C CCC C PPPP PPPP PPP CC CC CCC CCCC CC C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C CC CC CCC CCCC CC NOTES: IP - Indust~aJ Pa~k - Haven Overlay Distnc! GI - General Industrial MI/Ht - Mimmurn Impact Heavy Indus~al HI - Heavy ~ndus~'~al Permitted Use Conditionally Permitted Use Non-ma~ked Uses not Permitted Revised: 6/03/92 111-5 SECONDARY (88 ft. ROW) o Vineyard o Mellman o 6thI East of Derore Freeway o Turner o Jersey sL'f2 ft.I 23-30 ft. Min. ROW ~ SotlJeck from P.L, 3l ft. Stroeteempe 1See Subarea 15, Special Consideration LOCAL INDUSTRIAL (66 ft. ROW) 8th 9th Center Santa Anita (O1 d) Rochester 7th West of Haven ~;co. L b ft. ~. ~0 It. Min. ~S ft. PART IV OVERLAY DISTRICTS & SUBAREA DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INTRODUCTION This part provides development standards for the individual subareas of the I.S.P. and for specific sections of Haven Avenue which crosses through the industrial area. Because of the City-wide significance of Haven Avenue as the major entry into the City, the Haven Overlay District provisions have been placed at the beginning of this part followed by those of the subarea's. The purpose of preparing subarea development standards is to identify the most prominent development standards applied within each of the 18 subareas in the industrial area. For each subarea the following categories have been identified and discussed: - Land Use Designation - Primary Function - Permitted Uses - Conditional Uses - Access and Circulation - Minimum Parcel Size - Setback Requirements - Landscape Area Requirements - Performance Standards - Special Considerations The list described above does not intend to cover every specific development requirement which may be utilized in developing within the industrial area, but does provide a quick overview of the major development considerations within each subarea. Any person interested in developing within the boundaries of the Specific Plan should refer to both Parts II and III of this plan for an indepth discussion of all the development constraints, opportunities, and standards. Any special conditions which may provide exception or modification to development requirement are discussed within the "Special Consideration" topic of each subarea. IV-1 a3ZS3HOOa N3A~H SUBAREA 10 (Continued) Access and Circulation 120' Right-of-Way - Milliken 66' Right-of-Way - Old Rochester 7th Street All other Local Streets Cleveland Minimum Parcel Size One (1) acre Setback Requirements (Measured from ulti- mate face of curb) Landscaping Required Average Landscaping Parking Building Milliken 45' 25' 45' (Old) Rochester 25' 15' 25' 7th and all other ..... ' local streets 10% of the net lot area IV -66 SUBAREA 10 (Continued) Performance Standards Noise: The maximum allowable noise level of any use shall not exceed 75Ldn as measured at the lot line of the lot containing tlqe use. Where a use occupies a lot abutting residentially zoned land, the noise level shall not exceed 65 Lbd~ as measured at the common lot line. Noise caused motor vehicles and trains are exempted from this standard. Vibration: All uses shall be operated so as not to generate vibration discernible without instruments by the average person beyond the lot upon which the source is located. Vibration caused by motor vehicles, trains, and temporary construction or demolition is exempted from this standard. Particulate Matter and Air Contaminants: In addition to compliance with the Air Quality Maintenance District (A(~lD) standards, all uses shall be operated so as not to emit particulate matter or air contaminants which are readily detectable without instruments by the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing such uses. Odor: All uses shall be operated so as not to emit matter causing unpleasant odors which are perceptible to the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing such uses. Special Considerations: Humidity, Heat and Glare: All uses shall be operated so as not to produce humidity, heat, glare or high- intensity illumination which is perceptible without instruments by the average person beyond the lot line of any lot containing such uses. Parcels which adjoin existing or proposed lead/spur rail lines as indicated on the Subarea Map are required to be developed in accordance with Rail Service Standards (Part III, Section G, Appendix D). IV -67 SUBAREA 11 (Continued) Conditional Uses Access and Circulation Administrative and Office Professi onal/Desi gn Services Public Storage Animal Care Automotive Fleet Storage Automotive Service Station Convenience Sales and Services Fast Food Sales Financial, Insurance and Real Estate Services Food and Beverage Sales Heavy Equipment Sales and Rentals Indoor Wholesale/Retail Commercial Medical/Heal th Care Services Personal Services Petroleum Products Storage Processing Facil i ties Recreation Facil iti es Extensive Impact Utility Facilities Publ ic Assembly Public Safety and Util i ty Services Religious Assembly 120' Right-Of-Way - 6th Street Milliken SUBAREA 1l (Continued) 66' Right-Of-Way - 7th Street lwest of Rochester) All other Local Streets Cleveland Utica Minimum Parcel Size One-half (1/2) acre Setback Requirements (Measured from ulti- mate face of curb) Average Landscaping Parking Building 6th 45' 25' 45' Milliken " " " New Rochester " " " Cleveland ~25' ~15' ~25' 7th and all 25' other local streets 15' ~5' Landscaping Requirements Performance Standards 12% of the net lot area Noise: The maximum allowable noise level of any use shall not exceed 75 _ as measured at the lot line of 'tt~- the lot containing e use. Where a use occupies a lot abutting residentially zoned land, the noise level shall not exceed 65 _ as measured at the common lot · L ,, line. No~se caused ~J motor vehicles and trains are Y exempted from this standard. Vibration: All uses shall be operated so as not to generate vibration discernible without instruments by the average persons beyond the lot upon which the source is located. Vibration caused by motor vehicles, trains, and temporary construction or demolition is exempted from this standard. IV-71 SUBAREA 12 Land Use Designation Industrial Park Primary Function Permitted Uses Conditional Uses This area will provide for a high quality character to several entryways to the City. This area will also provide an opportunity for tourist oriented uses such as hotels and motels which relate to the airport activities. The subarea is located east of ~4~ Milliken, west of Devore Freeway, south of future alignment of 5th Street to 4th Street and extends along Milliken to 6th Street. Custom Manufacturing Light Manufacturing Administrative and Office Professi onal/Desi gn Services Research Services Light Wholesale, Storage and Distribution Buil ding Maintenance Services Business Supply Retail & Services Business Support Services Communi cati on Services Eating and Drinking Establishments Financial, Insurance and Real Estate Services Hotel/Motel Recreational Facilities Administrative Civic Services Flood Control/Util ity Corridor Automotive Rental/Leasing Automotive Sal es Automotive Service Station Convenience Sales and Services Entertainment Fast Food Sales Food and Beverage Sales Medical/Heal th Care Services Personal Services Cul rural Public Assembly Public Safety and Util i ty Services Religious Assembly IV -73 SUBAREA 12 (Continued) Access and Circulation 120' Right-of-Way- 4th 6th Mil 1 i ken 100' Right-of-Way - New Rochester SUBAREA 12 (Continued) 66' Right Of Way - (Old) Rochester Pittsburgh All other Local Streets Minimum Parcel Size Two (2) acres on parcels adjacent to 4th Street; and One (1) acre on remaining area. Setback Requirements (Measured from face of curb) Lands caping Required Performance Standards Average Landscaping Parking Building 4th 45 ' 25' 45' 6t h " " " Milli ken " " " New Rochester " " " Old Rochester 25' 15' 25' Pittsburgh and " " " all other local streets 15% of net lot area Noise: The maximum allowable exterior noise level of any use shall not exceed 65Ldn as measured by any location on the lot occupied by such uses, Where a structure is occupied by more than one use, the noise level shall not be in excess of 60tthd~ as measured within the interior space of neighboring establishment. Noise caused by motor vehicles are exempted from this standard. IV -76 FIG. IV-20 III IIII II III A.T.& S.F.R.R 1 IIIII I $ub~re~ 11 t111 III I IIIIIIIII IIIIII 4th St CIRCULATION ~ 12~,' R.O.W. ~ I0~' R.O.W. 89' O~ LESS R.O.W. RAIL SERVICE TRAILS/ROUTES 0000 '~!~ ~(~AL MULT~-U~ ~/I~CIAL $TREET$CAI~.~ ---: ............ UTIUTy E ASEk~4~NT ...... POWEI~.INE ~11 ~ CIdEKe & CHANNELS I I 0 400~ ao0' 11QOt Note: Parcel lines end lot configurations are Ihowll is Ipproxlmetionl only. The ellis ihown moy n~ ~ currently OW~ nor lB ~l location lite T~ deMotion of I IIM It K Indlc~lon of I pr~ future no~ thor ~y ~luot~ ~er tim ml ~e C~ ~vel~. SUBAREA 18 Land Use Oesignation Primary Function General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Specific Plan g3-01 The function of the subarea is to provide for a mixed- use development oriented around an ]8-hole golf course. This subarea is located south of the A.T. & S.F. tracks, west of Milliken Avenue, north of 4th Street, and east of Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue. Uses allowed and development standards are addressed in a separate document: the General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Subarea 18 Specific Plan. In the event of a conflict between the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the Subarea 18 Specific Plan, the Subarea 18 Specific Plan shall control. IV-lOS DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: April 27, 1994 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; VACATION OF CLEVELAND AVENUE BETWEEN 4TH AND 6TH STREETS, TNOMAS STREET, VINCENT AVENUE, AND 7TH STREET EAST OF CLEVELAND AVENUE; AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 1464! - GENERAL DYNAMICS - A subdivision of 380 acres of land into 15 parcels in the General Industrial designation (Subareas 10 and 11) and the Industrial Park designation {Subarea 12) of the Industrial Area SpeciFic Plan, bounded on the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07, and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38, and 3g; and 210-361-01 through 26. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Action Requested: Approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map as shown on Exhibit m'B", to take effect upon City Council certification of the Environmental Impact Report and adoption of Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A and Industrial Specific Plan Amendment 93-03. B. Parcel Size: Parcel 1 57.06 ac Parcel 9 20.95 ac Parcel 2 28.22 Parcel 10 10.31 Parcel 3 22.29 Parcel 11 18.00 Parcel 4 17.00 Parcel 12 .~.00 Parcel 5 27.00 Parcel 13 88.48 Parcel 6 23.41 Parcel 14 3.58 Parcel 7 23.84 Parcel 15 7.25 Parcel 8 22.69 TOTAL: ~ ac Existing Zoning: General Industrial, Industrial Area Specific Plan Subareas 10 and 11, and Industrial Park, Industrial Area Specific Plan Subarea 12. Surrounding Land Use: North - Industrial buildings, partially developed South - Vacant East - Industrial Park West - Industrial buildings, partially developed ITEM F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PARCEL MAP 14647 April 27, 1994 PAGE 2 E. Surrounding General Plan and Development Code Designations: North - Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial, ISP Subarea 9 South - City of Ontario, Ontario Center Specific Plan East - General Industrial and Industrial Park, ISP Subareas 10, 11, 12 West - General Industrial and Industrial Park, ISP Subareas 6, 10, 11 Site Characteristics: The 380-acre site is primarily vacant, except for the westernmost 75 acres {bounded by 4th Street, Utica Avenue, 6th Street, and Cleveland Avenue) which contains three industrial office buildings. Existing street improvements, visible on the topography map (Exhibit "C"), are as follows: Milliken Avenue Full width pavement, landscaped median, curb and gutter both sides, sidewalk and street lights north of 6th Street Fourth Street Full width pavement, curb and gutter both sides Sixth Street Median, 38' pavement with curb and gutter on south side, 19' pavement with AC berm on north side, sidewalk and street lights between Utica and Cleveland Avenues Cleveland Avenue Full width pavement with curb and gutter both sides (street tights on west side) south of 6th Street, west half only north of 6th Street includes sidewalk Utica Avenue Full width pavement with curb, gutter and street lights for southerly 1600 feet, 27' pavement with east side improvements only for northe~y gO0 ¢eet Both Utica and Cleveland Avenues contain storm drains between 4th and 6th Streets and there is a storm arain in ~iq~iken from the railroad underpass to just north of 6th Street. The City's current Master ~an of Storm Drains calls for a future storm drain in Sixth Street between Cleveland and Milliken Avenues. Additional facilities cross Fourth Street west of Utica Avenue, west of Cleveland Avenue and in the 4th/Mllliken intersection, connecting to a ditch which parallels Fourth Street on the south side. Vacant portions of the site generally slope to the south at less than 2 percent. ANALYSIS: ll~e purpose of the Parcel Map is to reconfigure the applicant's existing properties into 15 parcels consistent with the proposed ISP Subarea 18 Specific Plan (Exhibit "O") also under review at tonight's meeting. Specific Plan 93-01 and its related Environmental Impact Report, General man Amendment 93-02A and ISP Amendment 93-03 all require City Council action. Therefore, the tentative map approval is contingent upon City Council adoption of those documents. It is the applicant's intent to begin processing the Final Parcel Map as quickly as possible upon adoption of the Specific Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT PARCEL MAP 14647 April 27, 1994 PAGE 3 Three existing streets - Cleveland, Thomas, and Vincent - will be vacated with the Final Parcel Map, along with the existing offer of dedication for 7th Street. Easements will be provided for all existing utilities, including the public storm drain in Cleveland Avenue, or abandoned as directed by the affected utility companies. Vacated streets will be removed and/or reconstructed as private accesses with the golf course development. Frontage public improvements will be completed upon development, redevelopment, or future subdivision of the parcels being created. Additional requirements with the golf course development (phase 1) include widening the north side of Sixth Street to accommodate 2 traffic lanes across parcels 9 and 11, street lights on the south side of Sixth Street across parcel 8, and installation of the entry monument at Fourth and Milliken. The applicant is proposing to alter the storm drainage master plan by directing runoff from parcels 1, 3, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 and 15 through the golf course (parcels 1 and 13). This eliminates the need for a storm drain in Sixth Street, but may require some retention at the south end of the golf course in a 100-year storm The City Engineer is agreeable, as long as acceptable easement language can be worked out to guarantee private maintenance and minimize the City's liability exposure. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The applicant p~epared an Environmental Impact Report, which is being recommended to the City Council for certification concurrency with this application, and completed Part I of the Initial Study. Staff conducted a field investigation and completed Part II of the Initial Study. No adverse impacts upon the environment are anticipated as a ~esult of this subdivision. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrounding property owners and placed in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Posting at the site has also been completed. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider all input and elements of the Tentative Parc~ Map 14647. If after such consideration, the Commission can recommend approval, then the adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectful 1 y submitted, Dan Jame~ Senior Civil Engineer DJ:BAM:dlw Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Tentative Map Exhibit "C" - Existing Topography Exhibit "D" - Subarea 18, Specific Plan Resolution and Recon~ended Conditions of Approval CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENG~'E~G DIVL9ION I'; I~00 iTF.,M:FIRR~EI_ Mt~P Iq&H'7 P~,~CEL ~--- ~ . ~,,, J ~ ~ I~'~ PARCEL 1 1 :: 27.00 ACRES~ T.O~*S ST. ~., ~ .... ~ , ~ /' ~ _ .. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~IGDOt.~'~,.I~G DIVI~ON T]~.~t. T~lr/q7/tiE. /vlR%:) ~~. "Z3 " N CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGD~.~G DIVeION ),R£^ '('~ -- ; t,, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINE, eqI:NG DIVI~ON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NUMBER 14647, BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY FOURTH STREET, ON THE EAST BY MILLIKEN AVENUE ON THE NORTH BY THE A. T. & S. F. (METROLINK) RAILROAD, AND ON THE WEST BY CLEVELAND AVENUE AND UTICA AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209-272-01, 04, 07 AND 08; 210-081-22 AND 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38 AND 39; AND 210-361-01 THROUGH 26 WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map Number 14647, submitted by General Dynamics, applicant, for the purpose of subdividing into 15 parcels, the real property situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, identified as APNs 209-272-01, 04, 07 and 08; 210-081-22 and 23; 210-082-02, 11, 17, 37, 38 and 39; and 210-361-01 through 26, bounded on the south by Fourth Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the A. T. & S. F. (Metrolink) Railroad, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Avenue; and WHEREAS, on April 27, 1994, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing for the above-described map. NOW, THEREFORE, THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Prior to the adoption of this Resolution, this Commission has reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report for Specific Plan 93-01, including analysis of this parcel map, and, by separate resolution, recommended that the City Council certify the Report, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Consideration, in compliance with the California EnviroD_~ental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder. SECTION 2: Prior to the adoption of this Resolution, this Commission has reviewed and recommended approval of Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A, and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03, and recommended adoption by the City Council. SECTION 3: Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Environmental Impact Report, Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03, the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the proposed Subarea 18 Specific Plan, together with all written and oral reports, this Commission has made the following findings: ' 1. That the map is consistent with the General Plan. 2. That the improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the General Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 2 3. That the site is physically suitable for the proposed development. That the proposed subdivision and improvements will not cause substantial environmental damage or public health problems or have adverse effects on abutting properties. 5o The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements contemplated will not conflict with public easements for access through or use of property within the subdivision. The findings, facts, and conclusions referenced in the resolutions recommending adoption of Specific Plan 93-01, adoption of General Plan Amendment 93-02A, adoption of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03, and certification of the Environmental Impact Report are hereby incorporated by reference. SECTION 4: Tentative Parcel Map Number 14647 is hereby approved subject to the attached Standard Conditions and the following Special Conditions: En~ineerin~ Division In the event a Development Agreement is adopted by the City Council, which addresses the phased installation of infrastructure improvements, that agreement shall supercede all applicable conditions, including all applicable standard conditions. Utility Undergrounding shall be completed upon redevelopment, development, or future subdivision of parcels with frontage on each of the following: The existing overhead utilities (electrical, except for the 66KV electrical) on the project side of Fourth Street shall be undergrounded from the first pole on the west side of Utica Avenue to the first pole on the east side of Milliken Avenue prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. The existing overhead utilitie~ (electrical) on the south side of Sixth Street shall be undergrounded from the first pole on the west side of Cleveland Avenue to the end-of-line pole on the west side of Milliken Avenue, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 3 The existing overhead utilities (railroad communications and ~electrical, except for the 66KV electrical) on the project side of the A. T. & S. F. Railroad right-of-way shall be undergrounded from the first pole on the east side of Milliken Avenue to the first pole off site west of the west project boundary, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. The Developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposite side of the right-of-way. The area fronting the Metrolink site shall be the responsibility of the Metrolink property. do An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (electrical) on the opposite side of Sixth Street shall be paid to the City prior to redevelopment on Parcel 2. The fee shall be one- half the City adopted unit amount times the length from the center of Utica Avenue to the end of line pole on the west side of Cleveland Avenue remaining after Condition 1.b is completed. In addition to the perimeter street dedication requirements listed in Standard Condition A.2, the Final Parcel Map shall include the following dedications: a. Streets "A, .... B," and "C" serving Parcels 9, 10, 14, and 15 as shown on the tentative map; b. The knuckle between Cleveland Avenue and Seventh Street; Co An additional 12 feet at the southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Sixth Street, transitioning to zero across Parcel 8, approximately 600 feet west of Milliken; Intersection right turn lanes to the satisfaction of the City Engineer with the following lengths: 590 feet at Fourth/Milliken and Sixth/Milliken and 390 feet for all other street intersections with Fourth, Sixth, and Milliken Avenue; and e. The entry monument at the northwest corner of Fourth Street and Milliken Avenue. Upon development of the golf course' and driving range (Parcels 1, 3, 12, and 13), public improvements shall be completed as follows: Install missing street improvements, as indicated in Standard Condition B.3, for all frontage streets of Parcels 1, 3, 12, and 13, including the Cleveland/Seventh knuckle. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 4 5o Widen the existing pavement on the north side of Sixth Street to provide two westbound traffic lanes across adjacent Parcels 9 and 11. Co Reconstruct the Sixth Street median break to eliminate the eastbound left turn pocket and landscape the median, from Cleveland Avenue to a projection of the east property line for Parcel 1. do The developer may request a reimbursement agreement from future development for median landscaping and pavement north of the Sixth Street centerline, not fronting Parcel 13. e. Install street lights on the south side of Sixth Street fronting Parcel 8. f. Underground all frontage overhead utilities of Parcels 1, 3, 12, and 13. g. Construct the City entry monument at the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Fourth Street. he Reconstruct Cleveland intersections at Fourth and Sixth Streets as driveways or private streets with right turn lanes. The Sixth Street driveway shall align with a future centerline shift in Cleveland. Vacate Vincent Avenue, Thomas Street, Cleveland Avenue between Fourth and Sixth Streets, and a portion of Cleveland Avenue north of Sixth Street while providing the following: ao Provide easements for all existing utilities including the public storm drain, 12-inch water line, and 6-inch gas main. Provide a surface drainage easement to accommodate QlO0 in the event of blockage in Sixth Street catch basins. Record CC&Rs and a letter of negative covenant to replace a public street with a private fire lane, to the satisfaction of the Fire District. c. Convert existing street lighting system to private responsibility. Immediately upon their vacation, Cleveland Avenue, Vincent Avenue, and Thomas Street shall b~ removed from public use. Existing utilities within Thomas and Vincent shall be abandoned as directed by the affected agencies. Install a traffic signal at the intersection of Milliken Avenue and Sixth Street. The Developer shall be eligible for fee credit toward, and reimbursement of costs in excess of, the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 5 10. 11. 12. 13. Transportation Development Fee in conformance with City policy. If the Metrolink project has secured these improvements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, this condition shall not be imposed. Parcels 7 and 8, fronting Milliken Avenue south of Sixth Street, shall reimburse the City for the cost of installing the median in accordance with City Council Resolution 89-574 upon development or further subdivision, whichever occurs first. Upon development or further subdivision of Parcel 8 or 9, shift the west side of the Sixth/Milliken intersection southerly about 12 feet to align the Sixth Street centerlines. The centerline transition shall be approximately 600 feet long. A contribution in-lieu of construction shall be provided to the City for the future reconstruction of Fourth Street pavement, to the centerline, fronting Parcel 1, prior to Final Parcel Map approval. Prior to development or further subdivision of Parcels 6 or 7, or redevelopment of Parcel 5, the 1988 Pavement Rehabilitation Study shall be updated. The findings of that study shall be implemented across Parcels 1 and 5 and prior to redevelopment on Parcel 5, or across Parcels 1, 6, and 7 upon development or further subdivision of Parcels 6 and 7. Upon development or further subdivision of Parcel 11, Cleveland Avenue north of Sixth Street shall be reconstructed as a local industrial street, with the centerline crown shifted westerly 10 feet and the east side widened 12 feet. Provide a drainage easement across Parcels 1 and 13 in favor of Parcels 3, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, and 15 and the public street systems therein. Provide an agreement covering all flows entering the easement from the Metrolink site and public streets to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and City Attorney. Said agreement shall provide for, but not be limited to, maintenance and liability to be the responsibility of the property owner, and include provisions, in the event the property owner is negligent in said maintenance, that the City has authority to enter and maintain at the property owners cost. Storm Drainage Facilities for the entire study area shall be included in the Final Drainage Study a. Facilities shall be designed for~Q100 as follows: (1) The golf course drainage channel shall be sized to accommodate flows from streets "A," "B," "C," and future streets within Parcel 9, but not from Sixth Street, and shall have appropriate erosion control. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 6 (2) The interim golf course detention facility shall accommodate the ultimate build out of the area, including the drainage area of the Fourth Street storm drain. The spillway of the detention facility shall be to the satisfaction of the City Planner and the City Engineer. (3) Inlet facilities at the intersection of Sixth Street and Cleveland Avenue shall intercept a Q100 storm. The existing Storm Drain within Cleveland Avenue shall receive Q100 flows from areas upstream of Sixth Street and Cleveland Avenue. (4) Q100 fully developed flows reaching the intersection of Fourth Street and Cleveland Avenue shall not exceed Q100 for the existing undeveloped condition. The Fourth Street storm drain shall accommodate Q100 for the drainage area to the north and be sized to include the south half of Fourth Street. Laterals shall be stubbed for future connection of catch basins by the City of Ontario. The Fourth Street storm drain shall connect to the existing open channel in the City of Ontario. The City of Rancho Cucamonga will assist the Developer in obtaining the permit for the work in the City of Ontario. b. Installation may be phased as follows: (1) Install drainage facilities with the golf course (across Parcels 1 and 13) to accommodate parcels 9, 10, 14, and 15. Provide desilting facilities for interim inlets in Parcel 9. (2) Extend the inlet facilities at the intersection of Sixth Street and Cleveland Avenue as needed to accommodate street improvements. (3) Install drainage facilities to eliminate surface flows across Sixth Street at Milliken Avenue with the first development phase. (4) Facilities serving Parcels 6, 7, and 8 shall be installed upon development or further subdivision of said parcels. ~ (5) Upon development of the Fourth Street storm drain and its connection to the channel in Ontario, the golf course detention facility shall have its outlet control reconstructed to eliminate the detention facility. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 7 14. Upon development of any parcel fronting Fourth or Sixth Street, a parkway beautification master plan shall be developed which expands upon the existing designated street trees. 15. Chino Basin Municipal Water District owns and operates the non- reclaimable sewer which lies within an easement on the north side of this map. As Chino Basin Municipal Water District is a public agency servicing the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the developer of the subdivision shall be responsible for any relocation, modification, or construction on this system required due to the development. Such work shall include, but not be limited to, adjusting manholes to grade, realignment of lines to allow other utilities to be constructed, and other similar construction. If any modification or adjustment to District facilities is desired, plans shall be approved by the District before proceeding. 16. Easements which are no longer necessary shall be abandoned, including City slope easements adjacent to Cleveland Avenue. 17. Upon redevelopment or reuse of Parcel 2, obtain the necessary right-of-way and construct sufficient widening on the west side of Utica Avenue to bring the total pavement width to 36 feet. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement from future development for improvements west of the Utica Avenue centerline. Plannin~ Division Provide a reciprocal parking agreement between the golf course/driving range and Parcels 2, 4, and 5 to accommodate overflow spectator parking for professional golf tournaments. 2e This approval is contingent upon City Council approval of Specific Plan 93-01 (Subarea 18 Specific Plan), certification of the related Environmental Impact Report, and approval of related General Plan Amendment 93-02A, and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03. Buildin~ and Safetv Provide minimum 60-foot side yards between all existing buildings and adjacent property linea or provide non-buildable side yard easements on adjacent parcels in order to achieve compliance with the wall and opening protection requirements of Chapter 5 of the Uniform Buildin~ Code for unlimited area buildings. SECTION 5: This Resolution shall be effective upon the effective date of an Ordinance of the City Council approving Specific Plan 93-01, General Plan Amendment 93-02A and Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 93-03, and the Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 14647 - GENERAL DYNAMICS April 27, 1994 Page 8 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, 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 27th day of April, 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT COMMISSIONERS: J ~m DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Con~nission STAFF REPORT Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, Associate Planner VARIANCE 94-02 - ORTIZ - A request to construct a 6-foot high solid fence within the front yard setback of an existing single family residential parcel in the Very Low Residential designation (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located at 5333 Hermosa Avenue - APN: 1074-231-08. BACKGROUND: Prior to 1987, the residence was part of a 1.16-acre parcel. Vista Grove Street had been partially dedicated north of the site and was not improved as a public street. The only street frontage was along Hermosa Avenue. Therefore, the front of the lot was along Hermosa Avenue. In 1987, the Planning Coa~nission approved Tentative Tract 13644 for the development of 24 lots. with the Tract Map, Vista Grove Street was dedicated and ultimately improved. The lot created for the existing residence is now a 1/2-acre lot with a 185-foot frontage along Hermosa Avenue and a 106-foot frontage along Vista Grove Street. Under the Development Code definition, the narrower of the two frontages, in this case Vista Grove Street, is considered the "front" of the corner lot. The Development Code allows for the installation of 6-foot high fences within the required front yard "provided such fences are constructed with at least 90 percent of the top 3 feet of their vertical surface open and non-view obscuring." This would include wrought iron fencing with pilasters, a 3-foot wall with wrought iron fencing on top, chain link fencing, etc. In 1991, the applicant submitted plans to construct a wall/fence around the property consisting of block pilasters (to be faced with rock) with wood fencing between pilasters. At the time of permit issuance, a note was placed on the wall elevation stating that the area between pilasters was to remain open for that area within the front setback. The applicant began work on the wall but the permit expired. In 1993, the applicant reapplied for a building permit to construct the wall/fence. The plans indicated that wood fencing would be provided between pilasters. A staff member, unfamiliar with previous staff action on this issue, mistakenly approved the wall/fence permit. Upon installation of a portion of the wood fencing along Vista Grove Street and the northern portion of the east property line, staff received a complaint from a neighbor about the construction. After investigating the complaint, staff informed the applicant that the wood fencing could not be provided within the front setback area. Construction of the wall has been halted by the applicant. l'i'hM G PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VAR 94-02 - ORTIZ April 27, 1994 Page 2 One unique element of this property is its historical setting and relationship to Hermosa Avenue. In the 50s when the home was built it was designed to front onto Hermosa Avenue because Vista Grove Street did not exist at the time. With the subdivision of the surrounding property Vista Grove Street was extended. Prior to the development of the surrounding lots as they exist today, the front for this lot was along Hermosa Avenue and the northerly property line was an exterior side. The question raised is did the lot frontage change with the subdivision of Tentative Tract 13644. Staff believes it did, thereby making Vista Grove Street the front of the lot. ANALYSIS: One of the key considerations on requiring open fencing is to ensure that there is adequate visibility of pedestrians and/or vehicles when pulling out of a driveway or turning a corner. The open fencing within the front setback helps to provide visibility. Additionally, the Development Code requires a visibility cut-off to be provided at all corners wherein nothing solid over 3 feet in height may be grown or constructed that would obscure visibility around the corner (see Exhibit "F"). Another reason front and street side yard setbacks is neighborhood streetscape compatibility. Setbacks set a pattern for the development of a given neighborhood to avoid the encroachment of property development that could negatively impact an adjoining property. In this particular instance, the traffic engineer has stated the concern is not from pulling out of the applicant's driveway but, rather, the driveway of the adjacent residence to the east. The driver might not be able to see eastbound traffic until almost into the street. Similarly, there is a concern about vehicles traveling northbound on Hermosa Avenue and turning right onto Vista Grove Street. While the applicant does meet the corner cut-off requirement, the solid wall diminishes visibility around the corner prior to the turn. Vehicles parked along the street or backing out of the driveway might not be visible until an approaching vehicle was into the turn. The Traffic Engineering Division has reviewed the plans and feels that the solid fencing should not be permitted within the front yard setback (see Exhibit Included with the applicant's Variance request are a number of photographs depicting similar wall configurations in the area. In two of the four instances, the walls identified by the applicant are located within the corner side yard. The other pictures depict solid walls within the front yard setback similar to that being requested by the applicant. However, in both cases no wall permits were on file with the Building & Safety Division. The walls at 5191 Mayberry Avenue and 9509 Orange Street appear to have been built without permits and prior to the adoption of the requirement that block walls require building permits. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order to approve a Variance request, the Planning Co~nission must find that there are unique or special circ%unstances pertaining to the property, such as size, shape, topography, or location that deprives PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT VAR 94-02 - ORTIZ April 27, 1994 Page 3 the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and in the same zoning designation. Specifically, the Planning Comission must determine that there are facts to support all of the following findings: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. Be That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Be That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or i~provements in the vicinity. To deny the application, the Co~nission need only find that one of the findings can not be met. Staff believes that the fence location does pose a potential public safety concern as previously stated. Additionally, (staff feels that there are not exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property). The wood portion of the fence could be replaced with wrought iron fencing and comply with the Code requirements, thereby eliminating the need for the Variance. A wood fence could be placed 42 feet from the Vista Grove Street curb and meet the setback requirement for a 6-foot solid wall (see Exhibit "C-2"). RECOMMENDATION: Staff reco~ends that the Planning Commission deny Variance 94-02 through adoption of the attached Resolution. BB:SM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Area Plan Exhibit "B" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Photographs Exhibit "E" - Traffic Engineering Comments Exhibit "F" - Development Code Excerpt Resolution of Denial Type of Variance: Our property is located on the southeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove. The front of our residence faces Hermosa, however, the north side of the property which faces Vista Grove is considered the front of our property because it is the shorter street-front side. (See Ex. A a map of the property.) A variance is requested to allow us to keep the existing 6 foot block pilasters and 6 foot wood fence inserts on the northeast side of the property and to complete the installation of the wood fence inserts on the north and west side of our property as previously approved by planning and building and safety. (See Ex. A & B The yellow line depicts the section of the property at issue and Ex. C through E show the pilasters and wooden fence.) Reasons for Variance: The following are the reasons we are requesting the variance: 1. To allow the existing 6 foot pilasters and 6 foot wood fence inserts to remain and to allow the completion of the wood fence inserts. We have expended thousands of dollars on the pilasters and wood fence. The suggestion of a 6 foot wrought iron open fence is not an option as stated below. We would not have built the pilasters if a closed/solid fence for our backyard were not possible. We would have installed a 6 ft chain link fence. 2. The closed/solid fence inserts are requested because it borders our rear and side yard, without the closed/solid wooden fence inserts we cannot have privacy in our backyard. 3. Our home sits approximately 15 feet below Vista Grove and the sidewalk. The noise from the vehicles on Vista Grove and Hermosa echo down. Our three bedrooms are on the north side of our house. The closed wood fence inserts will lower the noise level. 4. We have a fifteen month old daughter and another baby on the way. We are concerned that a wrought iron fence will not provide a safe backyard environment for our children. Children have been known to pass through wrought iron bars and Vista Grove and Hermosa are well traveled streets. 1 5. The pilasters and fence inserts could not be inset 45 feet from Vista Grove (front of property per City) because of the dangerous condition left by the developers of the surrounding houses and City by the sidewalk on Vista Grove side of the property put in prior to our purchasing the property in May of 1991. Our property immediately dropped up to 12 feet after the sidewalk which pedestrians could fall down the slope. (See Ex. F picture of slope.) 6. We have had coyotes drag a rabbit, cage included, from our backyard. Coyotes have brought neighbor's chickens and eaten them on our property. Coyotes have fit through wrought iron fences in our area, thus our children and animals would not be protected without a closed/solid fence. Request for Variance Fee to be Waived: We request the variance fee be waived and monies paid returned because the City approved and permitted our work, the work is completed and we continually checked with Planning at various stages to make sure our plans were proper. Compatibility With Surroundin~ area: 1. There are many houses in the area similar to our situation where a rear yard borders a neighbor's front and side yard. Exhibits ~ through L , show similar circumstances with 6 foot walls bordering a neighbor's property. Ex. I is located at 10241 Woodridge Drive and 5360 Woodridge Court. The houses are part of the same development as our next door neighbor to our east. The properties are on the same ground level, thus the property owner on 10241 Woodridge cannot see around his neighbor's fence until reaching the sidewalk. Ex. L is located at 10347 Hidden Farm and 5200 Mayberry. The houses are a few blocks north of our property. The side yard at 5200 Mayberry appears to be the shorter side, thus its side yard on Hidden Farm is the front of the property. The picture shows a 6 foot wooden fence bordering 10347 Hidden Farm's front yard and a block wall along 5200 Maybefry's side yard. Also the line of sight and driveway of 10347 Hidden Fa£m are blocked far grater than our neighbor to the east. Mountain. K is located at 11135 Antietam and 5998 Cedar Ex. J is located at 6379 Amethyst and 9509 Orange Street. 2. A six foot block wall is across the street on Vista Grove from the north side of our property. ( See Ex. E) Additional Information: Our house was built in the early 1950's. We purchased the house in May of 1991. The surrounding property once belonged to the prior owner of our house. After we bought, the four houses along Vista Grove were completed by Sahama Development. We applied for our permit to build the block pilasters and for the closed fencing on or about August 23, 1991. Scott Murphy approved the plans, except he advised my husband the area between the columns had to remain open. My husband believed he meant from the front of our house forward and along Hermosa. After he went over the plans with me I said the map did not depict where closed and open fencing would be, and we went back to planning to have the plans clarified. Scott Murphy was not available and we saw another planner. We showed the plans and clarified that the city considers Vista Grove the front of our property, but our residence faces Hermosa. Because the north side of our property is our side and backyard and the problem with the immediate drop after the sidewalk, the planner wrote 6 foot closed fencing along our northeast and north sides of the property. In December of 1991 our neighbors to the east purchased their property. Shortly after moving in he asked us to share the cost of a block wall along our east property line. We showed him our plans, but his wife disliked the wood fence inserts. We cooperated with the block wall along 3/4 quarters of the east side of our property, but agreed we would complete the pilaster and wood inserts to Vista Grove. Our neighbor never objected. After the block wall was completed and we began our pilasters our neighbor asked if we would put a block wall up to Vista Grove. We checked with planning and were told no way. He also checked into the issue and was told a variance probably wouldn't be approved. We slowly continued to work on the pilasters and wood fencing. Our neighbor came over intoxicated complaining we couldn't finish our wall because it was a safety hazard to them as they left their driveway. He claimed he checked with the City and it agreed. This incident was witnessed by a friend who was visiting. My husband went down to planning to check on the matter. He was told there was no problem. Our neighbor complained several more times, but never would give us an individual's name to talk with. We asked him to meet us at planning to resolve the problem, but he refused. I went down to planning two more times. The first time I fully advised the planner of the situation, including where the City considers the front of our property and the alleged sight problem interfering with their driveway. I was told an inspector would come out and check out the situation. I had a third party with me to verify what I was told. An individual called me, who I believe was Steve Hayes, telling me he had checked out the situation. He stood on our neighborts front porch and driveway determining their line of sight was not a problem. The weeping willow in our yard and eucalyptus trees in the parkway block our neighborts sight line already. In addition, he agreed we could not set our fence in because of the drop in elevation next to the sidewalk. At my last visit last year, the lady I spoke with was frustrated with me for again asking the same questions. At no time did a planner not know where the city considered the front of our property to be. Now that we installed the closed wooden fence inserts along our east property line after our neighbor cussed us out for not doing something and completing our backyard which she found offensive, they have complained to planning causing us to receive a code enforcement notice to remove the wooden fencing. Our neighbor doesn't object to it b~ing 6 foot, only that it is wood and she hates wood. After receiving the code enforcement notice, planning has now decided it made a mistake by approving the plans with closed wooden fencing on our east, north and west property lines. Our plans have been remarked with 3 foot closed or 6 foot open fencing. This defeats our purpose and is a waste of thousands of dollars. It is not fair or just for our plans to be changed. When we first applied for our permit our neighbors did not own the house, as such they should not have the right to object to the plans or to this variance. Second, our work is nearly completed and it is inappropriate for a City Department to revoke it's approval at this stage when any mistake is due to their error. N .= 'J ? 41, QITY OF RANCHO QUQAMONGA TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMENTS P&E MEETING AGENDA ITEMS TO: DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT FROM: TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ~C SUBJECT: P & E COMMENTS PROJECT NUMBER: "IMP- "f:.~'(--//~ ,-.... LOCATION: '~'~ ~' .?-~ ~-:-..'.:E" ;*.~ ^.:r-, CMPLT: ~ PRELIM: I. COMPLETENESS COMMENTS: II. OTHER COMMENTS:. Je Antennas. The installation of one (1) antenna which exceeds the maximum height of the base district shah be permitted subject to the following limitations: Operation. Any operation of citizens band or other radio transmitting equipment, excluding public service, public safety, or emergency radio services, shall be subject to the Performance Standards of this Chapter (See Section 17.08.080). Height. The antenna shall not exceed 50 feet in height, fully extended when in use and no higher than 35 feet when not in use (unextended) as measured from ground level. 3. Setback. The antenna shah not occupy any portion of a yard required in Tables 17.08.040-B and C except as follows: (a) A guy wire and anchor point may be no closer than 3 feet from a side or rear line. (b) A guy wire and anchore point may extend to the side or rear line adjacent to a dedicated alley. 4. Satellite dish antennas (a) Dishes no greater than 1 meter in diameter may be roof mounted. (b) Dishes greater than 1 meter in diameter shall be ground mounted and screened from public view on all sides with a combination of walls, landscaping or buildings. Fences, Walls~ and Hedges. The following provisions regarding fences shall apply to all residential districts. Fences, walls, hedges or similar view obstructing structures or plant growth that reduce visibility and the safe ingress and egress of vehicles or pedestrians, shall not exceed a height of 3 feet in any required front yard. 2. Fences or walls, not exceeding 6 feet in height, may be located in a required corner side yard, rear or side yard. A combination of solid and open fences (e.g. wrought iron, chain link) not exceeding 6 feet in height may be located in a required front yard, corner side yard or visibility clearance area, provided such fences are constructed with at least 90 percent of the top 3 feet of their vertical surface open, and non-view obscuring. Section A visibility clearance area shall be required on corner lots in which nothing shall be erected, placed, planted or allowed to grow exceeding 3 feet in height. Such area shall consist of a triangular area bounded by the street right-of-way Lines of such corner lots and a line joining points along said street lines 20 feet from the point of intersection. Outdoor recreation court fences not exceeding 12 feet in height shall be located $ feet from any rear or side property lines, except when adjacent to outdoor recreation courts on adjacent properties. K. Swimming Pools and Recreational Courts Swimming pools, tennis courts, basketball courts, or similar paved outdoor recreational courts shall not be located in any required front yard, and shall be located no closer than 5 feet from any rear, side or corner side property Line. Outdoor lighting poles and fixtures are permitted not to exceed 12 feet in height. Any such lighting shall be designed to project light downward and shall not create glare on adjacent properties. Mobile Home Parks: This section sets forth requirements for mobile home park development. Except as provided herein above, all other development standards contained in Tables 17.08.040-B and C shall apply. 1. There shad be no minimum side area fo~ a mobDe home park. 2. There shall be no minimum area, width, or depth requirement for individual lots or spaces. 3. There shall be no minimum yard requirement for individual lots or spaces. 4. There shall be no minimum size for individual mobile home units. The minimum street yard setback on pubUe sU'eets shalt be in conformance with Table 17.08.040-D Streetscape Setbacks. Existing mobile home parks and preexisting mobile home parks shall not ~e deemed nonconforming by reason of failure to meet the minimum requirements prescribed in this section, provided that the regulations of this section shad apply to the enlargement or expansion of a mobile home park. -90- RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING VARIANCE NO. 94-02 A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 6-FOOT HIGH SOLID FENCE WITHIN THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK OF AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCEL IN THE VERY LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (LESS THAN 2 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED AT 5333 HERMOSA AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1074-231-08. A. Recitals. 1. Jaime and Donnasue Ortiz have filed an application for the issuance of Variance No. 94-02 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 27th day of April 1994, 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Conm~ission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at 5333 Hermosa Avenue with street frontages of 185 feet along Hermosa Avenue and 106 feet along Vista Grove Street and is presently improved with a single family residence; and b. The property to the north, south, and east of the subject site is zoned for residential uses and is developed with single family homes and the property to the west is zoned for residential uses and is vacant; and c. The Development Code defines the front of a corner lot as the shorter of the two street frontages. Vista Grove, with the 106-foot frontage, is the front of the lot and Hermosa Avenue with the 185-foot frontage is the corner side yard; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VAR 94-02 - ORTIZ April 27, 1994 Page 2 d. The Development Code allows for the installation of 6-foot high fences within the required front yard setback provided such fences are constructed with at least 90 percent of the top 3 feet of their vertical surface open and non-viewing obscuring. The existing fence could utilize wrought iron fencing between the pilasters and comply with the Code requirement; and e. The fence installation will obscure visibility of on-coming traffic, thereby creating a potential public safety hazard. 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 strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. b. That there are not exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. c. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. d. That the granting of the Variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. e. That the granting of the Variance will be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby denies the application. 5. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. VAR 94-02 - ORTIZ April 27, 1994 Page 3 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: April 25, 1994 To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Co~ission From: Jaime and Donnasue Ortiz Re: Supplement to applicants~ variance 94-02-Ortiz After review of the staff report by Mr. Murphy, we hereby submit this supplement regarding our request for variance number 94-02. In order to complete the closed fence area as approved in 1991, we seek a variance to the Development Code's definition of the narrower of two frontages is considered the "front" of a corner lot. Mr. Murphy's report fails to address this issue and skips directly to addressing the code regarding fences. We have attached as Exhibit "A" the Development Code regarding yards as given to me by planning staff. The Development Code does not specifically define the "front" of a corner lot as the narrower of two frontages as alleged by Mr. Murphy. As such we should have the right to complete our wood fence because Hermosa yard is actually our front yard. In the event the planning commission should grant the variance exempting our property from the narrower frontage definition the fence code requirements become moot. In our discussion with Mr. Brad Bullet he did not have any knowledge of the purpose for the narrower frontage definition. He stated many cities adopted the definition and Rancho Cucamonga followed a few years ago. We have investigated the history of this code and were unable to find any written history of the intent of the code. We then asked an individual with approximately twenty years of experience in city planning. He believes the purpose of the definition was to encourage uniformity in neighborhood developments. As tracts are developed the corner houses will uniformly face the same direction as the other houses along the same street in order to guarantee a corner private backyard. 1 Our home was built in the 1950's as indicated by Mr. Murpy's report, as such it could not comply with the definition when the tract surrounding our home was developed in 1987. We do not fit into what we believe was the underlying intent for creating and adopting the narrower front definitionas alleged by Mr. Murphy. Therefore, because the definition ie vague, overbroad and burdensome we request our property be granted a variance. Further, we address each of the factors necessary to qualify for a variance. Our property does have special circumstances that deprives us of privileges enjoyed by other property owners. We address each factor as it relates to the narrow front definition and fence code. A. We believe the strict or literal interpretation of the narrow front definition results in a difficult and unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the code. The only objective known to us is to encourage uniformity in new tracts as they are built. Our home has been caught in the definition with the completion of Vista Grove and surrounding property being developed. However, we are burdened in that we cannot enjoy our side and backyard as all of our neighbors by being able to have closed fences. The fence code also causes us the same difficult and unnecessary burden. Hermosa and Vista Grove are well traveled streets, we are unable to enjoy the privacy others enjoy in their side and backyards. In addition, all of the houses along Vista Grove, except ours can reduce the traffic noise with their fences and because our property drops elevation the noise echoes across our north side. B. The way our house is situated on the lot we have a very small backyard, approximately 15 feet between the house and property line. Our side yards are our actual backyard areas. None of the other properties have similar situations. In order for us to enjoy our north side yard as others we must be granted a variance. C. As stated above, we are denied and deprived of the privilege of privacy and safety of having a closed fence around our side and back yard. D. The granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege to us. The other properties we found with the similar circumstances of the narrow front definition have fences and enjoy their privacy and safety. E. Mr. Murphyts report makes certain representations not supported by the traffic engineerrs simple report. (G22, EX.E) The comments recite the code set backs and that the Eucalyptus trees need to be trimmed. The trees were trimmed by the City within the last two months when five tree stumps were removed from our parkway after being blown down in recent wind storms. The trees are three years old and will only be a greater visibility problem as they grow. We are not putting any wooden fencing near the Hermosa\Vista Grove corner. The closed fence begins at our second set of pilasters which are 40 feet from the Hermosa curb and 12 feet from the Vista Grove curb. If you actually view the property, the horse trail fence and eucalyptus trees diminish visibility when turning the corner, not our fence. Mr. Murphy, not the traffic engineer's comments, imply our fence may interfere with our east neighbor's use of their driveway. If our house was located facing Vista Grove we would have a problem with vehicles turning onto Vista Grove. However, our neighbor's driveway is more than 165 feet from the corner. Vehicles turning onto Vista Grove have plenty of time to slow down or stop for vehicles leaving our neighbor's driveway. Also, our neighbors have three trucks in their driveway because they operate a business from their home and store computers in the garage. When they leave they pull beyond the other vehicles reaching the sidewalk before they can see down the street anyway. Further, the eucalyptus trees in the parkway and our weeping willow tree the city required the developer to plant interfere with our neighbors' line of sight when pulling out of their driveway; as such our fence will have D0 impact on their ability to see. We believe the planning commission in exercising their discretion can find special circumstances exist to grant our variance. We do not wish to be petty and knit pick with the staff report. However, there are a couple misrepresentations regarding our permit and plans. Our plans were reviewed 4 times before our permit was renewed in 1993 and a planner made a visual inspection. Each and every staff member was aware of the shorter side situation of the property. At the time of our last inquiry last year we had only approximately five pilasters completed. Since our neighbors could not give us. a person's name at the city who told them we could not have closed fencing as requested and our numerous inquiries only continued to approve our plans, we hired someone last year to complete our pilasters. If someone had told us at any stage our plans were invalid we would have erected a chain link fence. Due to the planning staff~s errors we have now wasted over $6,000.00 and Mr. Murphy suggests we can complete the project with wrought iron. His suggestion would cause us to waste over $300.00 in special brackets to hold up to the wind, we would waste the wood already purchased and will expend more than double the cost of wood versus wrought iron inserts. The law provides that after a property owner has obtained all permits necessary for the proposed project and performed substantial work and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance upon those approvals, the property owner acquires a vested right to complete construction in accordance with the te£ms of the permit. It is our opinion we have completed substantial work and incurred substantial expenses in good faith reliance on our many approvals by staff members. We ask that the planning commission reject the staff recommendation and grant our variance as requested. Respect fully Submitted, JAIME and DONNASUE ORTIZ Section 17.02.140 W VEHICLE: A self-propelled device by which persons or property may be moved upon a highway, excepting a device moved by human power or used exlusively upon stationary rails or tracks. VEHICLE, RECREATIONAL: A vehicle towed or self-propelled on its own chassis or attached to the chassis of another vehicle and designed or used for temporary dwelling, recreational or sporting purposes. The term recreational vehicle shall include, but shA!! not be limited to, travel trailers, pick-up campers, earnping trailers, motor coach homes, converted trucks and buses, and boats and boat trailers. VEHICLE STORAGE/IMPOUND FACILITY: Any lot, lot area, or parcel of land used, designed, or maintained for the specific purpose of storing, impounding, or keeping motor vehicles, but not including dismantling or wrecking activities. WALL, FRONT: The nearest wnll of a bufiding or other structure to the street upon which the building faces, but excluding cornices, canopies, caves or any other architectural embellL~hments. WAREHOUSING: The use of a building or buildings primarily for the storage of goods of any type, when such building or buildings contain more than five hundred (500) square feet of storage space, but excluding bulk storage of materials which are flammable or explosive or which ereate hazardous or commonly recognized offensive conditions. WHOLESALING: A use engaged primarily in the selling of any type of goods for purpose of resale, including incidental storage and distribution. YARD: An open space that lies between the principal or accessory building or buildings and the nearest lot line. .,. , ~.:~ ...~..~,-.,.:-, ,., ,', ,., ':':ii..~ .:. i %--i ,'- '" "/11 ' ' ' ':'""" a ~',~.:l----J -40- Section 17.02.140 YARD, CORNER SIDE: A side yard which faces a public street on a corner lot and extending from the front yard to the rear yard. YARD, FRONT: A yard extending the full width of the lot between the front lot line and a line parallel thereto and passing through the nearest point of the building; provided that, if a future street right-of-way has been established, such measurement shall be from the future street right-of-way line. YARD, REAR: A yard extending the full width of the lot between the rear lot line and a line parallel thereto. For throught lots, if a future street right-of-way has been established, such measurement shall be from the future street right-of- way line. YARD, SIDE: A yard between the side lot line and a line parallel thereto and extending from the front yard to the rear yard. ZERO LOT LINE: The location of a building on a lot in such a manner that one or more of the building's sides rest directly on a lot line. -41- We the undersigned support Jaime and Donnasue Ortiz's request for a variance to complete a closed wooden fence around their side and backyard which faces Vista Grove and He£~osa. 1. Each of us lives within direct view of their property. 2. Each of us believes the Ortizes have a right to privacy and safety from the pedestrians and vehicles using Vista Grove and Hermosa, just as other surrounding property owners. 3. We use Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove routinely and disagree that the Ortizes proposed closed fence area would create a traffic safety problem for anyone, including their neighbor to the east when pulling out of their driveway. We ask and encourage the planning commission to grant the variance as requested by Jaime and Donnasue Ortiz. S ig~ature Signature Address AddreSs Address / ~PR-25-94 ~ON 16:10 ~ O2 April 25, 1994 Mr. E. David Barker, Chairman Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: I am writing this letter in support of Jaime and Donnasue Ortiz's request for a variance. My family and I live across the street to the north of the Ortiz property at 5283 Alpine Meadows Court. it is my opinion the Ortiz's plan to complete their rock-faced pilasters and closed wood fencing of their north side and backyard is reasonable and compatible to our neighborhood. I cannot understand why the Toheyes have objected to the closed wood fence. I understand the planning department has cited the Ortiz's with a code violation and revoked their approval of the closed wood fence. ! am told the City's reasoning for it's action is because the Vista Grove side of the Ortiz property is considered the front of their property and not the Hermosa side where their home actually faces. Apparently, this view came about because of an ordinance passed several years ago stating the shorter street-side of a corner lot is considered the front of a property. Therefore, because Vista Grove is c{aimed to be the front of their property, the code does not allow a 6 foot solid fencing along the front of a property. I support the planning commissions approval of the variance requested by the Ortiz's. It is my opinion that the literal interpretation of the shorter street-side ordinance unfaidy restricts the Ortiz's ability to have privacy in their side and back yard. Hermosa and Vista Grove are well-travelled streets by majority of all residents in the area. The Ortiz's would not have any privacy and ability to reduce noise from the street traffic. All of the residences in the area, including the Toheyes, can enclose their side and back yards with solid fences. The granting of a variance would not grant the Ortiz's any special privilege compared to other properties in the area, ~PR-25-94 MON ]6:!0 ...... P,O,~ Mr. E. David Barker Page 2 I cannot see how the closed wooden fence would be a safety or traffic concern. The proposed wooden fence begins approximately forty feet from the curb of Hermosa. t travel Hermosa and Vista Grove routinely. The horse-trail fence along Hermosa and eucalyptus trees interfere with drivers ability to see traffic at the corner of Hermosa and Vista Grove. The intent of the Ortiz family is to enclose their side and backyard with a wooden fence would not interfere with vehicles driving onto or from Hermosa to Vista Grove. I requested the planning commission approve the variance request of Jaime and Donnasue Ortiz. iincerely. ~'---,...., Jo. o. o~ D. Dunlap, III Former, City of Rancho Oucamonga Ohairman and Member of the Citizens Environmental Management Commission (1990-1993) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Conm%ission Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-11 - BHP STEEL U.S. A. (SUPRACOTE) - A request to construct a 93,500 square foot addition to connect two existing industrial buildings in the General Industrial designation (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located on the north side of Arrow Route at Oakwood Place - APN: 208-961-18 and 19. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Industrial Building; South East West Industrial Area Specific Plan, General Industrial (Subarea 8) - Vacant and Industrial Building; Industrial Area Specific Plan, General Industrial (Subarea 8) - Vacant; Industrial Area Specific Plan, General Industrial (Subarea 8) Industrial Building; Industrial Area Specific Plan, General Industrial (Subarea 8) General Plan Designations: Project Site - General Industrial North - General Industrial South - General Industrial East - General Industrial West - General Industrial Site Characteristics: The site consists of a 151,098 square foot metal building currently occupied by Supracote and a 59,920 square foot concrete tilt-up building serving several industrial tenants. The balance of the site is developed with parking and landscape areas. ITEM H PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 94-11 - BHP STEEL U. S. A. April 27, 1994 Page 2 D. Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Office 27,473 1 space/ 110 134 250 sq. ft. Processing/ Warehouse 20,000 1 space/ 20 20 1,000 sq. ft. 20,000 I space/ 10 10 2,000 sq. ft. 207,280 1 space/ 52 52 4,000 sq. ft. Total 274,753 192 216 ANALYSIS: General: Supracote has been in operation at this location since 1969. When the Industrial Area Specific Plan was adopted in 1981, the land use (i.e., Medium Manufacturing) became a conditionally per~titted use; hence, Supracote became legal non-conforming. In order to allow Supracote to expand their business consistent with current operations, the Industrial Area Specific Plan regulations for Subarea 8 state that Supracote should be allowed to continue and expand subject to the development standards of the Plan. A Conditional Use Permit is not required for the expansion of land use; however, it is necessary in order to exceed the 75-foot height limit imposed by the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Currently, the plant is used to apply a coat of paint to sheet metal. The proposed expansion would essentially be the same process and equipment, differing only in that the production line would be used to apply a metallic coating. All processing and storage will be within enclosed buildings. The facility involves the transport of heavy rolls of metal and frequent large truck trips. In order to accomplish the expansion, the following modifications will occur: The applicant has entered into an agreement to purchase the existing industrial building to the west. The production line will be housed in a structure connecting the existing Supracote building to the existing industrial building to the west. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 94-11 - BHP STEEL U. S. A. April 27, 1994 Page 3 The rear 142 feet of the existing industrial building will be removed and be replaced with a 271 foot deep structure that will serve as warehouse area for the new production line. The parking area at the north end of the Supracote site and the site to the west is being modified to provide automobile and truck parking to meet the needs of the users. The existing rail spur will be relocated to provide access to the new addition. Additional parking will be provided at the south side of the production line structure. With the development of the production line, several unique challenges affect the design of the addition: Ideally, the production line structure would be 800-900 feet in length; however, this site will only allow a 475 foot structure. A key element of the production line is the heating and cooling of the sheet metal during the coating process. Because the production line is limited to 475 feet in length, the material heating and cooling will be handled vertically instead of horizontally. To provide the necessary distance, the central portion of the production line structure is 98 feet tall. The southern portion of the structure will be 88 feet in height. By comparison, the existing production line structure is 48 feet high. The Industrial Area Specific Plan limits structures to four stories or 75 feet, whichever is greater, unless approved as a Conditional Use Permit. Large number of louvers are provided to assist in the cooling of the product. Vents provided at the roof eave help to expend the 7 million BTU's per hour generated by the process. Given the height of the building, the amount of heat to be expended, and the scrubber and brush requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the furnace stack will be ~13 feet tall. Design Review Co~m~ittee: The Design Review Co~nittee (McNiel, Coleman) reviewed the application and recomended approval subject to the following conditions: The west elevation should be designed with a finish similar to the existing concrete tilt-up building. The Committee suggested the use of a smooth metal finish, rather than corrugated metal, as used on other portions of the addition. 2. The color palette proposed by the applicant is acceptable. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 94-11 - BHP STEEL U.S.A. April 27, 1994 Page 4 Co Landscaping should be provided adjacent to the Supracote building, along the south elevation, between the existing roll-up doors. Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed the Initial Study and determined that the project could have a significant environmental effect in terms of producing air emissions and water quality. The Supracot plant presently operates within the air and water quality standards. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and Chino Basin Municipal Water District are the primary responsible agencies and were consulted early in the design process to ensure that the project includes state-of-the-art pollution control measures. A series of scrubbers will be used on the furnace stack to reduce the emissions generated on-site. This reduction, however, will not bring the emission level into compliance with SCAQMD requirements. In order to meet SCAQMD requirements, the applicant has purchased emission credits. The emission credits will offset the emissions generated by the new facility over the entire region, thereby providing mitigation acceptable to SCAQMD. To handle the waste water generated by the new production line, an on-site water treatment facility will be required to treat the water before discharging into the sanitary sewer. The existing production line is equipped with a water treatment facility. Based on discussions with Chino Basin Municipal Water District, the existing facility will be modified to handle the additional waste water generated by the new production line. Therefore, a second facility will not be required to meet Chino Basin Municipal Water District's requirements. With the above-mentioned mitigation measures in place, the potentially significant environmental impacts will be reduced to a level of less than significant. As a result, a mitigated Negative Declaration can be issued for the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recomends that the Planning Comission approve Conditional Use Permit 94-11 through adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a mitigated Negative Declaration. BB:SM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Map Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Building Elevations Exhibit "E" - Grading Plan Resolution of Approval with Conditions · RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-11, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 93,500 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION, IN EXCESS OF 75 FEET IN HEIGHT, TO CONNECT TWO EXISTING INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DESIGNATION (SUEAREA 8) OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ARROW ROUTE AT OAKWOOD PLACE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 208-961-18 AND 19. A. Recitals. 1. BHP Steel U.S. A. Inc. has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. 94-11, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 27th day of April 1994, 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located on the north side of Arrow Route at Oakwood Place with a street frontage of 875 feet and lot depth of 616 feet and is presently developed with two industrial buildings and a water treatment facility; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated for industrial uses and is developed with an industrial building. The property to the south of the site is designated for industrial uses and is vacant and developed with industrial buildings. The property to the east is designated for industrial uses and is vacant. The property to the west is designated for industrial uses and is developed with an industrial building; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 94-11 - BHP STEEL U. S. A. - SUPRACOTE April 27, 1994 Page 2 c. The development of the 93,500 square foot addition is consistent with the General Industrial designation of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Industrial designation of the General Plan; and d. The Industrial Area Specific Plan allows structures to exceed 4 stories or 75 feet subject to review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit application. The application contemplates a structure of up to 98 feet in height, excluding vent stacks, in the central portion of the building which is approximately 200 feet away from the street frontage; and e. The proposed architectural design minimizes the visual impact of the structure's height through the following features: increased setback from Arrow Route, shed roofs, color, curved roof forms, and massing; and f. The application, with the attached conditions of approval, will comply with all applicable standards of the Development Code. 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 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. That 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. c. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 94-11 - BHP STEEL U. S. A. - SUPRACOTE April 27, 1994 Page 3 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 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 application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Plannin~ Division 1) Approval is granted for a structure up to 98 feet in height, excluding vent stacks, in accordance with the approved plans on file in the Planning Division. 2) The west elevation shall be designed with smooth metal panels, rather than corrugated metal siding, similar in appearance to the existing concrete tilt-up building. The final design shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. 3) Parking shall be restriped and landscaping shall be provided adjacent to the existing Supracote building, along the south elevation, between the existing roll-up doors. 4) The project shall comply with all requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District including, but not limited to, stack scrubbers, purchase of emission credits, etc. Proof of compliance shall be submitted to the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. 5) The project shall comply with all requirements of the Chino Basin Municipal Water District for waste water discharge. Proof of compliance shall be submitted to the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 94-11 - BHP STEEL U. S. A. - SUPRACOTE April 27, 1994 Page 4 En~ineerin~ Division 1) A manhole shall be incorporated into the proposed storm drain line at the junction with the existing public facility. 2) An Encroachment Agreement for the private storm drain within the public right-of-way shall be prepared and accepted prior to the issuance of building permits. 3) The drive approach, 300 feet west of the railroad spur, shall be upgraded to include commercial radius returns. 4) Remove existing under-sidewalk drain west of the 50-foot wide driveway and replace with a standard curbside outlet per City Standard Drawing No. 107. 5) A lot line adjustment shall be processed prior to issuance of building permit. 6) All City drawings shall be revised to reflect the above additions/alterations to the public right- of-way. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Those items checked are Conditions of Approval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 989-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Time Limits compl¢~o. Da~c 1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, it building permils are ~ / not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the (:late of approval. 2. DevelopmentJDesign Review shall be approved prior to / / ~ / 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subject to the approval of __/ / SC- t2/93 4. The developer shall commence, participale in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, --/ / participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Proteclion District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specilications o! the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the Districrs property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply wilh all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. 5. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance ol building permits, whichever comes / / first, the applicanl shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District Ior the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation ol the !trial map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, il the affected school district has not 1ormed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the linal map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. 6. This condition shall be waived if lhe City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written cedification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. B. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, extedor materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and ,/'.?,'/~:~-/:i/ Specific Plan and Planned Community. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. 4. 6. Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire MarshalPs regulations have been complied wilh. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.), or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community Plans or Specific Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Sheriffs Departmenl (989-6611) pdor to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. ,/ 12/93 If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pic~-up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view arid adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, herming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. / / / / / / / / / /_ 1 1. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to approval and recordation ol the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 16. 17. 18. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation ol the final map or issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except for utility wires and similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No. · Any further modificalions to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or interior alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal of landmark trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site, shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval. C. Building Design An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall be supplemented with solar healing. Details shall be included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 12/93 All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of sudace treatment subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Wig / / / / / / / / / D. Parking 3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted for City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/ plazas/recreational uses. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. 6. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall resldct the storage of recreational vehicles on this site unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permils. E. Landscaping (for publicly maintained landscape areas, refer to Section N.) 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- ing in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in acco rdance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborisrs recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and Idmming methods. 3. A minimumof trees per gross acre, comprised of the !oilowing sizes, shall be provided within the project: % - 48- inch box or larger, % - 36- inch box or larger, __ % - 24- inch box or larger, __ % - 15-gallon, and __ % - 5 gallon. 4. A minimum of /~- % of trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. 5. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for ever~ three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. / /__ / / / / / t / / /__/__ / / / /__ / / / /.-- / /__ 12/93 6. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate o! one tree per 30 linear feet of building. All private slope banks 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less lhan 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vedical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. It. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be. planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu- ously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are respon- sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free from weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or · This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 12. The linal design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated Ior consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander- ing sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensilied landscaping, is required along 14. Landscaping and irrigation syslems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter ol this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 15. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteda shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. /M/ / / / / / / / /__ __/ / / / / / SC-12/93 F. Signs The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. 2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or townhomes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. G. Environmental The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigalion measures contained in the final report. H. Other Agencies v'/ 1. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Standards. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide al all times during construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District requiremenls. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District that temporary water supply !or fire protection is available, pending completion of required lire protection system. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. /__/ / / / / __J / / SC-12/93 For projects using septic tank facililies, writlen certification of acceptability, including all supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department of Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. 6of12 ~-///'~0 APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 989-1863, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development 1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such tees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. 4. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, affer trac~parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. J. Existing Structures v/x 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings. 2. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished. 3. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, filled and/or capped to comply with the Uniform Plumbing Code and Uniform Building Code. 4. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans submitted for building permit application. K. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to pedorm such work. The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Disturbance Permit is required. Please contact San Bernardino County Department of Agriculture at (714) 387-2111 for permit application. Documentation of such permit shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance ol rough grading permit. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualilied engineer or geologist and submitted al the time of application for grading plan check. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. / / / / / / / /__ / / __/ / / / / / /__ SC- 12/93 6. As a custom-lot subdivision. the following requirements shall be met: Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits. Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction ol the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties, are to be installed pdor to issuance of building permits for conslruction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis.) All slope banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted with ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method of erosion control shall be completed to the satislaction of the Building Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be provided. This requirement does not release the applicant/developer from compliance with the slope planting requirements of Section 17.08.040 I of the Development Code. i Comp]euon D.~ L,: / / / / APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 989-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Dedication and Vehicular Access Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Privale easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): total feet on total feet on total feet on total feet on 3. An irrevocable offer of dedication for for all private streets or drives. -foot wide roadway easement shall be made 4. Non-vehicular access shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets: 12/93 Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of building permits, where no map is involved. / / / / / / / / 6. Private drainage easements forcross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 7. The final map shall clearly delineate a 10-foot minimum building restriction area on the neighboring lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and contain the following language: "l/We hereby dedicate to the City of Rancho Cucamonga the right to prohibit the construclion of (residential) buildings (or other structures) within those areas designated on the map as building restriction areas." Cemplemm D.mz / / / /__ A maintenance agreement shall also be granted from each lot to the adjacent lot through the CC&R's. 8. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the final map. 9, Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City wherever they encroach onto private property. 10. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street free maintenance easement shall be provided. 11. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required !or the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. / / M. Street Improvements v~ 1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. A minimum of 26- foot wide pavement, within a 40 -foot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half-section streets. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: STREET NAME CUR8 & A.C. SIDE- DRIV~ STREET STREET COMM MEDIAN BIKE GU ~ ~ t:R PVMT WALK APPR. LIGHTS TREES TRAIL ISI.AND TRAIL OTHER SC-12/93 Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. /c) I! so marked, side- walk shall be curvilinear per STD. 304. (d) tf so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee sha~l be provided for this item. ,/ 4. Improvement plans and construction: Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a regis- tered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or pdvate street improve- ments, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to any work being pedormed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Signal conduit wit h pull boxes shall be installed on any new construction or reconstruction of major, secondary or collector streets which intersect with other major, secondary or collector streets for future traffic signals. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside ol BCR, EC R or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) All pull boxes shall be No. 6 unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope. e. Wheel chair ramps shall be installed on all four corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. A street closure permit may be required. Acash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single family lots. h. Handicap access ramp design shall be as specified by the City Engineer. i. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being pedormed on the pri- vate streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. Slreet trees, a minimum o! 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. / / / / / / / / / sc-12/93 10 of 12 7. Intersection line of site designs shall be reviewed by lhe City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. a. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Walls, signs, and slopes shall be located outside the lines of sight. Landscaping and other obstructions within the lines of sight shall be approved by the City Engineer. / /. / /... b. Local residential street intersections shall have their noticeability improved, usually by moving the 2 +/- closest street trees on each side away fromthe street and placed in a street tree easement. / 8. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the following right-of-way: / / 9. All public improvements on the following streets shall be operationally complete pdor to the ~ / issuance of building permits: N. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set o! landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval pdor to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscape parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas are required to be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: / /__ 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. 4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: O, Drainage 1. SC-12/93 and Flood Control The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs firsl. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. I I of 12ff-'ff~ 4. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within itsright-of-way. 5. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain p~pe measured from the ouler edge of a mature tree trunk. 6. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street. P. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2.The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3.Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter ol compliance lrom the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. / / / / /__ / / Q. General Requirements and Approvals 1 .The separate parcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into one parcel prior to issuance of building permits. 2. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, Ior: 3. Prior to approval of the final map a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District among the newly created parcels. 4. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall be paid prior Io final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 5. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right-ot-way: / / / / 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the Law Enforcement Community Facilities District shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs lirst. Formation cosIs shall be borne by the Developer. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be com- pleted beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. / / SC-12/93 12 of 12 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Co~nission STAFF REPORT Brad Buller, City Planner CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-09 - PETROSSI - A request to establish an indoor soccer facility, including 2 soccer rinks, snack bar, pro- shop, and arcade, within an existing industrial building in the General Industrial designation (Subarea 8) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 11120 Tacoma Drive - APN: 209-471-05. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Site Characteristics: The site was fully developed in 1993 with an industrial building. B. Parking Calculations: N~mher of N~mber of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces · of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Soccer Facility 23,052 (Commercial Recreation) * 72 72 Total 72 72 * For discussion of parking ratio used, see Analysis below. ANALYSIS: General: The proposed use is the US Indoor Soccer Academy, a youth soccer training facility intended to capitalize on the enormous popularity of the sport of soccer in the United States. The facility will include two soccer arenas covered with astro turf (see Exhibit "D"). Ancillary facilities include a cafeteria, pro-shop to retain soccer goods, locker rooms, and a video arcade. The facility will be used exclusively for year-round indoor soccer league practice and competitive play. Both arenas will be utilized at the same time to maximize playing time during the evening and weekends. Games will be scheduled weekly from 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. and on weekends from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Training clinics will be held throughout the year from 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. weekly. There will be eight full time staff in the facility at any given time. For more information, refer to the letter from the applicant (see Exhibit "F"). ITEM I PLANNING CO~dISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 94-09 - PETROSSI April 27, 1994 Page 2 De Site Suitability: The primary consideration in reviewing a Conditional Use Permit is suitability of the project site for the intended co~ercial recreation ~se and compatibility with surrounding uses. The site is part of a larger master planned industrial park that consists of 30 buildings on 52 acres of land (see Exhibit "B"). The site is located one-half block south of Arrow Route, a major arterial street, with projected traffic volumes in excess of 50,000 daily two-way trips. The subject building is located on a separate parcel that shares access with adjoining industrial parcels. The building was parked at 1 space per 500 square feet, which is manufacturing, for a total of 51 parking spaces. The proposed site plan parking layout, access, and building configuration are suitable for the intended use. Compatibility: The subject building is bounded on the west by a similar sized industrial manufacturing building, on the east by two smaller industrial ~U%nufacturing buildings, and on the north by a smaller industrial building (future phase). To the south, across Tacoma Drive, is a larger warehouse distribution building (future phase). The majority of this industrial park has not bean developed. The proposed hours of operation are weekly after 3:00 p.m. for the training clinics and after 4:00 p.m. for games, and on weekends from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. These hours represent an offset peak demand period from the surrounding industrial land uses. With primary soccer activity occurring in the evenings and on weekends, no conflicts are anticipated between the proposed use and surrounding uses. Parking: The Development Code has no parking standard for an indoor soccer use; however, an adequate formula for parking can be derived from analyzing the operating characteristics of the proposed use. The most intense parking demand will occur during league play. Both arenas will essentially be in play at all times during business hours. Therefore, four teams, each with an average of 12 players, could have up to 48 players plus 4 coaches. Training clinics will be limited to 40 players, plus coaches or trainers. According to the applicant, 80 percent of the players are below the age of ~2 and would be driven to the facility by parents or coaches. Under a worst case scenario in which each coach drove in individual vehicles and each player were brought by a parent in individual vehicles, 52 vehicles plus 8 staff vehicles could be on-site at one time resulting in the need to accomodate 60 vehicles per session. A total of 72 parking spaces are shown on the proposed site plan. However, only 67 spaces can be counted toward the required parking. The existing parking lot contains 53 spaces. Five of the new stalls (the employee parking) cannot be counted toward required parking because they are tandem to 5 other standard spaces. However, staff finds that the 7 additional spaces beyond the 60 vehicles per session noted earlier is sufficient for this use given the conditions for the use of the facility and hours of operation. The 5 e~ployee spaces may provide an additional parking buffer beyond the 7 standard spaces provided. PLANNING CO~ISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 94-09 - PETROSSI April 27, 1994 Page 3 RECO~4ENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit 94-09 through adoption of the attached Resolution. BB:DC:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Master Plan Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Floor Plan Exhibit "E" - Elevations Exhibit "F" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "G" - Building & Safety Con~nents Exhibit "H" - Fire Safety Comments Resolution of Approval CITY EXHIBIT:~ SCALE: '--Ii ,i|l ~ Ij il i ,',,, , _.~.~ ~. ~~~ .., ' ': ~ ~' - ~ ' 'J J. I , ,::;~' I : I*** ~:J* U~'-~:I:~l, ,:;~h,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,%~; ~ :.:.~~ ~,..,~ ~ .....= .......j:~,r :::::::::::::::::::::::::: ':' r .i ]= ='- - = - =,,~ ..... . _,=, . ,..=_ ==___ ~, ~'~:~:, .,,., ............. '-:~~ ~/ ~1 ~ ,~ ': ; .....:~ ' .=~ m'~,i I~ ............m-.-:.-.-~m ~ ~ ' ~].'~ k - I ~ ~ J ~'] ~t~ ~ ~J J t I I J~ j I I ; j t I I .... NY'-I d ~I,LI$ N~Id ~00~M Petrossi & Associates Architecture, Planning, Interiors February 7, 1994 Mr. Brad Bullard Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Mr. Bullard, -- RECEIVED -- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONQA ~'LANNING DIVISION 1994 Per our telephone conversation regarding parking, Please find following parking study: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Indoor Soccer is played with six (6) player on each side. An average team will have Twelve (12) registered players. There are two (2) indoor soccer fields. Two (2) Teams play on each field every hour. Total of four (4) teams will be playing at any given time. There will be forty eight (48) players every hour. Eighty (80) percent of players are below the age of 12. Parents will be driving players to the center. Players usually drive together or with some parents to the center. For every two players there is only one car needed. So for forty eight (48) players, twenty four (24) car is needed. There is also an overlap of players in the center. For The Forty eight (48) additional players during the overlap period an additional 24 cars are needed. At any given time 48 parking spaces are required for players. There will be eight (8) full time staff on site at any given time. Therefore (48 players + 8 staff) = 56 parking spaces are required. 20% contingency must also be allocated for additional parking spaces, this is 11 additional parking spaces. The Total parking requirement will therefore be 56+ 11 =67 spaces. The center has currently 70 parking spaces which is more than adequate for the traffic that the center generates. The cafeteria is actually a rest area for the parents while their children are playing. The cafeteria will only be serving cold drinks as well as snacks. It is not a restaurant. Please find attached copy of cup for similar project in City Of Irvine. Should you have any question please call me at any time. Sincerely Yours, 2~)82 S.E Bristol ,%/it~ 221 · Sawta A~o Heights, CA 92707. Tel: (714) 833-3240 · Fax: (714) 833-1145 Executive Summary The Company US Indoor Soccer Academy Inc., ("USISA") was formed in August 1993 to provide youth soccer players with state-of-the art indoor soccer fields and facilities for training as well as for recreational and competitive games. Indoor soccer is becoming one of the hottest sports in the US. Its popularity is increasing rapidly in all age groups. Indoor soccer is a very exciting and fast game. It helps the players with their playing technique and ball control skills. USISA's goal is to teach and develop skills of individual players and coaches. There are over 15 Million youth soccer players in the US. Soccer is the most popular sport for kids under the age of 14. USISA's goal is to provide an environment where these players can improve their skills. USISA centers will be set up in regions with a very large concentration of youth soccer players. Currently 55 sites have been identified. Each of these sites has a population of at least 30,000 youth soccer players. 80% of all youth soccer players are under the age of 14. The products USISA centers will consist of two indool' soccer arenas covered with astro turf, an arcade with state-of-the art video games as well as virtual reality machines, a pro shop and a cafeteria. USISA centers will also offer viewing access to all major soccer games around the world via satellite dishes. USISA will generate its revenue from 6 different areas: 1. Indoor Soccer League Registrations: There will be six sessions during the year when teams can sign up to play in a league. Each team can choose one of the 24 different divisions available. The league calendar is as follows: Season #1: Sep-Oct Season 02: Nov-Dec Season #3: Jan-Feb Season 04: Mar-Apr Season #5: May-Jun Season #6: Jul-Aug There will be games scheduled weekly from 4:00 PM - 11:00 PM, and on weekends from' 9:00 AM - 10:00 PM. That is a total of 54 hours a week for league games. There are two arenas available in each center, so there are 108 hours available for team play. Two teams can play every hour, so the center can accommodate 216 teams for an 8-week season. The registration fee per team is $450 for each season, Each team can have up to 15 players. Each of the 24 divisions is made up of 9 teams. Each team will play 8 games. The team with the most points will be the divisional champion. The top 4 teams will win awards. The divisions will be as follows: Divisions 1,2 and 3:5-6 years old boys and girls Division 4, 5 and 6:7-8 years old boys and girls Divisions 7,8 and 9:9-10 years old boys and girls Divisions I0, 11 and 12:11-12 years old boys and girls Divisions 13, 14 and 15:13-14 years old boys and girls Divisions 16, 17 and 18: 15- 16 years old boys and girls Divisions 19, 20 and 21:17-18 years old boys and girls Divisions 22, 23, and 24: open During each eight-week season, tournament teams will receive: · Two hours of an indoor soccer clinic conducted by professional soccer players and coaches. · One hour of indoor soccer coaching practice for coaches and team managers. · Video recording of one of the teams' games. · Team pictures · Minimum of 8 games. · Awards and trophies will be handed out to the top 4 teams in each division A limited number of teams will be accepted for each tournament. Teams must sign up at least 30 days before the start of each tournament. All games will be played with 6 players on each side, in 1 O-minute quarters. 2. Youth clinics There will be 7 youth clinics throughout the year. Each clinic will last 7 weeks. The hours for the clinics will be weekly from 3:00 PM - 4:00 PM. The cost for attending each clinic will be $50 per player. 40 players can sign up for each clinic. There will be 5 divisions in each session. During each session each player will get one-on-one training by a professional coach or player. 3. Cafeteria Each center will have a cafeteria that will serve hot and cold drinks, juices, as well as cold snacks and cookies. The cafeteria will be equipped with large-screen TVs for displaying national and international soccer games. 4. Pro Shoo There will be a pro shop on site. The shop will provide soccer gear from Addidas, Puma, Lanzera, Lotto, Umbro, Le Coq Sportif and Hummel. Other products offered will be ' Soccer T-shirts, Accessories and Socks, 1994 Word Cup Collector Items, Guards, Balls, Videos, Sandals, Etc. Arcade Each center will be equipped with a 1,500 square foot arcade. State of the art video games as well as Virtual Reality Machines will be available. The arcade section will have over 25 different machines. 6. Comoany Sponsorship The side panels of each field will be covered with advertising from major corporate sponsors. There will be 50 12-foot panels available in each center for advertising by sponsors. Potential sponsors are: Nintendo, Addidas, Disney, Toys-R-Us, Etc. SUMMARY With the 1994 World Cup taking place in the US, and with the increased popularity of the sport as well as a very large number of participating players, this will prove to be a very successful venture. !~P,F, ~ ^1 F."I~Y I)IVISION 1')1~¢)]1,~, I Rt. II ~ COMMI,,N [ S RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-09 FOR AN INDOOR SOCCER FACILITY, LOCATED IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 8) OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209-471-05. A. Recitals. 1. Hannibal Petrossi has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. 94-09 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 27th day of April 1994, 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at 11120 Tacoma Drive with a street frontage of 204 feet and lot depth of 296 feet and is presently improved with a 23,052 square foot industrial building; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is industrial, the property to the south consists of industrial, the property to the east is industrial, and the property to the west is industrial; and c. The application contemplates an indoor soccer facility, including two playing fields, locker rooms, pro-shop, and cafeteria; and d. The proposed hours of operation are weekdays from 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. and on weekends from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; and e. The proposed use is exclusively for league play and is not open to the general public. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 94-09 - PETROSSI April 27, 1994 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. That 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. That 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. c. That the proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. This Commission hereby finds and determines that the project identified above in this Resolution 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 the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, ~, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below: Plannin~ Division l) Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and all other City ordinances. 3) If the operation of the facility causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses or operations, including but not limited to parking, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for the consideration and possible termination of the use. 4) Any signs proposed for the facility shall be designed in conformance with the Uniform Sign Program for the complex. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 94-09 - PETROSSI April 27, 1994 Page 3 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) Fire 1) Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all conditions of approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Approval is for a 23,052 square foot indoor soccer facility with incidental services such as a cafeteria and pro-shop. The expansion or the intensification of the use, or change in the hours of operation, shall require a modification to the Conditional Use Permit. A copy of this Resolution shall be attached to any lease for this space. The applicant shall restripe the parking lot to provide the 67 required parking spaces per the approved site plan on file in the Planning Division. The 5 additional employee parking spaces on the west side of the building may be striped and used for overflow parking but shall not be counted as required parking. The approval is granted for indoor soccer league use only and the facility shall not be open to the general public. The hours of operation, except for office functions, shall be limited to weekdays from 3:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. and on weekends from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Spectator seating shall not be provided, except as is included in the cafeteria, unless a modification to this permit is approved subject to additional parking study. District/BuildinG and Safetv Division Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal's regulations have been complied with. Detailed plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CUP 94-09 - PETROSSI April 27, 1994 Page 4 2) Any modification to the approved plans after occupancy of the building may require additional review and/or permits from the Fire District and the Building and Safety Division. 3) The building will be required to have an automatic fire protection system (sprinklers). Flame retardant treatment of the interior finish and decorations will require proper certification. Additional exit illumination with back-up power may apply after plans are approved and upon final Fire Department inspection. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Co~nission Brad Buller, City Planner Scott Murphy, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. - A request to construct an 8,540 square foot restaurant on a 2.2 acre parcel in the Office Park designation of the Terra Vista Planned Com~nunity, located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue - APN: 1077-421-58. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant; Terra Vista Planned Community, Office Park South - Vacant; Industrial Area Specific Plan, Industrial Park (Subarea 7) East - Vacant; Terra Vista Planned Community, Office Park West - Co~ercial Center; Terra Vista Planned Co~m~/nity, Commercial Community General Plan Designations: Project Site - Office North - Office South - Industrial Park East - Office West - Community Commercial Site Characteristics: The site is presently vacant with an average slope of approximately 2 percent from north to south. No significant vegetation exists on the site. D. Parking Calculations: N,~mher of N~mher of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Restaurant 6,000 1 space/ 60 60 100 sq. ft. 2,540 ~ space/ 46 72 55 sq. ft. Total 8,540 ~06 132 ITEM J PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DR 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. April 27, 1994 Page 2 ANALYSIS: Ae General: The applicant is proposing to develop an 8,540 square foot restaurant located at the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue. The restaurant's entrance will face Foothill Boulevard. Hardscape and benches will be provided along the Foothill Boulevard frontage. Parking for the facility will be located to the east and north of the restaurant building. Access to the site will be gained via a driveway off Spruce Avenue, and also ultimately from Foothill Boulevard. Be Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Lumpp, Bull,r) reviewed the application on March 15, 1994. At that time, the Committee recommended the following conditions be incorporated into the plans prior to Planning Commission consideration: Additional architectural detailing/treatment should be provided on the Spruce Avenue (west) elevation. The detailing should include the use of columns slightly recessed to appear as a structural element. 2. Columns shouldbe provided to frame the main entry. 3. The stucco and cornice treatment provided on the parapet should be carried around to the back side of the parapet. 4. The loading area at the north side of the building should be striped and posted for "loading only." 5. The trash enclosure should be redesigned to include an overhead trellis, roll-up door, and wall cap. The screen wall along the north elevation should be extended to a point in line with the tower element and landscaping should be provided on the north side of the wall. The applicant should explore the possibility of providing additional hardscape, benches, tree wells, etc., at the southeast corner of the building to provide a more inviting waiting/plaza area. 8. A cap should be provided on the screen walls. To address the Committee's concerns, the applicant has revised the site plan to extend the screen wall and provide landscaping along the north elevation and has provided additional hardscape and benches along the southern portion of the building. Staff has spoken with the applicant about the possibility of providing additional hardscape and benches at the main entry. The applicant has expressed concern about the grading that will take place within this area and, therefore, suggests that additional review with staff occur prior to building permit issuance. The applicant has also revised the building elevations to provide col-mns at the main entry and along both the east and west elevations. The col-mns however PLANNING CO~4ISSION STAFF REPORT DR 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. April 27, 1994 Page 3 are not recessed as suggested by the Design Review Committee. The applicant believes that recessing the columns will obscure their visibility and not provide the relief desired. Additionally, the applicant believes that it will not be noticeable that the columns are not supporting a structural element because the tops of the columns are under the awnings. A condition of approval has been included in the Resolution requiring the recessing of those column elements. If the Planning Commission believes that the condition is not necessary, it should be removed prior to adoption of the Resolution. All other items identified by the Design Review Committee have been included as conditions of approval in the Resolution. Co Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed Part II of the Initial Study and determined that the development of the restaurant will not have a significant impact on the environment. As a result, staff recommends that the Planning Co~nission adopt a Negative Declaration for the project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Development Review 94-02 through adoption of the attached Resolution and issue a Negative Declaration for the project. BAd Bullet City Planner BB:SM:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" - Master Plan Exhibit "C" - Site Plan Exhibit "D" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "E" - B~ilding Elevations Exhibit "F" - Grading Plan Resolution of Approval with Conditions JERSEY IBLVO i I S,~ ~S -T l al fill 0 d RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 94-02, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN 8,540 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT ON A 2.2 ACRE PARCEL IN THE OFFICE PARK DESIGNATION OF THE TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND SPRUCE AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1077-421-58. A. Recitals. 1. CRNO Architects, Inc. has.filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 94-02 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 27th day of April 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue with street frontages of 292 feet along Foothill Boulevard and 242 feet along Spruce Avenue. The property is presently vacant; and b. The properties to the north and east of the subject site are designated for office park uses and are vacant. The property to the south is designated for industrial use and is vacant, the property to the west is designated for commercial uses and is developed with a commercial center; and c. The development of the restaurant is consistent with' the office park designation of the Terra Vista Planned Community and the office designation of the General Plan; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. April 27, 1994 Page 2 d. The application, with the attached Conditions of Approval, will comply with all applicable standards of the Development Code and Terra Vista Community Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included f~r 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 hearing, the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. April 27, 1994 Page 3 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 application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Plannin~ Division 1) The following items shall be included on the final building plans for review and approval by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance: a) b) c) The stucco and cornice treatment shall be carried around to the back side of the parapet. The trash enclosure shall be designed to include an overhead trellis, roll-up door, and wall cap. A cap shall be provided on the screen walls. 2) 3) 4) d) The loading area shall be striped and/or posted. e) The columns shall be recessed on the east and west elevations to appear as if supporting the soffit. The final grading and site plans shall be reviewed to determine if additional hardscape and benches can be provided adjacent to the main entry. The final plans shall be approved by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. All signs shall be internally illuminated channel letters. The maximum number of signs shall be limited to 3 (combination of wall and/or monument signs). The final plans shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to permit issuance. This approval is only for an 8,540 square foot restaurant. The Master Plan is not approved herewith and requires separate Commission review and approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. April 27, 1994 Page 4 5) A Type III Cateway shall be installed at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Spruce Avenue. The design and setback shall be consistent with the gateway on the west side of Spruce Avenue. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. En~ineerin~ Division l) All applicable conditions of Resolution No. 93-26 for Parcel Map 14331 shall apply. 2) A sidewalk easement along Spruce Avenue to achieve a 12-foot parkway shall be dedicated. 3) The parkway within the sidewalk easement on Foothill Boulevard shall be designed as follows: a) The sidewalk shall be constructed in conformance with City Standard No. 114. b) Public sidewalk shall not be integrated into private access. c) No private hardscape shall be placed between public sidewalk and curb (monument sign on landscape plan). 4) City Plan No. 1342 shall be revised to reflect the new mid-block driveway on Spruce Avenue including modifications to signing and striping as approved by the City Engineer. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Bullet, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 94-02 - CRHO ARCHITECTS, INC. April 27, 1994 Page 5 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: ~V~,~/~/~/~' /~Vi~'V~' ~-~ APPLICANT: ~ ~~f~ /~ LOCATION: ~ ~/~ ~ '~/~ ~ose items c~ am ~ of ~val. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (714) 98~-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Time Llmltl ~ ~.,. 1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are ---/ / not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the (:late ol approval. 2. Development/Design Review shall be approved prior to I I __/ / 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted sub~sct to the approval of __.J / 2/9 t 4. Thedeveiopershallcommonce, participate in, anciconsummateorcausatobecommenced, ---/ / participated in, or consummatecl, a Metlo-Roos ComntJnlty Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Prolsction District to finance conatnJction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be iooated, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District'8 property upon con~:~tefion. The equipment shaJl be selected by the District in accorclance with Its needs. In any ~ of a atation, the developer shall con~ with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be 1orrnsd by the District and the developer by the time racordation of the final map occurs. 5. Prtor to recorclation of the final map or the lesuance of buiiding parmits, whichever comes ___/ / first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the e~tabllshment of a Mello-Roos community Facilities District Ior the construction and maintemmce of necessan/school facilities. However, if any school district has I:xeviously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territon/of such existing District I:~or to the recordation of the final map or the issuance oi building permits, whichever comes lirat. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Melio-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the peoject and prior to the rscorclation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said I~OjeCt, this condition 8hall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived it the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. Prior to recordation of the linal map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to tinal map approval in the ease of subdivision or prior to issuance of permits in the case of all other residential pmjeots. B. Site DeveloRmant 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which inolucle site plans, architectural elevations, exte~tor materials and colore, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and Specific Plan and Planned Community. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satislaction of the City Planner. Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall's regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building parmits. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency p~ior to issuance of any parrnlra (su~ as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.), or prior to final map a13proval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or appm~ use has commenced, whichever comes first. o Approval of this request shall not waive corr~iance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and N:I31'.c-'-Ie Community Plans or Specitic Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and a13pmved by the City Planner and Sheriff's Department (989-6611) prior to the ~suanca of building parmits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method of shielding sc as not to adversely SC - 2/9 ! o o If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash plc~-up shall be for individual units with all reoeptacles shielded lrom public view. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet C~y standards. The final clesign, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and aPl:)roval prior to issuance of building parmits. 10. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances sucfi as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination o! concrete or masonry walls, betming, and/or iandsca13ing to the satisfaction of the City Planner. No.: Comld. etic~'~ .._/ / / / __./ / ._./ / /' / / / ! / / / / / / / / / ,/ 11. Street names shall be submitted tor City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopied Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the tinal map. 12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to approval am] recon:latlon of the Final Tract Map and prior to ap13mval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recoKled concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 16. All parkways, open areas, and tmxtecaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means a(~.,eptable to the City. Proof ol this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the puq:x)so of assuming that each lot or dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions for the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, excep~ for utility wires and similar ol~s, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2. 18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The s~e shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alleration Permit No. · Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to, exterior alterations and/or interior alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, ramoval of landmark trees, demolition, reiccation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site, shall require a moclifioation to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval. C. Building Design An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units and tor heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to he of equivalent ~ and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time of initial development shall be sul:3tdemented with solar heating. Details shall be included in the building plans and shall be subrnitled for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. sc- 2/91 All dwellings shall have the from, side and rear elevations up~fack~l with architectural traatmsnt, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment sul~eot to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance ot building permits. / / __J / __/ / / / / / / / __/ / / / 3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted tor City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as requlrad by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. O. Parking and Vehicular Am (Indicate ~etatl~ on bulkling planl) 1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). 3. Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the developmeN to connect dwelltng&/units/buildings with open spaces/ plazas/recreational uses. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entmncas, and exits shall be striped per City standards. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back o! sidewalk. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restrict the storage of recreational vehicles on this site unless they are the principal source of transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on interior circulation aisles ofhor than in clasignatad visitor parking areas. Plans for any security gates shall be submittad for the City Planner, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval p~or to issuance of building parmits. E. Landscaping (for publicly maintaine I landlcape areee, reler to Section N.) v'/ 1. Adatailedlandscapaandinlgabonplan, including alopa planting and model home lar~scap- ing in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and ~1 prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map ap!xoval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. ,/ Existing trees required to be ~ed in place shall be I:x~lected with a construction barrier in accon~!ncewttll the Municipal Code Section 19.0~.110, and so riofed on the grading plans. The location of Ihose trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscapa plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and trimming methods. A minimum of trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, sltallbe provided within the project: % - 48- inch box or larger, % - 36- inch box or larger, ~ % - 24- inch box or larger, % - 15-gallon, and ~ % - 5 gallon.. 4. A minimum of ~-P % of trees plantad within the project shall be specimen size trees - 24-incll box or larger. 5. W'dhin parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. / / __J / ._J / / / / / ,, / / __/ / / / __/ / / /_ SC-2/9! 6. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. All private slope banks 5 leet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree par each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. It. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In acldition, slope hanks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Sk3pe planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to o For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu- ously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and cx~upled by the buyer. Prior to releasing cxx:upancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory 10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property ownera are respon- sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kepl tree from weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any clamaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 clays from the date of damage. 11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or . This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 12. The final design of the perimeter parkways, wails, iandacal~ng, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landacape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coo~inatecI for consistency with any parkway iandacaplng plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 13. Special landscape features such as mounding, aauvial rock, specimen size trees, meander- ing side_walks (with horizontal change), and intens#ied ianclscaplng, is rlKluired along f-~'////.ff_ ~/-- yD. 14. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be colltinuously maintained by tha developer. 15. All walls shall be provided with dacorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coorclinatEKI with the Engineering Division. 16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be deveioped and submitted for City Piannar review and approval pdor to issuance of building permits. These cr#eda shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 17. Landacaping and irrigation srtell be designed to consewe water through the principles of Xedacape as defined in Chapler 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. ._J / / / / / / / / / _.../ / / /, / / __/ / 2191 F. Signa The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs, 2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building parmits. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or townhemes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance of building permits. G. Environmental The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to ac_-,'e_pting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shell discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report, H. Other Agencle~ / 1. Emergency secondary accoss shall be proviCKi in a__,.,_-~_~t_ anco with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Standards. 4. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance free and clear, a minimum of 26 feet wide at all times ~luring co--ion in accordance w#h Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District requirements. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District that temporary water aupply for fire protection is available, pending completion of required fire protection system. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the apl~ate type and location of mail boxes. MuitHamily res~lential deve~=ments st~l I~OVUe a solid ovemead structure tor mail boxes with a¢laquato ilgNJng. The final location of the mall boxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be sul~act to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. / / / / / / __ff / / / / ,/ ,, / / / / __J / SC - 2/91 For projects using septic tank facilities, w~en certification of aCcolxa y, including all supportive information, shall be ol:Xained from the San Bernardino County Department ol Environmental Health and submittad to the Building Official prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. e of 12 APPLICANTS SHAll CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (714) 989-1863, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development V'/ 1. The applicant shall compiy with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Unilorm Mechani- cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all other appiicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautiticatldn Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems Deveiopment Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or Industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development tees at the established rate. Such tees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. 4. Street addresses shall be providod by the Building OfficiaJ, a~ter tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. J. Existing Structurl~ K. Grading -/ Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings. Existing buildings shall be rnacle to comply with correct building argl zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be domolished. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, filled and/or capped to co,¢,~y with the Uniform Plumping Co~le and Uniform Building Code. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building prans sumn~ted for Grading ol the ~ property shall be in --a~,~m:lence with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and acoepled grading practices. The final grading pmn shall be in substantial coNommnco wtlh the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of Calitomia to The deveiopment is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Disturbance Permit is required. Please contact San Bernardino County Department of Agrtcuiture at (714) 387-2111 for permit application. Document~tion of such permit shall be sul~mitted to the City 4. A geological repmt shall be prepared by a quaillied engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan Check. 5. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior fo issuance of building permits. No.: ~"~'°c'~. C, om~efio~t Datg; /, / / / ,, __/ / / / __/. / ._./ / / / / / / / / / SC - 2/9 ! 6. As a cuatom-iot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met: a. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion of all on-site drainage facilities necessary for dewatering all parcels to the satisfaction of the Building and Satety Division prior to final map approval and priorto the issuance of grading permits. b. Appropriate easements for sate disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, am to be defineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits. c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties, are to be installed prior to issuance of building permits for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building pain, it is requested. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Sataty Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis.) All slope banks in excess of 5 feet in vertical height shall be sseck~ with native grasses or planted with ground cover tor erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method of erosion control shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Building Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be provided, This requirement cloas not release the applicant/deveioper from compliance with the siope planting requirements of Section 17.08.040 1 of the Deveiopment Code. Pmiect No,; / / / / / / / / APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DNISION, (714) 08~-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L Dedication and Vehloul~r AoceM 1. Rights*of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public passos, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be teeawed as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights.of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): total feet on total leer on total feet on total teat on 3. An irrevocable offer of dedication for for all private streets or drives. 4. -foot ~ roa~vay easement shall be made Non-vehiCular access shall be ~edicated to the City lor the lo#owing streets: 2/9 ! Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by (teeds ancl shall be recordad concurmntty with the map or p~or to the issuance of building parmRs, where no map is invoived. ___/ / 6. Private drainage easements forcross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. The final map shall clearly delineate a 10-foot minimum building restriction area on the neighboring lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and contain the following language: "EWe hereby dedicate to the City of Rancho Cucarnonga the right to prohibit the construction of (residential) buildings (or other structures) within those areas designated on the map as building restriction areas." A maintenance agreement shall also be granted from each lot to lhe adjacent lot through the CC&R's. 8. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the final map. 9. Easements for public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City wherever they encroach onto private property. 10. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right tum lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. ff curt) adjacent sidewak is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. 11. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public Improvements, and it ha/sha should fall to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreemeN to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City aoquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developel'$ cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City I:~or to commencement of the appraisal. M. Street Improvemania All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, pareos, landscapad areas, etc.) shownonthe plans and/ortentative mapshallbe constructed to City Standards. Interior street intlxovements shall include, but are not limited to, cufo and gutter. AC pavement. drive appmachee, si tewalks, street lights, and street trees. A minimum of 26- foot wide pavement, within a 40 4oot wide dedicated rignt-of-way shall be constnJcted for all half-section streets. Construct the following padmeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Como!.¢~o~ D~=: / / / / __/ / / / / / __/* / / / __/ / / / CUR~ & A.C. SIDE DRIVE; ~ =11'~,~ COMM. MEDI.~ OTHER Girt s-_.R, PVMT W&LK Ayt'~. 1.1OH'I"S TRff, ES TRAIl, ISLAND SC - 2/91 Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and ovehays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, side- walk shall be curvilinear per STD. 304, (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. 4. Impmvernent plans and construction: Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a regis- tered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the sateaction Ot the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or p~ivete street improve- mants, prior to final map approval orthe issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to any work being perlorrned in public rtght-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in a¢:ldition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed on any new constnJctlon or reconstruction of major, secondary or collector streets which intersect with other major, secomJary or collector streets for tuture traffic signais. Pull boxee shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside ot BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) All pull boxes shall be No. 6 unless Othamttse specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope. e. Wheel chair ramps shall be installed on all four comers of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Existing City roads requiring construction shall ramain open to traffic at all times with edequate detours during construction. AstreetcJomrepermilmaybe required. Acash del oSit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading ~ paving, which shall be refunded upon COml~letion of the construction to the sati~a~tlon of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated dralnage flows shall not ~-~,ss sidewabs. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standard, excelX for single family lots. h. Handicap access ramp design shall be as specified by the City Engineer. i. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan cbeck. 5. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the pri- vate streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. 6. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed par City Standards in accon:lance with the City's street tree program. __./ / __/ / / / / / / / SC - 2/9t 7. Intersection line of site designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. a. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Walls, signs, and slopes shell be located outside the lines of sight. Landscaping and other obstructions within the lines of sight shall be approved by the City Engineer. b. Local residential street intersections shall heve their noticeability improved, uSually by moving the 2 +/- closest street trees on each side awaylromthe street and placed in a street tree easement. 8. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any wo~ within the following fight-of-way: 9. All public improvements on the following streets shell be operationally complete prior to the issuance of building permits: Com~¢~o~ __3 / / / / / /,, . / / N. Public Maintenance Area~ 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscape parkways, medians, passos, easements, trails, or other areas are required to be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the approphete Landscape and Lighting Districts Shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained bythe developer until accepted by the City. 4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautiticatinn Master Plan: / / O. Drainage and Floo~l Control The project (or portions thereof) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, ficod protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. It shall be the deveicpar's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the proiect area. The developers engineer shall prepare all nacessa~ reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydrauitc calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of buitding permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued hy FEMA prior tO occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. 3. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All ~trainage tacilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. __/ / 2/91 4. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within itsdgnt-ol-way. 5. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. 6. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street. P. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. v/' 2.The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessan/. __/ / l//' 3.Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the / / . .. Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of parmits, whichever occurs first. Q. General Requlrement~ an~l Approvals 1.The eel~arate parcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into ~ / one parcel prior to issuance of building permits. 2. An easement for a joint use d~ivaway shall be provided prior to linal map approval or ~ / issuance of building parmits, whichaver occurs first, tor: 3. Prior to approval of the final map a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District among the newly created parcels. 4. Eftwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondre7 Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance no map is involved. 5. Permits shall be obtained from the tollowing agencies for won within their right-of-way: / / __ /. 6.A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or torre the Law Enforcement Community Facilities District shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building parmits, whichever _oc~_ars first. Formation costs shall be berne by the Developer. Prior to finailzation of any development phase, sufficient im13rovement plane shall be com- pleted beyond the phase boundaries to assure eeconda~/access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the ap13roved tentative map. __/ / SC - 2/91 12 of 12 DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT April 27, 1994 Chairman and Members of the Planning Co~nission Brad Bullet, City Planner Scott Murphy, Associate Planner DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 94-03 - MATLOCK ASSOCIATES - A request to construct a 4,710 square foot multi-purpose building of a previously approved church master plan in the Low Residential designation (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located at the west side of Jasper Street between Base Line Road and Lomita Drive - APN: 202-026-13. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: ae Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single family residence; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - Shopping Center; Neighborhood Commercial East - Single family residences; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling unit per acre) - Cucamonga Creek Flood Control Channel; Flood Control West General Plav Designations: Project Site - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) North - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - Neighborhood Commercial East - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West - Flood Control Ce Site Characteristics: The site contains a church office located in the central portion of the parcel and a parking lot located at the southern portion of the lot. The balance of the site has been rough graded. D. Parking Calculations: N,~mher of N-tuber of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided Sanctuary Area 2,692 ANALYSIS: 1 space/ 77 35 sq. ft. 8O Background: In July 1987, the Planning Commission approved the Master Plan and Phase I development plans for the church. Following approval, the office building was constructed and occupied. On February 13, 1991, the Planning Com~ssion approved the design of the 11,320 square foot ITEM K PLANNING CO~4ISSION STAFF REPORT DR 94-03 - MATLOCKASSOCIATES April 27, 1994 Page 2 sanctuary building. The design included the use of large roof areas, stucco walls, and river rock planters (see Exhibit "G"). Since that approval, the applicant has evaluated their financial resources and determined that insufficient funds are available to construct the sanctuary building at this time. General: The applicant is proposing to construct a 4,710 square foot multi-purpose building. The building will be used as a sanctuary until funds are available for the sanctuary building construction. The building is designed to seat 286 people. The building is designed to allow for expansion on the west side. The addition will be consistent with the east elevation. Ce Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Lumpp, Bullet) reviewed the application and recommended approval subject to the following conditions: Additional landscaping should be provided on the west side of the building. The "future" parking area north of the building should be hydroseeded. 3. The trellis on the west side of the building is optional. De Environmental Assessment: In approving the church Master Plan for the site, the Planning Commission issued a Negative Declaration for the project. The current application is consistent with the original Master Plan. Therefore, no additional environmental review is required. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Development Review 94-03 through adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:SM:mlg Attachments= Exhibit #A" - Site Utilization Exhibit "B" - Site Plan Exhibit "C" - Landscape Plan Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan Exhibit "E" - Phasing Plan Exhibit "F' - Building Elevations Exhibit WG" - Approved Sanctuary Elevations Resolution of Approval with Conditions · enue~ eUlleeSq -, jl V~NOIWY~)n~ OH~,N¥1::I dO ~Nl(J'11(lg :150dllfld-IJ.'1flfl (JJlgOdOIJd IljJl!!t Y~NOffiYS~O OH3NYtd 50 ~)NIO'11flII :l$OdMfld'll"lllN G~SOdOYd H:DI::InHD /~1/d~G ¥151A ¥gNO~DNO OHON¥~J ~0 I r U' 0 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. 94-03, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 4,710 SQUARE FOOT MULTI-PURPOSE BUILDING OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CHURCH MASTER PLAN IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE), LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF JASPER STREET BETWEEN BASE LINE ROAD AND LOMITA DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 202-026-13. A. Recitals. 1. Thomas G. Matlock Associates, Inc. has filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. 94-03 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 27th day of April 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a meeting on the application and concluded said meeting 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 substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on April 27, 1994, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located on the west side of Jasper Street between Base Line Road and Lomita Drive with street frontages of 580 feet along Jasper Street and 250 feet along Lomita Drive and is presently developed with a church office and parking lot; and b. The property to the north and east of the subject site is designated for residential uses and is developed with single family dwellings. The property to the south of the site is designated for commercial uses and is developed with a shopping center. The property to the we~t is designated for flood control uses and is developed with a flood control channel; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 94-03 - MATLOCK ASSOCIATES April 27, 1994 Page 2 c. The development of the multi-purpose building is consistent with the Master Plan (Conditional Use Permit 90-40) approved by this Commission on February 13, 1991, and with the Low Residential designation of the Development Code and the Low Residential designation of the General Plan; and d. The application, with the attached conditions of approval, will comply with all applicable standards of the Development Code. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs i and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows= a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. That the proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. That the proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. That the proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. This Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, the Planning Cow~ission issued a Negative Declaration on February 13, 1991. Further, this Commission finds that the Application is in substantial compliance with the original approval for which the Negative Declaration was issued. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Plannin~ Commission 1) Additional landscaping shall be provided on the west side of the building. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. 2) The "future" parking area north of the building shall be hydroseeded. The final plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DR 94-03 - MATLOCK ASSOCIATES April 27, 1994 Page 3 3) All river rock shall be native stone. The final plans shall be reviewed by the City Planner prior to building permit issuance. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF APRIL 1994. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: E. David Barker, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly end 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 27th day of April 1994, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: Those items checked are CondOions of ~proval. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 989-1861, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. Time Limits Complcdo~ D.t~ ~ 1. Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are ----/ / not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. 2. Development/Design Review shall be approved prior to / / _._/ / 3. Approval of Tentative Tract No. is granted subject to the approval of ___/ ./ SC-12/93 4. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, ----/ / participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to linance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the Districrs property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be 1orrned by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. 5. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes / / first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District 1or the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance ol building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the aliected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the dale ol approval of the project and prior to the recordation ol the final map or issuance of building permits lot said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived il the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreeme nt to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. B. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, amhitectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and Specific Plan and Planned Community. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions o! Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Occupancy of the facility shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshall's regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The building shall be inspected 1or compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted 1or City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. o All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.), or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes lirst. Approval o! this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community Plans or Specific Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. A detailed on-site lighting plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Sheriffs Department (989~6611) prior to the issuance of building permits. Such plan shall indicate style, illumination, location, height, and method ol shielding so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. SC-12/93 10. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with all receptacles shielded from public view. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction ot the City Planner. 2 of 12//~/~ No.: z~-t:~, '~ Compl~;tion Da~e: / ./ / / / / ._./ / __J / ___/ / / / / /, __J / __/ / / /_ 11. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. 12. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination. 13. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, lencing, and weed control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 14. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping of equine animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option ol keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors or homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. · 15. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Divisions and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. 16. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof ol this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. Solar access easements shall be dedicated for the purpose of assuming that each lot or dwelling unit shall have the right to receive sunlight across adjacent lots or units for use of a solar energy system. The easements may be contained in a Declaration of Restrictions tor the subdivision which shall be recorded concurrently with the recordation of the final map or issuance of permits, whichever comes first. The easements shall prohibit the casting of shadows by vegetation, structures, fixtures or any other object, except !or utility wires and similar objects, pursuant to Development Code Section 17.08.060-G-2. 18. The project contains a designated Historical Landmark. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit No. · Any further modifications to the site including, but not limited to. exterior alterations and/or interior alterations which affect the exterior of the buildings or structures, removal ol landmark trees, demolition, relocation, reconstruction of buildings or structures, or changes to the site, shall require a modification to the Historic Landmark Alteration Permit subject to Historic Preservation Commission review and approval. C. Building Design SC- 12/93 An alternative energy system is required to provide domestic hot water for all dwelling units and for heating any swimming pool or spa, unless other alternative energy systems are demonstrated to be of equivalent capacity and efficiency. All swimming pools installed at the time ot initial development shall be supplemented with solar heating. Details shall be included in the building plans and shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of sudace treatment subject to City Planner review and approval prior to issuance ol building permits. P~iect .No.: Completion Date: / ,/ / / / / __/ / / / /. / / / / / / / 3. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners' Association shall be submitted for City Planner and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffe red lrom adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. D. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) v/" 1. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/ plazas/recreational uses. 3. All parking spaces shall be double striped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. 4. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall restdct the storage ol recreational vehicles on Ibis site unless they are the principal source ol transportation for the owner and prohibit parking on interior circulation aisles other than in designated visitor parking areas. Plans for any security gates shall be submitted for the City Planner, City Engineer, and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. E. Landscaping (for publicly maintained landscape areas, refer to Section N,) ~ 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscap- ing in the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval priorto the issuance of building permits Or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted o n the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborisrs recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting and tdmming methods. A minimum of trees per gross acre, comprised of the following sizes, shall be provided within the project: % - 48- inch box or larger, % - 36- inch box or larger, ~ % - 24- inch box or larger,. % - 15-gallon, and ~ % - 5 gallon. 4. A minimum of ~ % of trees planted within the project shall be specimen size trees 24-inch box or larger. 5. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate ol one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. Co~plet~on Date: ___/ / / ! / / / / / / ./ / / / ,/ / .__/ / / / / / __/ / __J / SC-12/93 4 6. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. All private slope banks 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or g reater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. AIIprivateslopesinexcessofSfeet,butlessthan8 teet inverticalheight andof 2:1orgreater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. It. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess o! 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior tO occupancy. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continu- ously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those u nits, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satislactory condition. 10. For multi-family residential and non-residential development, property owners are respon- sible for the continual maintenance of all landscaped areas on-site, as well as contiguous planted areas within the public right-of-way. All landscaped areas shall be kept free trom weeds and debris and maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing, and trimming. Any damaged, dead, diseased, or decaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. 11. Front yard landscaping shall be required per the Development Code and/or · This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 12. The linal design o! lhe perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated !or consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 13. Special landscape features such as mounding, alluvial rock, specimen size trees, meander- ing sidewalks (with horizontal change), and intensitied landscaping, is required along 14. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-ol-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 15. All walls shall be provided with decoralive trealment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 16. Tree maintenance criteria shall be developed and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. These criteda shall encourage the natural growth characteristics of the selected tree species. 17. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. P,mject No.: ~ -~J,~ Completion Date: / / / / / / / /__ / / ___/ / __/ / / / / ./ .. / / / / __/ / SC-[2/93 5 of X2 /~/~ F. Signs The signs indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this approval. Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Sign Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to installation of any signs. 2. A Uniform Sign Program for this development shall be submitted 1or City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Directory monument sign(s) shall be provided for apartment, condominium, or townhomes prior to occupancy and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to issuance ol building permits. G. Environmental The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard formal as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice ol the Foothill Freeway project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. A final acoustical report shall be submitted 1or City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level ol interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEU the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy ol the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. H. Other Agencies v'/ 1. EmergencysecondaryaccessshallbeprovidedinaccordancewithRanchoCucamongaFire Protection District Standards. v// 2. Emergency access shall be provided, maintenance Iree and clear, a minimum of 26 leet wide at all times during construction in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District requirements. Prior to issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District that temporary water supply tor fire protection is available, pending completion of required life protection system. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure tot mail boxes with adequate lighting. The tinal location of the mail boxes and the design ol the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. Compl¢~on Dat~: / / / / ___/ / __/ / / / / / / /, / / / / SC-12/93 For projects using septic tank facilities, wdtlen certification ot acceptability, including all supportive information, shall be obtained from the San Bernardino County Department ot Environmental Health and submitted to the Building Otficial prior to the issuance of Septic Tank Permits, and prior to issuance of building permits. 6of12 /_ APPLICANTS SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 989-1863, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Site Development V'/' 1. The applicant shall comply with the latest adopied Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechani- cal Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, and all olher applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such tees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautitication Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Systems Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development lees at the established rate. Such lees may include, but are not limited to: Systems Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. 4. Street addresses shall be provided bythe Building Official, aftertract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. J. Existing Structures K. Grading v/ 1. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and lire-resistiveness of existing buildings. Existing buildings shall be made to comply with correct building and zoning regulations for the intended use or the building shall be demolished. Existing sewage disposal facilities shall be removed, filled and/or capped to cornply with the Unilorm Plumbing Code and Unilorm Building Code. Underground on-site utilities are to be located and shown on building plans submitted for building permit application. Grading of the subject properly shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a quailtied engineer licensed by the State of California to pedorm such work. 3. 4o The development is located within the soil erosion control boundaries; a Soil Disturbance Permit is required. Please contact San Bernardino County Department of Agriculture at (714) 387-2111 for permit application. Documentation of such permit shall be submitted to the City prior to the issuance ol rough grading permit. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the time of application for grading plan check. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. SC-12/93 Pruitt No.: Completion Date: / / _J / ___/ / __J / / / /- / / / __/ / / / / / / / 6. As a custom-lot subdivision, the following requirements shall be met: a. Surety shall be posted and an agreement executed guaranteeing completion ol all on-site drainage facilities necessary !or dewatering all parcels to the satistaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to final map approval and prior to the issuance of grading permits. b. Appropriate easements for safe disposal of drainage water that are conducted onto or over adjacent parcels, are to be delineated and recorded to the satisfaction of the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of grading and building permits. c. On-site drainage improvements, necessary for dewatering and protecting the subdivided properties, are to be installed pdor to issuance of building permits for construction upon any parcel that may be subject to drainage flows entering, leaving, or within a parcel relative to which a building permit is requested. d. Final grading plans for each parcel are to be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for approval prior to issuance of building and grading permits. (This may be on an incremental or composite basis.) e. All slope banks in excess ol 5 feet in vertical height shall be seeded with native grasses or planted with ground cover for erosion control upon completion of grading or some other alternative method of erosion conlrol shall be completed to the satisfaction ol the Building Official. In addition a permanent irrigation system shall be provided. This requirement does not release the applicant/developer from compliance with the slope planting requirements of Section 17.08.040 I of the Development Code. ComDlcdon Date: __/ / / / / / APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 989-1862, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the Cily for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, and public drainage lacilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): total feet on total leet on total feet on total feet on 3. An irrevocable offer of dedication for -foot wide roadway easement shall be made for all private streets or ddves. 4. Non-vehicular access shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets: / / SC-12/93 o Reciprocal access easements shall be provided ensuring access to all parcels by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance ot building permits, where no map is involved. 6. Private drainage easements for cross-lol drainage Shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. 7. The final map shall clearly delineate a 10-foot minimum building restriction area on the neighboring lot adjoining the zero lot line wall and contain the lollowing language: "l/We hereby dedicate to the City of Rancho Cucamonga the right to prohibit the constnJction of (residential) buildings (or other structures) within those areas designated on the map as building restriction areas." A maintenance agreement shall also be granted lrom each lot to the adjacent lot through the CC&R's. 8. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quitclaimed or delineated on the linal map. 9. Easements 1or public sidewalks and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City wherever they encroach onto private property. 10. Additional street right-of-way shall be dedicated along right turn lanes, to provide a minimum of 7 feet measured from the face of curbs. If curb adjacent sidewalk is used along the right turn lane, a parallel street tree maintenance easement shall be provided. 11. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required lot the improvements. Such agreement shall provide lor payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property inte rests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form ol a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of Ihe appraisal. M. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2, A minimum o126- foot wide pavement, within a 40 -loot wide dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed for all half-section streets. 3. Construct the lollowing perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Comolctio~ Da~¢: / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / STREET NAME CURB & A.C. SIDE- DRIVE STREET STREET CONIM MEDIAN BIKE GU~ ~ ~:R PVMT WALK APPR. LIGHTS TREES TRAIL ISLAND TRAIL OTHER SC- 12/93 9 of 12 Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) I! so marked, side- walk shall be curvilinear per STD. 304. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for Ibis item. Corn~;,let~on Date: v"~ 4. Improvement plans and construction: Street improvement plans including street trees and street lights, prepared by a regis- tered Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion ol the public and/or pdvate street improve- ments, prior to final map approval orthe issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Prior to any work being perlormed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic, street name signing, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satistaction of the City Engineer. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed on any new construction or reconstruction of major, secondary or collector streets which intersect with other major, secondary or collector streets for future traffic signals. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides ol the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR or any other locations approved by the City Engineer. Notes: (1) All pull boxes shall be No. 6 unless othenNise specified by the City Engineer (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pullrope. e. Wheel chair ramps shall be installed on all four corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. A street closure permit may be required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satislaction ol the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single lamily lots. h. Handicap access ramp design shall be as specified by the City Engineer. i. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street improvement plans per City Standards 1or all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being pedormed on the pri- vate streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. 6. Street trees, a minimum ol 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. / / / / / / / / / / / ,/ / / 12/93 7. Intersection line of site designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. a. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted lot all project intersections, including driveways. Walls, signs, and slopes shall be located outside the lines ol sight. Landscaping and other obstructions within the lines of sight shall be approved by the City Engineer. b. Local residential street intersections shall have their noticeability improved, usually by moving the 2 +/- closest street trees on each side away from the street and placed in a street tree easement. Completion Date: /.. ! 8. A permit shall be obtained from CALTRANS for any work within the following right-of-way: ---/ / 9. All public improvements on the following streets shall be operationally complete pdor to the issuance of building permits: /, / N. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval pdor to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The lollowing landscape parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails, or other areas are required to be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer pdorto final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained bythe developer until accepted by the City. 4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: / / / / ,J / O. Drainage and Flood Control The project (or portions thereol) is located within a Flood Hazard Zone; therefore, flood protection measures shall be provided as certified by a registered Civil Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone designation removed from the project area. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs lirst. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. SC-t2/93 / / 4. A permit from the County Flood Control District is required for work within its right-or-way. 5. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter o! any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge ot a mature tree trunk. 6. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street. P. Utilities .1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2.The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 3.Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County ot San Bernardino. A letter of compliance lrom the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Completion Date: / / .._./ / __/ / __J / ___/ / .__/ / Q. General Requirements and Approvals 1 .The separate parcels contained within the project boundaries shall be legally combined into one parcel prior to issuance ol building permits. 2. An easement for a joint use driveway shall be provided prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first, 1or: 3. Prior to approval o! the final map a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment Districl among the newly created parcels. 4, Eftwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 5. Permits shall be obtained lrom the following agencies Ior work within their right-of-way: / / ./ / / / / / /. / 6. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the Law Enforcement Community Facilities District shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the Developer. 7. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be com- pleted beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. / / SC- t2/93